Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND: Following radical prostatectomy, between 15 and 60% of all patients with pT3 prostate cancer experience persistence or increasing levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a sign of tumor persistence or progression within 5 years. Retrospective studies have shown a rate of 35-55% of positive biopsies from the vesicourethral anastomosis in this situation. Best treatment for these disease conditions is under debate, current strategies include adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), 'wait-and-see' and salvage RT or hormone therapy for increasing PSA. RESULTS: A number of retrospective studies have shown an increased rate of local control and 'freedom from treatment failure' following adjuvant RT with doses in the range of 50-60 Gy. However, no survival benefit could be demonstrated by now. Results of three major phase III studies are pending. In case of persisting or increasing PSA levels following radical prostatectomy, 30-70% of these patients will reach an undetectable PSA level after conformal RT with total doses of 60-70 Gy, which will stay undetectable or at least stable within the next 2-5 years in about 50% and therefore offering a chance of cure. When starting RT, PSA should be as low as possible (<2 ng/ml). With higher PSA levels the chance of achieving an undetectable PSA again decreases below 35%. High Gleason scores of 8-10, seminal vesicle involvement and a short PSA doubling time are adverse prognostic factors. Severe late side effects of conformal RT are infrequent (<3%). In contrast, hormonal treatment is of palliative nature in the long run, with a median time to development of metastases of 4-7 years, and can be offered to patients with progressive disease after RT. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant RT following radical prostatectomy for pT3 prostate cancer offers higher local control rates and an increase in 'freedom from treatment failure', but no prolongation of survival has yet been shown. In the situation of increasing PSA levels after radical prostatectomy, salvage RT seems to offer a chance of cure in selected patients, although it is difficult to draw firm conclusions because of generally too short follow-up times.     

Improved biochemical outcome with adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer with poor pathologic features

PURPOSE: The indications for adjuvant external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) are poorly defined. We performed a retrospective comparison of our institution's experience treating prostate cancer with RP vs. RP followed by adjuvant EBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1987 and 1998, 617 patients with clinical Stage T1-T2N0M0 prostate cancer underwent RP. Patients who underwent preoperative androgen deprivation and those with positive lymph nodes were excluded. Of the 617 patients, 34 (5.5%) with an undetectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level underwent adjuvant prostatic fossa RT at a median of 0.25 year (range, 0.1-0.6) postoperatively because of poor pathologic features. The median total dose was 59.4 Gy (range, 50.4-66.6 Gy) in 1.8-2.0-Gy fractions. These 34 RP+RT patients were compared with the remaining 583 RP patients. Biochemical failure was defined as any postoperative PSA level > or =0.1 ng/mL and any postoperative PSA level > or =0.3 ng/mL (at least 30 days after surgery). Administration of androgen deprivation was also scored as biochemical failure when applying either definition. The median clinical follow-up was 8.2 years (range, 0.1-11.2 years) for RP and 8.4 years (range, 0.3-13.8 years) for RP+RT. RESULTS: Radical prostatectomy + radiation therapy patients had a greater pathologic Gleason score (mean, 7.3 vs. 6.5; p < 0.01) and pathologic T stage (median, T3a vs. T2c; p < 0.01). Age (median, 65.7 years) and pretreatment PSA level (median, 7.9 ng/mL) were similar between the treatment groups. Extracapsular extension was present in 72% of RP+RT patients vs. 27% of RP patients (p < 0.01). The RP+RT patients were more likely to have seminal vesicle invasion (29% vs. 9%, p < 0.01) and positive margins (73% vs. 36%, p < 0.01). Despite these poor pathologic features, the 5-year biochemical control (BC) rate (PSA <0.1 ng/mL) was 57% for RP+RT and 47% for RP (p = 0.28). For patients with extracapsular extension, the 5-year BC rate was 52% for RP+RT vs. 30% for RP (p < 0.01). The 5-year BC rate for patients with seminal vesicle invasion was 60% for RP+RT vs. 18% for RP (p < 0.01). For those with positive margins, the 5-year BC rate was 64% for RP+RT vs. 27% for RP (p < 0.01). The use of adjuvant RT remained statistically significant on multivariate analysis when applying either biochemical failure definition. Adjuvant RT also remained statistically significant when including the postoperative PSA level (>30 days after surgery) in the multivariate analyses. In addition, 99 (17%) of the 583 RP patients required salvage prostatic fossa RT (median dose, 59.4 Gy) at a median interval of 1.3 years after surgery (range, 0.1-8.4) for a palpable recurrence (n = 10) or a detectable/rising postoperative PSA level (n = 89). The median PSA level before salvage RT was 0.8 ng/mL (mean, 3.2 ng/mL). The 5-year and 8-year BC rate, using the PSA <0.1 ng/mL definition, from the date of salvage RT was 41% and 35%, respectively. The 5-year and 8-year BC rate, using the PSA <0.3 ng/mL definition, was 46% and 36%, respectively. The 8-year local recurrence rate after salvage RT was 4%. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant RT demonstrated improved efficacy against prostate cancer. For patients with poor pathologic features (extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, positive margins), adjuvant RT improved the biochemical outcome independent of other prognostic factors.     

Are all prostate cancer patients "fit" for salvage radiotherapy?

The indication for salvage radiotherapy (RT) (SRT) in patients with biochemically-recurrent prostate cancer after surgery is based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at the time of biochemical recurrence. Although there are clear criteria (pT3-pT4 disease and/or positive margins) for the use of adjuvant radiotherapy, no specific clinical or tumour-related criteria have yet been defined for SRT. In retrospective series, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (PFS) ranges from 35%-85%, depending on the PSA level at the start of RT. Two phase 3 trials have compared SRT with and without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), finding that combined treatment (SRT+ADT) improves both PFS and overall survival. Similar to adjuvant RT, the indication for ADT is based on tumour-related factors such as PSA levels, tumour stage, and surgical margins. The number of patients referred to radiation oncology departments for SRT continues to rise. In the present article, we define the clinical, therapeutic, and tumour-related factors that we believe should be evaluated before prescribing SRT. In addition, we propose a decision algorithm to determine whether the patient is fit for SRT. This algorithm will help to identify patients in whom radiotherapy is likely to improve survival without significantly worsening quality of life.     

Adjuvant and salvage radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) for clinically localized prostate cancer using conventional clinical end-points, and the biochemical relapse-free rate (bRFR). METHODS: Between 1987 and 1994, 113 node negative, hormonally na?ve men received RT 1 month to 12 years after RP. Adjuvant RT was given for positive resection margins and/or pT3 disease. Salvage RT was given for a persistently elevated prostatic specific antigen (PSA), a rising PSA, or palpable recurrence post RP. Clinical and biochemical endpoints determined outcome. Log-rank testing and the Cox proportional hazards model identified factors predictive for biochemical relapse free rate. RESULTS: Median follow-up after RT was 3.7 years (range 0.2-9 years). Five-year clinical local control was 95% for patients with no palpable evidence of disease and 59% for those with palpable recurrence (P < 0.0001). 5-year bRFR was 81% for adjuvant RT, 19% for salvage of biochemical recurrence, 0% for patients with palpable disease (P < 0.0001). Improved bRFR for adjuvant and salvage RT was predicted by a Gleason score < 7 vs. 7 vs. > 7 (hazard ratio 1.53; 95% CI 0.99-2.35) and an undetectable pre-RT PSA vs. PSA < 2.0 ng/ml vs. PSA > 2.0 ng/ml (hazard ratio 3.81; 95% CI 2.47-5.87). Seminal vesicle involvement was not a statistically significant independent predictor of bRFR. CONCLUSIONS: The most favourable bRFR was observed for adjuvant therapy. Salvage was most successful with a pre-RT PSA < 2.0 ng/ml, or Gleason score < 7. Few patients with a pre-RT PSA > 2.0 ng/ml were salvaged, and none with palpable recurrence. These patients require investigation of alternative salvage strategies.     

Treatment results of adjuvant radiotherapy and salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

Background The indications for and the efficacy of radiation therapy after radical operation for patients with prostate cancer are not clear. We analyzed the treatment results of adjuvant radiotherapy and salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Methods Between September 1997 and November 2004, 57 patients received adjuvant radiotherapy or salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Fifteen patients received radiation therapy because of positive margins and/or extracapsular invasion in surgical specimens (adjuvant group). Forty-two patients received radiation therapy because of rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) during follow-up (salvage group). Radiation therapy was delivered to the fossa of the prostate ± seminal vesicles by a three-dimensional (3-D) conformal technique to a total dose of 60–66 Gy (median, 60 Gy). Biochemical control was defined as the maintenance of a PSA level of less than 0.2 ng/ml. Results The median follow-up period after radiation therapy was 33 months (range, 12–98 months). Three-year biochemical control rates were 87% for the adjuvant group and 61% for the salvage group. For patients in the salvage group treated without hormone therapy, the preradiation PSA value was the most significant factor for the biochemical control rate. The 3-year biochemical control rate was 93% in patients whose preradiation PSA was 0.5 ng/ml or less and 29% in patients whose preradiation PSA was more than 0.5 ng/ml. No severe adverse effects (equal to or more than grade 3) were seen in treated patients. Conclusion Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy seemed to be effective for adjuvant therapy and for salvage therapy in patients with a preradiation PSA of 0.5 ng/ml or less. Also, radiation to the fossa of the prostate ± seminal vesicles, to a total dose of 60–66 Gy, using a three-dimensional (3-D) conformal technique, seemed to be safe.     

Salvage Radiotherapy After Postprostatectomy Biochemical Failure: Does Pretreatment Radioimmunoscintigraphy Help Select Patients with Locally Confined Disease?

PURPOSE: Radioimmunoscintigraphy (RIS) has the potential to demonstrate early recurrences after prostatectomy and might be useful in selecting patients for salvage radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: A total of 82 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate were treated with salvage RT between 1988 and 2005, for an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level after prostatectomy. Of the 82 patients, 32% had Gleason score 6 or less disease, 54% Gleason score 7 disease, 70% had Stage pT3 disease, 55% had positive margins, and 5% had pathologic lymph node involvement. The median pre-RT PSA level was 0.63 ng/mL. Of the 82 patients, 47 (57%) had a pre-RT RIS (ProstaScint) scan, which was used for both patient selection and target delineation. The RT regimen was a median dose of 66 Gy to the prostate bed. Also, 64% received androgen deprivation therapy. Biochemical failure was defined as a PSA level >0.1 ng/mL and increasing. RESULTS: Patients with a pre-RT RIS scan had a lower preoperative PSA level (p = 0.0240) and shorter follow-up (p = 0.0221) than those without RIS. With a median follow-up of 44 months, the biochemical control rate was 56% at 3 years and 48% at 5 years. Margin status was the only factor associated with biochemical control on univariate (p = 0.0055) and multivariate (p = 0.0044) analysis. Patients who had prostate bed-only uptake on RIS (n = 38) did not have improved outcomes, with biochemical control rates of 51% at 3 years and 40% at 5 years. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with salvage RT had modest responses. Patients who were selected for treatment with RIS did not have better biochemical outcomes. Our results indicated that patients with positive margins were most likely to benefit from salvage RT.     

Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in patients with extraprostatic carcinoma after radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND: A significant number of prostate adenocarcinoma patients undergoing radical prostatectomy are found to have microscopic extraprostatic disease extension. A majority of these patients have focal extraprostatic extension limited to one or both sides of the prostate. In addition, positive surgical margins are a common pathologic finding in this patient subgroup. In the current study, the authors evaluated the impact of positive surgical margins as an independent predictive factor for prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression in patients with pT3a/b N0M0 carcinoma. METHODS: The Mayo Clinic prostate cancer registry list provided 1202 patients with pT3a/b NO prostate carcinoma (no seminal vesicle or regional lymph node involvement) who underwent a radical prostatectomy between 1987-1995. To reduce confounding variables, patients who received preoperative therapy or adjuvant therapy were excluded, resulting in 842 patients who were eligible for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients (42%) had > or = 1 positive surgical margins whereas 488 patients (58%) demonstrated no margin involvement. The sites of margin positivity were as follows: apex (n = 163), base (n = 47), posterior prostate (n = 227), and anterior prostate (n = 11). A total of 111 patients had > or = 2 positive surgical margins. The 5-year survival free of clinical recurrence and/or biochemical failure (postoperative PSA level > 0.2 ng/mL) for patients with no positive surgical margins was 76% and was 65% for patients with 1 positive surgical margin (P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in biochemical disease progression between patients with 1 versus those with > or = 2 surgical margins (65% vs. 62%). Multivariate analysis revealed that positive surgical margins were a significant predictor (P = 0.0017) of clinical disease recurrence and biochemical failure (relative risk, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.04) after controlling for preoperative PSA, Gleason score, and DNA ploidy. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, positive surgical margins were found to be a significant predictor of disease recurrence in patients with pT3a/b NO prostate carcinoma, a finding that is independent of PSA, Gleason score, and DNA ploidy. The benefit of adjuvant therapy in optimizing recurrence-free survival remains to be tested.     

Prognostic Factors in Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer – Tertiary Center Experience

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to analyse the prognostic factors in postoperative prostate cancer irradiation and develop a nomogram for disease-free survival (DFS).Patients and methodsThis retrospective study included 236 consecutive prostate cancer patients who had radical prostatectomy followed by radiotherapy (RT) at a single tertiary institution between 2009 and 2014. The main outcome was DFS analysed through uni- and multivariable analysis, Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank testing, recursive partitioning analysis, and nomogram development.ResultsThe median follow up was 62.3 (interquartile range [IQR] 38.1–79) months. The independent clinical factors associated with increased risk of recurrence or progression in the multivariate analysis (MVA) were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level before RT, pT3 characteristic, and local failure as salvage indication. The value of PSA nadir had a significant impact on the risk of biochemical failure. Biochemical control and DFS were significantly different depending on treatment indication (p < 0.0001). The recursive partitioning analysis highlighted the importance of the PSA level before RT, Gleason Grade Group, PSA nadir, and local failure as a treatment indication. Finally, the nomogram for DFS was developed and is available online at https://apps.konsta.com.pl/app/prostate-salvage-dfs/.ConclusionsThe Pre-RT PSA level, pT3 characteristic and local failure as salvage indication are pivotal prognostic factors associated with increased risk of recurrence or progression. The Gleason grade group of 4–5 and PSA nadir value allow for further risk stratification. The treatment outcomes in postoperative prostate cancer irradiation are significantly different depending on treatment indication. An online nomogram comprising of both pre-treatment and current data was developed allowing for visualization of changes in prognosis depending on clinical data.Key words: prostate cancer, prognostic factors, postoperative radiotherapy, nomogram, disease-free survival     

Population-Based Referrals for Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy in Men With Prostate Cancer: Impact of Randomized Trials

IntroductionTo examine the impact of published randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on referrals for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in patients who had high-risk pathologic features after radical prostatectomy (RP).MethodsIn this population-based, retrospective Canadian study, all patients who received a diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma and underwent RP from 2003-2008 were identified through the Manitoba Cancer Registry. Manual review of pathology reports was performed, and patients who had high-risk pathologic features of extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, or positive surgical margins were included. Referrals for adjuvant RT were examined before and after publication of RCT data to determine their influence on practice. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors related to referral.ResultsOf the 1080 identified patients, 546 (50.6%) had ≥ 1 high-risk pathologic feature. Only 78 (14.3%) of the 546 patients were referred for adjuvant RT within 6 months of RP. Year of diagnosis, in relation to the publication of the RCT, was not significantly associated with referral (P = .60). Higher pT stage (P < .0001), Gleason score (P = .035), and increased distance from cancer center (P = .004) were associated with referral.ConclusionIn patients who had high-risk pathologic features after RP, referral rates for adjuvant RT were low and did not increase after presentation of RCT. Men who had higher pT stage, Gleason score, and rural residence were more likely to be referred.     

Positive resection margin and/or pathologic T3 adenocarcinoma of prostate with undetectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: to irradiate or not?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for positive resection margin and/or pathologic T3 (pT3) adenocarcinoma of the prostate with undetectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively analyzed 125 patients with a positive resection margin and/or pT3 adenocarcinoma of the prostate who had undetectable postoperative serum PSA levels after radical prostatectomy. Seventy-three patients received postoperative adjuvant RT and 52 did not. Follow-up ranged from 1.5 to 12.0 years (median 4.2 for the irradiated group and 4.9 for the nonirradiated group). PSA outcome was available for all patients. Freedom from failure was defined as the maintenance of a serum PSA level of < or =0.2 ng/mL, as well as the absence of clinical local recurrence and distant metastasis. RESULTS: No difference was found in the 5-year actuarial overall survival between the irradiated and nonirradiated group (94% vs. 95%). However, patients receiving adjuvant RT had a statistically superior 5-year actuarial relapse-free rate, including freedom from PSA failure, compared with those treated with surgery alone (88% vs. 65%, p = 0.0013). In the irradiated group, 8 patients had relapse with PSA failure alone. None had local or distant recurrence. In the nonirradiated group, 15, 1, and 2 had PSA failure, local recurrence, and distant metastasis, respectively. On Cox regression analysis, pre-radical prostatectomy PSA level and adjuvant RT were statistically significant predictive factors for relapse, and Gleason score, extracapsular invasion, and resection margin status were not. There was a suggestion that seminal vesicle invasion was associated with an increased risk of relapse. The morbidity of postoperative adjuvant RT was acceptable, with only 2 patients developing Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Grade 3 genitourinary complications. Adjuvant RT had a minimal adverse effect on urinary continence and did not cause serious gastrointestinal toxicity. CONCLUSION: Postoperative adjuvant RT was associated with a lower risk of relapse, including freedom from PSA failure, compared with observation alone for pT3 and/or margin-positive disease with undetectable postoperative PSA levels. This was accomplished with a minimal risk of serious RT morbidity.     

Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE: The optimal role of radiotherapy (RT) to the prostate bed after radical prostatectomy (RP) is the subject of much debate. In this study, the results of adjuvant RT (ART) and salvage RT (SRT) were compared. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 146 lymph node-negative patients were treated postoperatively after RP with RT to the prostate bed between 1987 and 1998. Of these, 75 patients had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and were treated with ART for adverse pathologic features only to a median dose of 60 Gy (range 51-70). A positive margin was identified in 96%, and two of the three with negative margins had seminal vesicle involvement (SVI). SRT was administered for either a persistently detectable PSA level after RP (n = 27) or for a delayed rise in PSA (n = 44) to a median dose of 70 Gy (range 60-78). Adjuvant androgen ablation was given to 37 patients; 2 who had received ART and 35 had who received SRT. The median duration of androgen ablation was 24 months. The primary end point was freedom from biochemical failure (bNED), which was considered to be an undetectable PSA level. The median follow-up was 53 months for all patients: 68 months for the ART patients and 35 months for the SRT patients. RESULTS: For the ART group, 8 patients subsequently developed a rising PSA level. The 5-year bNED rate was 88%. SVI was the strongest predictor of outcome, with a 5-year bNED rate of 94% for those without SVI and 65% for those with SVI (p = 0.0002). SVI was the only significant factor in Cox proportional hazards regression analysis in the ART cohort. For the SRT group, 20 patients developed a rising PSA level after RT. The 5-year bNED rate was 66% for all SRT patients, and 43% and 78% in those with a persistently detectable PSA and those with a delayed rise in PSA, respectively. In the Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, this subdivision of SRT was statistically significant. Moreover, when the Cox model included all patients and variables, the timing of RT (ART vs. SRT) was an independent correlate of bNED, as was androgen ablation. CONCLUSION: For RP patients with high-risk pathologic features, the timing of postoperative RT and the PSA status after RP were strong determinants of outcome. Because of the potential confounding factors, direct comparisons of ART and SRT are problematic; however, ART is extremely effective and offers the surest approach for maintaining biochemical control.     

High dose rate brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiotherapy in the radical treatment of prostate cancer: initial results of a randomised phase three trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A randomised phase III trial has compared external beam radiotherapy alone with a dose escalated schedule using high dose rate brachytherapy. Patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer, no evidence of metastases, a PSA <50, no previous TURP and fit for general anaesthetic were included. METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive either standard radiotherapy 55 Gy in 20 fractions treating Monday to Friday over 4 weeks or a combined schedule comprising external beam treatment delivering 35.75 Gy in 13 fractions treating daily Monday to Friday over 2.5 weeks followed by a temporary high dose rate afterloading implant delivering 17 Gy in two fractions over 24h. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were randomised, balanced for important prognostic parameters including tumour stage, presenting PSA, Gleason score and use of adjuvant anti-androgens. With a median follow up of 30 months (range 3-91) a significant improvement in actuarial biochemical relapse-free survival is seen in favour of the combined brachytherapy schedule (p=0.03). A lower incidence of acute rectal discharge was seen in the brachytherapy group (p=0.025) and other acute and late toxicities were equivalent. Patients randomised to brachytherapy had a significantly better FACT-P score at 12 weeks (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of high dose rate brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiotherapy resulted in an improved biochemical relapse-free survival compared to external beam radiotherapy alone with less acute rectal toxicity and improved quality of life in this randomised trial.     

Contemporary management of prostate cancer: a practice survey of Ontario genitourinary radiation oncologists.

OBJECTIVE: To survey radiation oncology practice in the utilization of hormonal and radiation therapy in the primary, adjuvant and salvage treatment of localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Genitourinary radiation oncologists practicing in Ontario were invited to participate in a practice survey examining staging, hormonal and radiation management, and radiation technique for a variety of common clinical scenarios. Background demographic information was collected on all respondents. The survey consisted of three cases relating to the hormonal/radiation management of low-, intermediate-, and high-risk prostate cancer as well as two adjuvant and one salvage post-prostatectomy scenarios. The survey response rate was 70% (26/37). RESULTS: Clinicians were more likely to utilize laboratory and imaging studies for staging as the risk categorization increased. Low-risk disease was managed with radiation alone in 26/26 (70 Gy in 65%, 74-79.8 Gy in 35%). Intermediate-risk disease was managed with radiation (70 Gy in 46%, 74-79.8 Gy in 54%) with neoadjuvant hormones in 58%. All respondents managed high-risk disease with adjuvant hormones in addition to radiation therapy (70-71 Gy in 85%, and 76 Gy in 15%).In the pT3a, margin negative (PSA undetectable) scenario, most individuals would not recommend adjuvant radiation (73%). If margins were positive, 30% would still not recommend adjuvant radiation. In the salvage scenario (slowly rising PSA 4 years post-prostatectomy for pT2a close margin disease), all respondents would manage with radiation therapy. Hormones were not routinely recommended in the initial management of the adjuvant and salvage scenarios. Radiation doses utilized for both adjuvant and salvage treatment ranged from 60-70 Gy (median 66 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: General agreement exists for the management of low- and high-risk disease and in the post-prostatectomy salvage setting. Use of dose-escalation and neoadjuvant hormones in the intermediate-risk setting and use of post-prostatectomy adjuvant radiation in the pT3a scenarios varied among radiation oncologists. Current clinical practice in localized prostate cancer reflects the evolving information in the published medical literature.     

Correlation of margin status and extraprostatic extension with progression of prostate carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The correlation of surgical margins and extraprostatic extension (EPE) with progression is uncertain with regard to prostate carcinoma patients treated by radical prostatectomy. The objective of this study was to define factors predictive of cancer progression; emphasis was placed on surgical margins and their relation to extraprostatic extension. METHODS: The study group consisted of 377 patients who were treated by radical retropubic prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy at the Mayo Clinic between 1986 and 1993. All specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted. Patients ranged in age from 41 to 79 years (mean, 65 years). Those with seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node metastasis and those treated preoperatively with radiation or androgen deprivation were excluded. Final pathologic T classifications were pT2a (41 patients), pT2b (237), and pT3a (99). Progression was defined as biochemical failure (prostate specific antigen [PSA] >0.2 ng/mL), clinical or biopsy-proven local recurrence, or distant metastasis. The mean follow-up was 5.8 years (range, 0.2-11.4 years). Seventy-nine patients who received adjuvant treatment within 3 months after surgery were excluded from survival analysis. RESULTS: The overall margin positivity rate was 29%. Seventy-two patients (19%) had only positive surgical margins without evidence of EPE ("surgical incision"), 53 (14%) had only EPE, 37 (10%) had both, and 215 (57%) had neither. Positive margins were correlated with the finding of EPE (P = 0.003). Progression free survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 88% and 67%, respectively. In univariate analysis, preoperative PSA concentration, positive surgical margins, Gleason grade, cancer volume, and DNA ploidy were significant in predicting progression (P values, <0.001, <0.001, 0.01, 0.007, and <0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, margin status and DNA ploidy were independent predictors of progression (relative risk for margin status, 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.4; P = 0.03; relative risk for DNA ploidy, 5.1; 95% CI, 2.4-10.9; P<0.001). Among patients with positive margins, 5-year progression free survival was 78% for those with negative EPE and 55% for those with positive EPE. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical margin status and DNA ploidy were independent predictors of progression after radical prostatectomy. To improve cancer control, adjuvant therapy may be considered for patients with positive surgical margins or nondiploid cancer.     

The efficacy of early adjuvant radiation therapy for pT3N0 prostate cancer: a matched-pair analysis.

PURPOSE: This study examines the effect of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) on outcome in patients with pT3N0 prostate cancer and makes comparisons to a matched control group. METHODS AND MATERIALS: At our center, 149 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were found to have pT3N0 prostate cancer, had an undetectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and had no immediate hormonal therapy. Fifty-two patients received adjuvant RT within 3 to 6 months of surgery. Ninety-seven underwent radical prostatectomy alone and were observed until PSA failure. From these two cohorts, we matched patients 1:1 according to preoperative PSA (<10 ng/ml vs. >10 ng/ml), Gleason score (<7 vs. > or =7), seminal vesicle invasion, and surgical margin status. Seventy-two patients (36 pairs) were included in the analysis. Median follow-up time was 41 months. We calculated a matched-pairs risk ratio for cumulative risk of PSA relapse (a rise above 0.2 ng/ml). RESULTS: After controlling for the prognostic factors by matching, there was an 88% reduction (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78-93%) in the risk of PSA relapse associated with adjuvant RT. The 5-year freedom from PSA relapse rate was 89% (95% CI: 76-100%) for patients receiving adjuvant RT as compared to 55% (95% CI: 34-79%) for those undergoing radical prostatectomy alone. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that adjuvant RT for pT3N0 prostate cancer may significantly reduce the risk of PSA failure as compared to radical prostatectomy alone. Its effect on clinical outcome awaits further follow-up.     

Evidence-based radiation oncology: definitive, adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer.

The standard treatment options based on the risk category (stage, Gleason score, PSA) for localized prostate cancer include surgery, radiotherapy and watchful waiting. The literature does not provide clear-cut evidence for the superiority of surgery over radiotherapy, whereas both approaches differ in their side effects. The definitive external beam irradiation is frequently employed in stage T1b-T1c, T2 and T3 tumors. There is a pretty strong evidence that intermediate- and high-risk patients benefit from dose escalation. The latter requires reduction of the irradiated normal tissue (using 3-dimensional conformal approach, intensity modulated radiotherapy, image-guided radiotherapy, etc.). Recent data suggest that prostate cancer may benefit from hypofractionation due to relatively low alpha/beta ratio; these findings warrant confirmation though. The role of whole pelvis irradiation is still controversial. Numerous randomized trials demonstrated a clinical benefit in terms of biochemical control, local and distant control, and overall survival from the addition of androgen suppression to external beam radiotherapy in intermediate- and high-risk patients. These studies typically included locally advanced (T3-T4) and poor-prognosis (Gleason score >7 and/or PSA >20 ng/mL) tumors and employed neoadjuvant/concomitant/adjuvant androgen suppression rather than only adjuvant setting. The ongoing trials will hopefully further define the role of endocrine treatment in more favorable risk patients and in the setting of the dose escalated radiotherapy. Brachytherapy (BRT) with permanent implants may be offered to low-risk patients (cT1-T2a, Gleason score <7, or 3+4, PSA 相似文献   

Effect of higher radiation dose on biochemical control after radical prostatectomy for pT3N0 prostate cancer

Purpose: The appropriate radiation dose has not been determined for postoperative radiation therapy (RT) of prostate cancer. Postoperative PSA level is a useful marker of local residual disease, and may allow evaluation of RT dose–response after radical prostatectomy.Methods and Materials: Between 1989 and 1996, 86 consecutive patients with pT3N0 prostate cancer who did not receive prior hormonal therapy or chemotherapy were irradiated postoperatively. All patients received 55.8 to 70.2 Gy (median = 64.8 Gy) to the prostatic/seminal vesicle bed. Patients were judged to be free of biochemical failure (bNED) if their PSA remained undetectable or decreased to undetectable level (< 0.2 ng/ml). The median follow-up time was 32 months from time of irradiation.Results: Univariate and multivariate analyses of variables showed that the preRT PSA level was the most significant predictor of improved bNED survival (p < 0.001). Actuarial analyses of radiation dose grouped with preRT PSA levels found higher radiation dose to be significant (p < 0.05). For the 52 patients with an undetectable preRT PSA level, the 3-year bNED rate was 91% for patients irradiated to 61.5 Gy or more and 57% for those irradiated to lower doses (p = 0.01). For the 21 patients with preRT PSA level > 0.2 and ≤ 2.0 ng/ml, the 3-year bNED rate was 79% for patients irradiated to 64.8 Gy or more and 33% for those irradiated to a lower dose (p = 0.02). No other preRT PSA interval or radiation dose level was associated with a dose–response function.Conclusion: In patients with pT3N0 prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy, a radiation dose–response function may be present and depends on the preRT PSA value. Patients with high postoperative PSA levels (> 2.0 ng/ml) may be less likely to benefit from higher doses of RT, and should be considered a group for which systemic therapy should be tested.     

Serum PSA evaluations during salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy biochemical failures as prognosticators for treatment outcomes

Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels have proved to be sensitive markers for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. In addition, PSA levels are useful for detecting and monitoring prostate cancer progression after radiotherapy. Serum PSA evaluations during radiotherapy, however, have not been well documented. In this study, we investigate the prognostic value of PSA evaluations during salvage radiotherapy for prostatectomy failures.

Forty-one patients with biochemical failures after prostatectomy treated with salvage radiotherapy consented to have their serum PSA levels evaluated at 30 Gy and 45 Gy of irradiation. All 41 patients had negative metastatic workup and pathologically uninvolved pelvic lymph nodes at the time of referral for salvage radiotherapy. Radiation therapy was delivered with 10–25 MV photons, with doses of 59.4–66.6 Gy. No patients received hormonal ablation therapy before irradiation.

The mean follow-up for all patients was 30.9 months. At last follow-up, 28/41 patients (68.3%) were free from biochemical failure, with 20 of 41 patients (48.8%) expressing undetectable PSA levels. Serum PSA evaluations at 30 Gy did not significantly predict for either biochemical (p = 0.0917) or clinical (p = 0.106) disease-free outcome. However, serum PSA evaluations at 45 Gy significantly predicted for both biochemical (p = 0.0043) and clinical (p = 0.0244) disease-free outcomes, with PSA elevations at 45 Gy significantly associated with poor outcomes. On univariate analysis of prognosticators for biochemical failures, the following were significant: an elevation in serum PSA levels at 45 Gy, detectable serum PSA immediately after prostatectomy, Gleason score 7–10, and serum PSA level >1 ng/ml before salvage radiotherapy.

Evaluation of serum PSA level at 45 Gy of salvage radiotherapy for biochemical relapses after prostatectomy may serve as a significant prognosticator for both biochemical and clinical disease-free outcomes.     

Importance of margin extent as a predictor of outcome after adjuvant radiotherapy for Gleason score 7 pT3N0 prostate cancer

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in Gleason score 7, pT3N0 prostate cancer patients with positive surgical margins, the predictors of progression-free survival and to identify a patient subgroup that would benefit from immediate adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy (ART). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between November 1989 and August 1998, 76 men underwent radical prostatectomy and were found to have capsular penetration (pT3N0), surgical Gleason score 7, tumor present at the resection margin, and an undetectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. All surgical specimens underwent whole-mount serial sectioning to determine the degree of margin positivity (focal vs. extensive). Of the 76 men, 45 underwent early ART (within 6 months with a median dose of 64.8 Gy), and 31 had no immediate treatment. We defined freedom from PSA failure (bNED) as the absence of two consecutive PSA rises >0.2 ng/mL. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 5.1 years (range, 2-10 years). The ART and non-ART patients were similar with respect to preoperative PSA level, Gleason score (4 + 3 vs. 3 + 4), presence of seminal vesicle invasion, and margin extent. On univariate analysis, margin extent was predictive for improved bNED (5-year bNED rate of 92% vs. 58%, p = 0.010, for men with focal and extensive margins, respectively). Gleason score (4 + 3 vs. 3 + 4), seminal vesicle invasion, and ART were not statistically significant predictors. On multivariate analysis, the preoperative PSA level, margin extent, and ART were independent significant factors. In the group with extensive surgical margins, men receiving ART had a significantly greater 5-year bNED survival rate compared with the non-ART patients (73% vs. 31%, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the amount of microscopic residual tumor significantly affects bNED after radical prostatectomy for Gleason score 7, pT3N0 prostate cancer. In addition, men with pathologic evidence of microscopic local disease appear to benefit from early ART compared with untreated controls.     

Does Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Improve Outcomes In pT1-3N0 Oral Cavity Cancer With Tumor-Free Margins and Perineural Invasion?

PURPOSE: The criteria for administration of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) remain controversial, and it is unclear whether patients with pT1-3N0 disease benefit from adjuvant radiation in the presence of free margins and perineural invasion. The goal of this report was to determine whether this group would benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy in terms of 5-year local control rate and overall survival rate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively reviewed our case records from January 1996 to May 2005. In all, 460 pT1-3N0 OSCC patients had tumor-free margins, of whom 68 had perineural invasion. Postoperative adjuvant RT was performed in patients with pT4 tumors, positive lymph nodes, or close margins (< or =4 mm). In addition, selected OSCC patients with large pT3 tumors or perineural invasion received postoperative adjuvant RT. Local control and overall survival rates were plotted by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in 5-year local control (p = 0.1936) and overall survival (p = 0.5580) rates between patients with perineural invasion compared with those without. Among patients with perineural invasion, the addition of adjuvant radiotherapy did not significantly alter the 5-year local control rate (p = 0.3170) or the overall survival rate (p = 0.0935). CONCLUSION: Altogether, these data seem to indicate that radical surgical resection alone should be considered a sufficient treatment for OSCC patients with pT1-3N0 disease, even in the presence of perineural invasion.