68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT-based radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer.
Aged
Dose Fractionation, Radiation
Gallium Isotopes
Gallium Radioisotopes
Humans
Male
Membrane Glycoproteins
/ administration & dosage
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Metastasis
/ diagnostic imaging
Organometallic Compounds
/ administration & dosage
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography
Prostatic Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Radiopharmaceuticals
/ administration & dosage
Retrospective Studies
Robotic Surgical Procedures
Survival Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
11
06
2020
accepted:
05
10
2020
entrez:
21
10
2020
pubmed:
22
10
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the standard therapy for patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC). Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT)-based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is emerging as an alternative option to postpone starting ADT and its associated side effects including the development of drug resistance. The aim of this study was to determine progression free-survival (PFS) and treatment failure free-survival (TFFS) after PSMA-PET/CT-based SBRT in OMPC patients. The efficacy and safety of single fraction radiosurgery (SFRS) and ADT delay were investigated. Patients with ≤5 metastases from OMPC, with/without ADT treated with PSMA-PET/CT-based SBRT were retrospectively analyzed. PFS and TFFS were primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints were local control (LC), overall survival (OS) and ADT-free survival (ADTFS). Fifty patients with a total of 75 metastases detected by PSMA-PET/CT were analyzed. At the time of SBRT, 70% of patients were castration-sensitive. Overall, 80% of metastases were treated with SFRS (median dose 20 Gy, range: 16-25). After median follow-up of 34 months (range: 5-70) median PFS and TFFS were 12 months (range: 2-63) and 14 months (range: 2-70), respectively. Thirty-two (64%) patients had repeat oligometastatic disease. Twenty-four (48%) patients with progression underwent second SBRT course. Two-year LC after SFRS was 96%. Grade 1 and 2 toxicity occurred in 3 (6%) and 1 (2%) patients, respectively. ADTFS and OS rates at 2-years were 60.5% and 100%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, TFFS significantly improved in patients with time to first metastasis (TTM) >36 months (p = 0.01) and PSA before SBRT ≤1 ng/ml (p = 0.03). For patients with OMPC, SBRT might be used as an alternative to ADT. This way, the start/escalation of palliative ADT and its side effects can be deferred. Metastases treated with PSMA-PET/CT-based SFRS reached excellent LC with minimal toxicity. Low PSA levels and longer TTM predict elongated TFFS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the standard therapy for patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC). Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT)-based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is emerging as an alternative option to postpone starting ADT and its associated side effects including the development of drug resistance. The aim of this study was to determine progression free-survival (PFS) and treatment failure free-survival (TFFS) after PSMA-PET/CT-based SBRT in OMPC patients. The efficacy and safety of single fraction radiosurgery (SFRS) and ADT delay were investigated.
METHODS
Patients with ≤5 metastases from OMPC, with/without ADT treated with PSMA-PET/CT-based SBRT were retrospectively analyzed. PFS and TFFS were primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints were local control (LC), overall survival (OS) and ADT-free survival (ADTFS).
RESULTS
Fifty patients with a total of 75 metastases detected by PSMA-PET/CT were analyzed. At the time of SBRT, 70% of patients were castration-sensitive. Overall, 80% of metastases were treated with SFRS (median dose 20 Gy, range: 16-25). After median follow-up of 34 months (range: 5-70) median PFS and TFFS were 12 months (range: 2-63) and 14 months (range: 2-70), respectively. Thirty-two (64%) patients had repeat oligometastatic disease. Twenty-four (48%) patients with progression underwent second SBRT course. Two-year LC after SFRS was 96%. Grade 1 and 2 toxicity occurred in 3 (6%) and 1 (2%) patients, respectively. ADTFS and OS rates at 2-years were 60.5% and 100%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, TFFS significantly improved in patients with time to first metastasis (TTM) >36 months (p = 0.01) and PSA before SBRT ≤1 ng/ml (p = 0.03).
CONCLUSION
For patients with OMPC, SBRT might be used as an alternative to ADT. This way, the start/escalation of palliative ADT and its side effects can be deferred. Metastases treated with PSMA-PET/CT-based SFRS reached excellent LC with minimal toxicity. Low PSA levels and longer TTM predict elongated TFFS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33085712
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240892
pii: PONE-D-20-17881
pmc: PMC7577453
doi:
Substances chimiques
Gallium Isotopes
0
Gallium Radioisotopes
0
Membrane Glycoproteins
0
Organometallic Compounds
0
Radiopharmaceuticals
0
gallium 68 PSMA-11
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0240892Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Clin Cancer Res. 1996 Sep;2(9):1445-51
pubmed: 9816319
World J Nucl Med. 2019 Jul-Sep;18(3):232-237
pubmed: 31516365
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2019 Oct;145(10):2469-2479
pubmed: 31444549
J Nucl Med. 2015 Aug;56(8):1185-90
pubmed: 26112024
Radiat Oncol. 2014 Jun 12;9:135
pubmed: 24920079
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Jul;43(8):1410-7
pubmed: 26993315
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Nov 1;99(3):701-709
pubmed: 29280465
JAMA. 1998 Sep 16;280(11):969-74
pubmed: 9749478
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 Feb;45(2):235-242
pubmed: 29075832
J Nucl Med. 2017 Jul;58(7):1081-1087
pubmed: 28209912
Int J Cancer. 2020 Jan 1;146(1):161-168
pubmed: 31199504
World J Urol. 2019 Dec;37(12):2615-2621
pubmed: 31346760
Eur Urol. 2018 Oct;74(4):455-462
pubmed: 30227924
Radiat Oncol. 2019 Nov 14;14(1):205
pubmed: 31727093
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb 10;36(5):446-453
pubmed: 29240541
Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):9-12
pubmed: 26189689
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Oct;15(5):e773-e782
pubmed: 28462855
J Nucl Med. 2018 Sep;59(9):1338-1339
pubmed: 30030344
BJU Int. 2019 Nov;124 Suppl 1:19-30
pubmed: 31507035
Clin Transl Oncol. 2018 Apr;20(4):484-490
pubmed: 28795303
J Clin Oncol. 1995 Jan;13(1):8-10
pubmed: 7799047
JAMA Oncol. 2020 May 1;6(5):650-659
pubmed: 32215577
Strahlenther Onkol. 2020 Mar;196(3):213-221
pubmed: 31559480
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Jun 1;95(2):696-702
pubmed: 27131082
BMC Cancer. 2020 Apr 29;20(1):362
pubmed: 32349700
Clin Nucl Med. 2016 Jul;41(7):515-21
pubmed: 26975008
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 12;13(4):e0195149
pubmed: 29649281
Radiat Oncol. 2016 Jan 22;11:9
pubmed: 26796633
Br J Cancer. 2017 Jun 6;116(12):1520-1525
pubmed: 28449007
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014 Jan;41(1):11-20
pubmed: 24072344
World J Urol. 2019 Nov;37(11):2343-2353
pubmed: 30706122
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Jan;43(1):34-41
pubmed: 26404016
J Nucl Med. 2015 May;56(5):668-74
pubmed: 25791990
Strahlenther Onkol. 2020 Nov;196(11):1034-1043
pubmed: 32617620
Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26 Suppl 5:v69-77
pubmed: 26205393
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2019 Jan;39:309-320
pubmed: 31099652
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Jan;21(1):e18-e28
pubmed: 31908301