Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.
androgen deprivation therapy
biochemical control
high-risk prostate cancer
review
stereotactic body radiotherapy
toxicity
Journal
Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Feb 2021
12 Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
07
12
2020
revised:
04
02
2021
accepted:
09
02
2021
entrez:
6
3
2021
pubmed:
7
3
2021
medline:
7
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Radiotherapy (RT) is an established, potentially curative treatment option for all risk constellations of localized prostate cancer (PCA). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose-escalated RT can further improve outcome in high-risk (HR) PCA. In recent years, shorter RT schedules based on hypofractionated RT have shown equal outcome. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly conformal RT technique enabling ultra-hypofractionation which has been shown to be safe and efficient in patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCA. There is a paucity of data on the role of SBRT in HR PCA. In particular, the need for pelvic elective nodal irradiation (ENI) needs to be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the available data on observed toxicities, ADT prescription practice, and oncological outcome to shed more light on the value of SBRT in HR PCA. We searched the PubMed and Embase electronic databases for the terms "prostate cancer" AND "stereotactic" AND "radiotherapy" in June 2020. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. After a rigorous selection process, we identified 18 individual studies meeting all selection criteria for further analyses. Five additional studies were included because their content was judged as relevant. Three trials have reported on prostate SBRT including pelvic nodes; 2 with ENI and 1 with positive pelvic nodes only. The remaining studies investigated SBRT of the prostate only. Grade 2+ acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity was between 12% and 46.7% in the studies investigating pelvic nodes irradiation and ranged from 0% to 89% in the prostate only studies. Grade 2+ chronic GU toxicity was between 7% and 60% vs. 2% and 56.7%. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) grade 2+ toxicity was between 0% to 4% and 0% to 18% for studies with and without pelvic nodes irradiation, respectively. Chronic GI grade 2+ toxicity rates were between 4% and 50.1% vs. 0% and 40%. SBRT of prostate and positive pelvic nodes only showed similar toxicity rates as SBRT for the prostate only. Among the trials that reported on ADT use, the majority of HR PCA patients underwent ADT for at least 2 months; mostly neoadjuvant and concurrent. Biochemical control rates ranged from 82% to 100% after 2 years and 56% to 100% after 3 years. Only a few studies reported longer follow-up data. At this point, SBRT with or without pelvic ENI cannot be considered the standard of care in HR PCA, due to missing level 1 evidence. Treatment may be offered to selected patients at specialized centers with access to high-precision RT. While concomitant ADT is the current standard of care, the necessary duration of ADT in combination with SBRT remains unclear. Ideally, all eligible patients should be enrolled in clinical trials.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Radiotherapy (RT) is an established, potentially curative treatment option for all risk constellations of localized prostate cancer (PCA). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose-escalated RT can further improve outcome in high-risk (HR) PCA. In recent years, shorter RT schedules based on hypofractionated RT have shown equal outcome. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly conformal RT technique enabling ultra-hypofractionation which has been shown to be safe and efficient in patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCA. There is a paucity of data on the role of SBRT in HR PCA. In particular, the need for pelvic elective nodal irradiation (ENI) needs to be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the available data on observed toxicities, ADT prescription practice, and oncological outcome to shed more light on the value of SBRT in HR PCA.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched the PubMed and Embase electronic databases for the terms "prostate cancer" AND "stereotactic" AND "radiotherapy" in June 2020. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations.
RESULTS
RESULTS
After a rigorous selection process, we identified 18 individual studies meeting all selection criteria for further analyses. Five additional studies were included because their content was judged as relevant. Three trials have reported on prostate SBRT including pelvic nodes; 2 with ENI and 1 with positive pelvic nodes only. The remaining studies investigated SBRT of the prostate only. Grade 2+ acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity was between 12% and 46.7% in the studies investigating pelvic nodes irradiation and ranged from 0% to 89% in the prostate only studies. Grade 2+ chronic GU toxicity was between 7% and 60% vs. 2% and 56.7%. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) grade 2+ toxicity was between 0% to 4% and 0% to 18% for studies with and without pelvic nodes irradiation, respectively. Chronic GI grade 2+ toxicity rates were between 4% and 50.1% vs. 0% and 40%. SBRT of prostate and positive pelvic nodes only showed similar toxicity rates as SBRT for the prostate only. Among the trials that reported on ADT use, the majority of HR PCA patients underwent ADT for at least 2 months; mostly neoadjuvant and concurrent. Biochemical control rates ranged from 82% to 100% after 2 years and 56% to 100% after 3 years. Only a few studies reported longer follow-up data.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
At this point, SBRT with or without pelvic ENI cannot be considered the standard of care in HR PCA, due to missing level 1 evidence. Treatment may be offered to selected patients at specialized centers with access to high-precision RT. While concomitant ADT is the current standard of care, the necessary duration of ADT in combination with SBRT remains unclear. Ideally, all eligible patients should be enrolled in clinical trials.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33673077
pii: cancers13040759
doi: 10.3390/cancers13040759
pmc: PMC7918664
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Références
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Apr 30;32(1):3-12
pubmed: 7721636
BMC Urol. 2013 Oct 17;13:49
pubmed: 24134138
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 May 1;104(1):36-41
pubmed: 30445172
Medicine (Baltimore). 2014 Dec;93(28):e290
pubmed: 25526468
Radiother Oncol. 2013 Nov;109(2):217-21
pubmed: 24060175
Acta Oncol. 2017 Jul;56(7):978-983
pubmed: 28514930
Radiat Oncol. 2014 Nov 15;9:241
pubmed: 25398516
Curr Oncol Rep. 2017 Apr;19(4):30
pubmed: 28343352
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2019 Jul 16;4(4):668-673
pubmed: 31681864
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jul 10;34(20):2325-32
pubmed: 27044935
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021 Mar;33(3):172-180
pubmed: 33214044
Tumori. 2015 Nov-Dec;101(6):684-91
pubmed: 26045107
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2014 Nov;14(11):1271-6
pubmed: 25367322
Radiat Oncol. 2015 Aug 28;10:182
pubmed: 26310244
Lancet. 2019 Aug 3;394(10196):385-395
pubmed: 31227373
World J Oncol. 2019 Apr;10(2):63-89
pubmed: 31068988
Brachytherapy. 2017 Jan - Feb;16(1):1-12
pubmed: 27771243
Radiat Oncol. 2013 Mar 13;8:58
pubmed: 23497695
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Jun 1;98(2):275-285
pubmed: 28262473
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014 Dec;26(12):757-61
pubmed: 25193299
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018 May - Jun;8(3):185-202
pubmed: 29339046
Lancet. 2011 Dec 17;378(9809):2104-11
pubmed: 22056152
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Jul 15;92(4):856-62
pubmed: 25936597
Front Oncol. 2014 Nov 14;4:313
pubmed: 25452934
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Nov;11(11):1066-73
pubmed: 20933466
Tumori. 2011 Jan-Feb;97(1):43-8
pubmed: 21528663
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Nov 1;69(3):646-55
pubmed: 17531401
J Clin Oncol. 2006 May 1;24(13):1990-6
pubmed: 16648499
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Jul 1;95(3):960-964
pubmed: 27302511
Strahlenther Onkol. 2020 May;196(5):421-443
pubmed: 32211939
Front Oncol. 2016 Jul 08;6:168
pubmed: 27458572
JAMA. 1998 Sep 16;280(11):969-74
pubmed: 9749478
J Med Radiat Sci. 2017 Sep;64(3):180-187
pubmed: 28271639
Radiat Oncol. 2014 Jan 01;9:1
pubmed: 24382205
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Nov;20(11):1531-1543
pubmed: 31540791
Lancet. 2009 Jan 24;373(9660):301-8
pubmed: 19091394
J Radiat Oncol. 2013 Mar;2(1):63-70
pubmed: 23504305
Front Oncol. 2016 Aug 23;6:184
pubmed: 27602330
Radiother Oncol. 2020 Oct 2;154:214-219
pubmed: 33011207
Cureus. 2015 Dec 04;7(12):e395
pubmed: 26798571
JAMA. 2005 Sep 14;294(10):1233-9
pubmed: 16160131
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 May 1;17(5):479-505
pubmed: 31085757
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jun 10;35(17):1884-1890
pubmed: 28296582
Lancet Oncol. 2007 Jun;8(6):475-87
pubmed: 17482880
Front Oncol. 2014 Oct 28;4:301
pubmed: 25389521
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Dec 1;102(5):1438-1447
pubmed: 30071295
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Mar 15;43(5):1095-101
pubmed: 10192361
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Jan;110(1):104-9
pubmed: 24246414
Radiother Oncol. 2019 Oct;139:83-86
pubmed: 31431369
Strahlenther Onkol. 2020 May;196(5):417-420
pubmed: 32211940
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Aug;17(8):1061-1069
pubmed: 27339116
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Feb;15(1):179-85
pubmed: 25586517
Cancer Med. 2020 May;9(9):3097-3106
pubmed: 32160416
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Mar 1;103(3):605-617
pubmed: 30528653
Radiat Oncol. 2020 Sep 15;15(1):217
pubmed: 32933541
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Jul 15;104(4):778-789
pubmed: 30959121
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2020 Oct 20;25:88-93
pubmed: 33145444
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Aug;17(8):1047-1060
pubmed: 27339115
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 May 1;104(1):42-49
pubmed: 30611838
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2018 Jul;30(7):442-447
pubmed: 29571936