Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ANDROGENS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

Influence of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on All-Cause Mortality in Men With High-Risk Prostate Cancer and a History of Congestive Heart Failure or Myocardial Infarction

Purpose: It is unknown whether the excess risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) observed when androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is added to radiation for men with prostate cancer and a history of congestive heart failure (CHF) or myocardial infarction (MI) also applies to those with high-risk disease. Methods and Materials: Of 14,594 men with cT1c-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer treated with brachytherapy-based radiation from 1991 through 2006, 1,378 (9.4%) with a history of CHF or MI comprised the study cohort. Of these, 22.6% received supplemental external beam radiation, and 42.9% received a median of 4 months of neoadjuvant ADT. Median age was 71.8 years. Median follow-up was 4.3 years. Cox multivariable analysis tested for an association between ADT use and ACM within risk groups, after adjusting for treatment factors, prognostic factors, and propensity score for ADT. Results: ADT was associated with significantly increased ACM (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.34; p = 0.0001), with 5-year estimates of 22.71% with ADT and 11.62% without ADT. The impact of ADT on ACM by risk group was as follows: high-risk AHR = 2.57; 95% CI, 1.17-5.67; p = 0.019; intermediate-risk AHR = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.13-2.73; p = 0.012; low-risk AHR = 1.52; 95% CI, 0.96-2.43; p = 0.075). Conclusions: Among patients with a history of CHF or MI treated with brachytherapy-based radiation, ADT was associated with increased all-cause mortality, even for patients with high-risk disease. Although ADT has been shown in Phase III studies to improve overall survival in high-risk disease, the small subgroup of high-risk patients with a history of CHF or MI, who represented about 9% of the patients, may be harmed by ADT.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

Variation in Use of Androgen Suppression With External-Beam Radiotherapy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To describe practice patterns associated with androgen suppression (AS) stratified by disease risk group in patients undergoing external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: We identified 2,184 low-risk, 2,339 intermediate-risk, and 2,897 high-risk patients undergoing EBRT for nonmetastatic prostate cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2005, in the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. We examined the association of patient, clinical, and demographic characteristics with AS use by multivariate logistic regression. Results: The proportions of patients receiving AS for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk prostate cancer were 32.2%, 56.3%, and 81.5%, respectively. AS use among men in the low-risk disease category varied widely, ranging from 13.6% in Detroit to 47.8% in Kentucky. We observed a significant decline in AS use between 2004 and 2005 within all three disease risk categories. Men aged {>=}75 years or with elevated comorbidity levels were more likely to receive AS. Conclusion: Our results identified apparent overuse and underuse of AS among men within the low-risk and high-risk disease categories, respectively. These results highlight the need for clinician and patient education regarding the appropriate use of AS. Practice patterns among intermediate-risk patients reflect the clinical heterogeneity of this population and underscore the need for better evidence to guide the treatment of these patients.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

External-Beam Radiation Therapy and High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy Combined With Long-Term Androgen Deprivation Therapy in High and Very High Prostate Cancer: Preliminary Data on Clinical Outcome

Purpose: To determine the feasibility of combined long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and dose escalation with high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. Methods and Materials: Between 2001 and 2007, 200 patients with high-risk prostate cancer (32.5%) or very high-risk prostate cancer (67.5%) were prospectively enrolled in this Phase II trial. Tumor characteristics included a median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen of 15.2 ng/mL, a clinical stage of T2c, and a Gleason score of 7. Treatment consisted of 54 Gy of external irradiation (three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy [3DCRT]) followed by 19 Gy of HDR brachytherapy in four twice-daily treatments. ADT started 0-3 months before 3DCRT and continued for 2 years. Results: One hundred and ninety patients (95%) received 2 years of ADT. After a median follow-up of 3.7 years (range, 2-9), late Grade {>=}2 urinary toxicity was observed in 18% of the patients and Grade {>=}3 was observed in 5%. Prior transurethral resection of the prostate (p = 0.013) and bladder D{sub 50} {>=}1.19 Gy (p = 0.014) were associated with increased Grade {>=}2 urinary complications; age {>=}70 (p = 0.05) was associated with Grade {>=}3 urinary complications. Late Grade {>=}2 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in 9% of the patients and Grade {>=}3 in 1.5%. CTV size {>=}35.8 cc (p = 0.007) and D{sub 100} {>=}3.05 Gy (p = 0.01) were significant for increased Grade {>=}2 complications. The 5-year and 9-year biochemical relapse-free survival (nadir + 2) rates were 85.1% and 75.7%, respectively. Patients with Gleason score of 7-10 had a decreased biochemical relapse-free survival (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Intermediate-term results at the 5-year time point indicate a favorable outcome without an increase in the rate of late complications.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

Implementation of High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy and Androgen Deprivation in Patients With Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To evaluate outcome (overall survival [OS], the actuarial 5-year cancer-specific survival [CSS], disease-free survival [DFS], biochemical failure-free survival [BFS]), complications and morbidity in patients treated with high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost and hormonal treatment with curative aims. Methods: Between 2004 and 2009, 275 prospectively followed pN0/N0M0 patients were included: 19 patients (7%) with T2, Gleason score 7 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <10 and 256 patients (93%) with T3 or Gleason score 8-10 or PSA >20 received multimodal treatment with conformal four-field radiotherapy (prostate/vesiculae 2 Gy Multiplication-Sign 25) combined with HDR-BT (iridium 192; prostate 10 Gy Multiplication-Sign 2) with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Results: After a median observation time of 44.2 months (range, 10.4-90.5 months) 12 patients had relapsed clinically and/or biochemically and 10 patients were dead, of which 2 patients died from prostate cancer. Five-year estimates of BFS, CSS, DFS, and OS rates were 98.5%, 99.3%, 95.6%, and 96.3%, respectively. None of the patients with either Gleason score <8 or with intermediate risk profile had relapsed. The number of HDR-BT treatments was not related to outcome. Despite of age (median, 65.7 years; range, 45.7-77 years) and considerable pretreatment comorbidity in 39 of 275 patients, Genitourinary treatment-related morbidity was moderate with long-lasting Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Grade 2 voiding problems in 26 patients (9.5%) and occasionally mucous discharge in 20 patients (7%), none with Grade >2 for gastrointestinal at follow-up. Complications during implantations were related to pubic arch interference (4 patients) and lithotomy time, causing 2 patients to develop compartment syndrome. Conclusion: Despite still preliminary observations, our 5-year outcome estimates favor the implementation of high-dose-rate brachytherapy in high-risk patients combined with conformal external radiotherapy and long-term ADT. High-quality implants can be achieved by a trained specialized team at a high-turnover center using transrectal ultrasound-based treatment plans with acceptable morbidity and complication rates.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

Phase II Study of Long-Term Androgen Suppression With Bevacizumab and Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) in High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose: We report a Phase II trial assessing the acute and late toxicities of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), long-term androgen suppression (LTAS), and bevacizumab in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: We treated 18 patients with LTAS with bicalutamide and goserelin in combination with bevacizumab and IMRT. Bevacizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) was administered for the first 16 weeks, and 15 mg/kg was then given every 3 weeks for 12 additional weeks, with an IMRT dose of 77.9 Gy to the prostate, 64.6 Gy to the seminal vesicles, and 57 Gy to the pelvic lymph nodes. Patients were eligible if they had clinical stage T2b to T4, a Gleason sum score of 8 to 10, or a prostate- specific antigen level of 20ng/mL or greater. The primary endpoint of the study was evaluation of acute and late toxicities. Results: The median age was 69 years, with a median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen level of 12.5 ng/mL and Gleason score of 8. The pretreatment clinical stage was T1c in 4 patients, T2 in 11, and T3 in 3. All patients completed IMRT with median follow-up of 34 months (range, 28-40 months) The most common Grade 2 or higher toxicities were hypertension (61% of patients with Grade 2 and 11% with Grade 3), proteinuria (28% with Grade 2 and 6% with Grade 3), and leucopenia (28% with Grade 2). No Grade 4 or higher acute toxicities were reported. Late toxicities included proctitis (6% of patients with Grade 2 and 11% with Grade 3), rectal bleeding (6% with Grade 2 and 11% with Grade 3), hematuria (6% with Grade 2), proteinuria (17% with Grade 2), hyponatremia (6% with Grade 3), cystitis (6% with Grade 3), and urinary retention (6% with Grade 2 and 11% with Grade 3). Grade 4 prostatitis occurred in 1 patient (6%). Conclusions: Bevacizumab does not appear to exacerbate the acute effects of IMRT. Late toxicities may have been worsened with this regimen. Further investigations of bevacizumab with LTAS and IMRT should be performed cautiously.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

High-Dose Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy With or Without Androgen Deprivation Therapy

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the outcome and toxicity in patients receiving high-dose (>69 Gy) adjuvant radiotherapy (HD-ART) and the impact of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Methods and Materials: Between 1999 and 2008, 225 node-negative patients were referred for HD-ART with or without ADT to two large academic institutions. Indications for HD-ART were extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and/or positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy (RP). A dose of at least 69.1 Gy was prescribed to the prostate bed and seminal vesicle bed. The ADT consisted of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog. The duration and indication of ADT was left at the discretion of the treating physician. The effect of HD-ART and ADT on biochemical (bRFS) and clinical (cRFS) relapse-free survival was examined through univariate and multivariate analysis, with correction for known patient- and treatment-related variables. Interaction terms were introduced to evaluate effect modification. Results: After a median follow-up time of 5 years, the 7-year bRFS and cRFS were 84% and 88%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, the addition of ADT was independently associated with an improved bRFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.4, p = 0.02) and cRFS (HR 0.2, p = 0.008). Higher Gleason scores and SVI were associated with decreased bRFS and cRFS. A lymphadenectomy at the time of RP independently improved cRFS (HR 0.09, p = 0.009). The 7-year probability of late Grade 2-3 toxicity was 29% and 5% for genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, respectively. The absolute incidence of Grade 3 toxicity was <1% and 10% for GI and GU symptoms, respectively. The study is limited by its retrospective design and the lack of a standardized use of ADT. Conclusions: This retrospective study shows significantly improved bRFS and cRFS rates with the addition of ADT to HD-ART, with low Grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity and 10% Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

High-Dose Radiotherapy With or Without Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Cancer Control and Toxicity Outcomes

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on cancer control outcomes and toxicity in intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (high-dose radiotherapy [HDRT]). Methods and Materials: Demographic, disease, and treatment characteristics of prostate cancer patients at 2 institution consortiums were charted. Of 296 men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (defined as {>=}T2b, prostate-specific antigen level >10 ng/mL, or Gleason score [GS] of 7, with none of the following: {>=}T3, prostate-specific antigen level >20 ng/mL, GS {>=}8, or positive nodes) treated with HDRT to a dose of 72 Gy or greater, 123 received short-course ADT and 173 did not. Univariate and multivariate analyses on biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) (including subset analysis by disease factors) and on overall survival (OS) were performed, as were comparisons of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity rates. Results: For the whole group, the median dose was 75.6 Gy; the minimum follow-up was 2 years, and the median follow-up was 47.4 months. For ADT vs. no ADT, the 5-year BFFS rate was 86% vs. 79% (p = 0.138) and the 5-year OS rate was 87% vs. 80% (p = 0.159). On multivariate analysis, percent positive cores (PPC) (p = 0.002) and GS (p = 0.008) were significantly associated with BFFS, with ADT showing a trend (p = 0.055). The impact of ADT was highest in the subsets with PPC greater than 50% (p = 0.019), GS 4+3 (p = 0.078), and number of risk factors greater than 1 (p = 0.022). Only intensity-modulated radiotherapy use (p = 0.012) and GS (p = 0.023) reached significance for OS, and there were no significant differences in GU or GI toxicity. Conclusions: Although the use of ADT with HDRT did not influence BFFS, our study suggests a benefit in patients with PPC greater than 50%, GS 4+3, or multiple risk factors. No OS benefit was shown, and ADT was not associated with additional radiotherapy-related GI or GU toxicity.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

Upfront Androgen Deprivation Therapy With Salvage Radiation May Improve Biochemical Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Patients With Post-Prostatectomy Rising PSA

Purpose: The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to definitive external beam radiation therapy (RT) improves outcomes in higher-risk prostate cancer patients. However, the benefit of ADT with salvage RT in post-prostatectomy patients is not clearly established. Our study compares biochemical outcomes in post-prostatectomy patients who received salvage RT with or without concurrent ADT. Methods and Materials: Of nearly 2,000 post-prostatectomy patients, we reviewed the medical records of 191 patients who received salvage RT at University of Pennsylvania between 1987 and 2007. Follow-up data were obtained by chart review and electronic polling of the institutional laboratory database and Social Security Death Index. Biochemical failure after salvage RT was defined as a prostate-specific antigen of 2.0 ng/mL above the post-RT nadir or the initiation of ADT after completion of salvage RT. Results: One hundred twenty-nine patients received salvage RT alone, and 62 patients received combined ADT and salvage RT. Median follow-up was 5.4 years. Patients who received combined ADT and salvage RT were younger, had higher pathologic Gleason scores, and higher rates of seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node involvement, and pelvic nodal irradiation compared with patients who received salvage RT alone. Patients who received combined therapy had improved biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) compared with patients who received RT alone (p = 0.048). For patients with pathologic Gleason scores {<=}7, combined RT and ADT resulted in significantly improved bPFS compared to RT alone (p = 0.013). Conclusions: These results suggest that initiating ADT during salvage RT in the post-prostatectomy setting may improve bPFS compared with salvage RT alone. However, prospective randomized data are necessary to definitively determine whether hormonal manipulation should be used with salvage RT. Furthermore, the optimal nature and duration of ADT and the patient subgroups in which ADT could provide the most benefit remain open questions.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2012

Prevention of Gynecomastia and Breast Pain Caused by Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer: Tamoxifen or Radiotherapy?

Purpose: To determine, in a meta-analysis, whether gynecomastia and breast pain rates in men with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are reduced if treated with prophylactic radiotherapy (RT) or tamoxifen (TMX). Methods and Materials: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CANCERLIT, and Cochrane Library databases, as well as proceedings of annual meetings, were systematically searched to identify randomized, controlled studies comparing RT or TMX with observation for men with prostate cancer using ADT. Results: Six RCTs (three RT trials and three TMX trials, N = 777 patients total) were identified that met the study criteria. Pooled results from these RCTs comparing RT vs. observation showed a significant reduction in the incidence of gynecomastia and breast pain rates in patients treated with RT (odds ratio [OR] = 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.12-0.37, p < 0.0001, and OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.20-0.57, p < 0.0001, respectively). Use of RT resulted in an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 29.4% and 19.9%, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3.4 and 5 to avoid one case of gynecomastia and breast pain, respectively. Pooled results from trials comparing TMX vs. observation showed a statistical benefit for breast pain and gynecomastia in favor of TMX arms (OR = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.02-0.08, p < 0.0001 and OR = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.0-0.14, p < 0.00001). TMX resulted in an ARR = 64.1% and 47.6%, with an NNT of 1.56 and 2.1 to avoid one case of gynecomastia and breast pain, respectively. Considering adverse effects, TMX was 6 times more adverse effects than RT. Conclusions: Our data have shown that both TMX and RT prevented gynecomastia and breast pain in patients with prostate cancer receiving ADT for prostate cancer. Although TMX was two times more effective in preventing gynecomastia, RT should represent an effective and safe treatment option, to take into account mainly in patients with cardiovascular risk factors or thrombotic diathesis.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Is Androgen Deprivation Therapy Necessary in All Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated in the Dose Escalation Era?

Purpose: The benefit of adding androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to dose-escalated radiation therapy (RT) for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer is unclear; therefore, we assessed the impact of adding ADT to dose-escalated RT on freedom from failure (FFF). Methods: Three groups of men treated with intensity modulated RT or 3-dimensional conformal RT (75.6-78 Gy) from 1993-2008 for prostate cancer were categorized as (1) 326 intermediate-risk patients treated with RT alone, (2) 218 intermediate-risk patients treated with RT and ≤6 months of ADT, and (3) 274 low-risk patients treated with definitive RT. Median follow-up was 58 months. Recursive partitioning analysis based on FFF using Gleason score (GS), T stage, and pretreatment PSA concentration was applied to the intermediate-risk patients treated with RT alone. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate 5-year FFF. Results: Based on recursive partitioning analysis, intermediate-risk patients treated with RT alone were divided into 3 prognostic groups: (1) 188 favorable patients: GS 6, ≤T2b or GS 3+4, ≤T1c; (2) 71 marginal patients: GS 3+4, T2a-b; and (3) 68 unfavorable patients: GS 4+3 or T2c disease. Hazard ratios (HR) for recurrence in each group were 1.0, 2.1, and 4.6, respectively. When intermediate-risk patients treated with RT alone were compared to intermediate-risk patients treated with RT and ADT, the greatest benefit from ADT was seen for the unfavorable intermediate-risk patients (FFF, 74% vs 94%, respectively; P=.005). Favorable intermediate-risk patients had no significant benefit from the addition of ADT to RT (FFF, 94% vs 95%, respectively; P=.85), and FFF for favorable intermediate-risk patients treated with RT alone approached that of low-risk patients treated with RT alone (98%). Conclusions: Patients with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer did not benefit from the addition of ADT to dose-escalated RT, and their FFF was nearly as good as patients with low-risk disease. In patients with GS 4+3 or T2c disease, the addition of ADT to dose-escalated RT did improve FFF.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Trial of Risedronate for the Prevention of Bone Mineral Density Loss in Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy Plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy

Purpose: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been used as an adjuvant treatment to radiation therapy (RT) for the management of locally advanced prostate carcinoma. Long-term ADT decreases bone mineral density (BMD) and increases the risk of osteoporosis. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of risedronate for the prevention of BMD loss in nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients undergoing RT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT. Methods and Materials: A double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was conducted for nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients receiving RT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT. All had T scores > −2.5 on dual energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline. Patients were randomized 1:1 between risedronate and placebo for 2 years. The primary endpoints were the percent changes in the BMD of the lumbar spine at 1 and 2 years from baseline, measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Analyses of the changes in BMD and bone turnover biomarkers were carried out by comparing mean values of the intrapatient changes between the 2 arms, using standard t tests. Results: One hundred four patients were accrued between 2004 and 2007, with 52 in each arm. Mean age was 66.8 and 67.5 years for the placebo and risedronate, respectively. At 1 and 2 years, mean (±SE) BMD of the lumbar spine decreased by 5.77% ± 4.66% and 13.55% ± 6.33%, respectively, in the placebo, compared with 0.12% ± 1.29% at 1 year (P=.2485) and 0.85% ± 1.56% (P=.0583) at 2 years in the risedronate. The placebo had a significant increase in serum bone turnover biomarkers compared with the risedronate. Conclusions: Weekly oral risedronate prevented BMD loss at 2 years and resulted in significant suppression of bone turnover biomarkers for 24 months for patients receiving RT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Retrospective Evaluation Reveals That Long-term Androgen Deprivation Therapy Improves Cause-Specific and Overall Survival in the Setting of Dose-Escalated Radiation for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To evaluate the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and duration for high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy (RT). Methods and Materials: A retrospective analysis of high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with dose-escalated RT (minimum 75 Gy) with or without ADT was performed. The relationship between ADT use and duration with biochemical failure (BF), metastatic failure (MF), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), non-prostate cancer death (NPCD), and overall survival (OS) was assessed as a function of pretreatment characteristics, comorbid medical illness, and treatment using Fine and Gray's cumulative incidence methodology. Results: The median follow-up time was 64 months. In men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network defined high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated RT, on univariate analysis, both metastasis (P<.0001; hazard ratio 0.34; 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.67; cumulative incidence at 60 months 13% vs 35%) and PCSM (P=.015; hazard ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.2-1.0; cumulative incidence at 60 months 6% vs 11%) were improved with the use of ADT. On multivariate analysis for all high-risk patients, Gleason score was the strongest negative prognostic factor, and long-term ADT (LTAD) improved MF (P=.002), PCSM (P=.034), and OS (P=.001). In men with prostate cancer and Gleason scores 8 to 10, on multivariate analysis after adjustment for other risk features, there was a duration-dependent improvement in BF, metastasis, PCSM, and OS, all favoring LTAD in comparison with STAD or RT alone. Conclusion: For men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated EBRT, this retrospective study suggests that the combination of LTAD and RT provided a significant improvement in clinical outcome, which was especially true for those with Gleason scores of 8 to 10.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Biochemical Response to Androgen Deprivation Therapy Before External Beam Radiation Therapy Predicts Long-term Prostate Cancer Survival Outcomes

Purpose: To determine whether the response to neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) defined by a decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) to nadir values is associated with improved survival outcomes after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: One thousand forty-five patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive EBRT in conjunction with neoadjuvant and concurrent ADT. A 6-month course of ADT was used (3 months during the neoadjuvant phase and 2 to 3 months concurrently with EBRT). The median EBRT prescription dose was 81 Gy using a conformal-based technique. The median follow-up time was 8.5 years. Results: The 10-year PSA relapse-free survival outcome among patients with pre-radiation therapy PSA nadirs of ≤0.3 ng/mL was 74.3%, compared with 57.7% for patients with higher PSA nadir values (P<.001). The 10-year distant metastases-free survival outcome among patients with pre-radiation therapy PSA nadirs of ≤0.3 ng/mL was 86.1%, compared with 78.6% for patients with higher PSA nadir values (P=.004). In a competing-risk analysis, prostate cancer-related deaths were also significantly reduced among patients with pre-radiation therapy PSA nadirs of <0.3 ng/mL compared with higher values (7.8% compared with 13.7%; P=.009). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that the pre-EBRT PSA nadir value was a significant predictor of long-term biochemical tumor control, distant metastases-free survival, and cause-specific survival outcomes. Conclusions: Pre-radiation therapy nadir PSA values of ≤0.3 ng/mL after neoadjuvant ADT were associated with improved long-term biochemical tumor control, reduction in distant metastases, and prostate cancer-related death. Patients with higher nadir values may require alternative adjuvant therapies to improve outcomes.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Causes of Mortality After Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy and Androgen Deprivation for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose: Men with high-risk prostate cancer have other competing causes of mortality; however, current risk stratification schema do not account for comorbidities. We aim to identify the causes of death and factors predictive for mortality in this population. Methods and Materials: A total of 660 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were treated with definitive high-dose external beam radiation therapy (≥74 Gy) and androgen deprivation (AD) between 1996 and 2009 at a single institution. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was conducted to determine factors predictive of survival. Results: The median radiation dose was 78 Gy, median duration of AD was 6 months, and median follow-up was 74 months. The 10-year overall survival (OS) was 60.6%. Prostate cancer was the leading single cause of death, with 10-year mortality of 14.1% (95% CI 10.7-17.6), compared with other cancers (8.4%, 95% CI 5.7-11.1), cardiovascular disease (7.3%, 95% CI 4.7-9.9), and all other causes (10.4%, 95% CI 7.2-13.6). On multivariate analysis, older age (HR 1.55, P=.002) and Charlson comorbidity index score (CS) ≥1 (HR 2.20, P<.0001) were significant factors predictive of OS, whereas Gleason score, T stage, prostate-specific antigen, duration of AD, radiation dose, smoking history, and body mass index were not. Men younger than 70 years of age with CS = 0 were more likely to die of prostate cancer than any other cause, whereas older men or those with CS ≥1 more commonly suffered non-prostate cancer death. The cumulative incidences of prostate cancer-specific mortality were similar regardless of age or comorbidities (P=.60). Conclusions: Men with high-risk prostate cancer are more likely to die of causes other than prostate cancer, except for the subgroup of men younger than 70 years of age without comorbidities. Only older age and presence of comorbidities significantly predicted for OS, whereas prostate cancer- and treatment-related factors did not.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2015

A Phase 1/2 Trial of Brief Androgen Suppression and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy (FASTR) for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To initiate a phase 1/2 trial to examine the tolerability of a condensed combined-modality protocol for high-risk prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: Men scoring ≥3 on the Vulnerable Elderly Scale (VES) or refusing conventionally fractionated treatment for high-risk prostate cancer were eligible to participate. Androgen suppression was delivered for 12 months, and radiation therapy was delivered using 25 Gy to pelvic nodes delivered synchronously with 40 Gy to the prostate given as 1 fraction per week over 5 weeks. The phase 1 component included predetermined stopping rules based on 6-month treatment-related toxicity, with trial suspension specified if there were ≥6 of 15 patients (40%) or ≥3 of 15 (20%) who experienced grade ≥2 or ≥3 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity, respectively. Results: Sixteen men were enrolled, with 7 men meeting the criteria of VES ≥3 and 9 men having a VES <3 but choosing the condensed treatment. One man was not treated owing to discovery of a synchronous primary rectal cancer. Four patients (26%) experienced grade ≥2 toxicity at 6 weeks after treatment. There were 9 of 15 (60%) who experienced grade ≥2 GI or GU toxicity and 4 of 15 (26%) grade ≥3 GI or GU toxicity at 6 months, and 5 of 15 (30%) grade ≥2 GI and GU toxicity at 6 months. A review of the 15 cases did not identify any remedial changes, thus the phase 1 criteria were not met. Conclusion: This novel condensed treatment had higher than anticipated late toxicities and was terminated before phase 2 accrual. Treatment factors, such as inclusion of pelvic lymph node radiation therapy, planning constraints, and treatment margins, or patient factors related to the specific frail elderly population may be contributing.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2015

A Phase 3 Trial of 2 Years of Androgen Suppression and Radiation Therapy With or Without Adjuvant Chemotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Final Results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Phase 3 Randomized Trial NRG Oncology RTOG 9902

Purpose: Long-term (LT) androgen suppression (AS) with radiation therapy (RT) is a standard treatment of high-risk, localized prostate cancer (PCa). Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9902 was a randomized trial testing the hypothesis that adjuvant combination chemotherapy (CT) with paclitaxel, estramustine, and oral etoposide plus LT AS plus RT would improve overall survival (OS). Methods and Materials: Patients with high-risk PCa (prostate-specific antigen 20-100 ng/mL and Gleason score [GS] ≥7 or clinical stage ≥T2 and GS ≥8) were randomized to RT and AS (AS + RT) alone or with adjuvant CT (AS + RT + CT). CT was given as four 21-day cycles, delivered beginning 28 days after 70.2 Gy of RT. AS was given as luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone for 24 months, beginning 2 months before RT plus an oral antiandrogen for 4 months before and during RT. The study was designed based on a 6% improvement in OS from 79% to 85% at 5 years, with 90% power and a 2-sided alpha of 0.05. Results: A total of 397 patients (380 eligible) were randomized. The patients had high-risk PCa, 68% with GS 8 to 10 and 34% T3 to T4 tumors, and median prostate-specific antigen of 22.6 ng/mL. The median follow-up period was 9.2 years. The trial closed early because of excess thromboembolic toxicity in the CT arm. The 10-year results for all randomized patients revealed no significant difference between the AS + RT and AS + RT + CT arms in OS (65% vs 63%; P=.81), biochemical failure (58% vs 54%; P=.82), local progression (11% vs 7%; P=.09), distant metastases (16% vs 14%; P=.42), or disease-free survival (22% vs 26%; P=.61). Conclusions: NRG Oncology RTOG 9902 showed no significant differences in OS, biochemical failure, local progression, distant metastases, or disease-free survival with the addition of adjuvant CT to LT AS + RT. The trial results provide valuable data regarding the natural history of high-risk PCa treated with LT AS + RT and have implications for the feasibility of clinical trial accrual and tolerability using CT for PCa.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2015

Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiation and Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: How Good Is the Evidence?

Purpose: The optimal treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer is controversial. Most studies focus on biochemical (PSA) failure when comparing radical prostatectomy (RP) with radiation therapy (RT), but this endpoint has not been validated as predictive of overall survival (OS) or cause-specific survival (CSS). We analyzed the available literature to determine whether reliable conclusions could be made concerning the effectiveness of RP compared with RT with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), assuming current treatment standards. Methods: Articles published between February 29, 2004, and March 1, 2015, that compared OS and CSS after RP or RT with or without ADT were included. Because the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system emphasis is on randomized controlled clinical trials, a reliability score (RS) was explored to further understand the issues associated with the study quality of observational studies, including appropriateness of treatment, source of data, clinical characteristics, and comorbidity. Lower RS values indicated lower reliability. Results: Fourteen studies were identified, and 13 were completely evaluable. Thirteen of the 14 studies (93%) were observational studies with low-quality evidence. The median RS was 12 (range, 5-18); the median difference in 10-year OS and CSS favored RP over RT: 10% and 4%, respectively. In studies with a RS ≤12 (average RS 9) the 10-year OS and CSS median differences were 17% and 6%, respectively. For studies with a RS >12 (average RS 15.5), the 10-year OS and CSS median differences were 5.5% and 1%, respectively. Thus, we observed an association between low RS and a higher percentage difference in OS and CSS. Conclusions: Reliable evidence that RP provides a superior CSS to RT with ADT is lacking. The most reliable studies suggest that the differences in 10-year CSS between RP and RT are small, possibly <1%.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2016

The Outcome for Patients With Pathologic Node-Positive Prostate Cancer Treated With Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Androgen Deprivation Therapy: A Case-Matched Analysis of pN1 and pN0 Patients

Purpose: Improved outcome is reported after surgery or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with lymph node (LN) positive (N1) prostate cancer (PC). Surgical series have shown that pathologic (p)N1 PC does not behave the same in all patients. The aim of this study was to perform a matched-case analysis to compare the outcome of pN1 and pN0 PC after high-dose EBRT plus ADT. Methods and Materials: Radiation therapy up to 80 Gy was delivered to the prostate with a minimal dose of 45 Gy to the pelvis for pN1 patients. After matching, Kaplan-Meier statistics were used to compare the 5-year biochemical and clinical relapse-free survival (bRFS and cRFS), prostate cancer–specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS). Acute and late rectal and urinary toxicity was evaluated. Results: Sixty-nine pN1 PC patients were matched 1:1 with pN0 PC patients. The median follow-up time was 60 months. The 5-year bRFS and cRFS for pN1 versus pN0 PC patients were 65% ± 7% versus 79% ± 5% (P=.08) and 70% ± 6% versus 83% ± 5% (P=.04) respectively. No significant difference was found in bRFS or cRFS rates between low volume pN1 (≤2 positive LNs) and pN0 patients. The 5-year PCSS and OS were comparable between pN1 and pN0 PC patients: PCSS: 92% ± 4% versus 93% ± 3% (P=.66); OS: 82% ± 5% versus 80% ± 5% (P=.58). Severe toxicity was rare for both groups, although pN1 patients experienced significantly more acute grade 2 rectal toxicity. Conclusion: Primary EBRT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT is a legitimate treatment option for pN1 PC patients, especially those with ≤2 positive LNs, and this with bRFS and cRFS rates comparable to those in pN0 PC patients. For pN1 PC patients with >2 positive LNs, bRFS and cRFS are worse than in pN0 patients, but even in this subgroup, long-term disease control is obtained.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗