Search

Importance: Bladder-preserving trimodality therapy can be an effective alternative to radical cystectomy for treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), but biomarkers are needed to guide optimal patient selection. The DNA repair protein MRE11 is a candidate response biomarker that has not been validated in prospective cohorts using standardized measurement approaches., Objective: To evaluate MRE11 expression as a prognostic biomarker in MIBC patients receiving trimodality therapy using automated quantitative image analysis., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study analyzed patients with MIBC pooled from 6 prospective phase I/II, II, or III trials of trimodality therapy (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 8802, 8903, 9506, 9706, 9906, and 0233) across 37 participating institutions in North America from 1988 to 2007. Eligible patients had nonmetastatic MIBC and were enrolled in 1 of the 6 trimodality therapy clinical trials. Analyses were completed August 2020., Exposures: Trimodality therapy with transurethral bladder tumor resection and cisplatin-based chemoradiation therapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: MRE11 expression and association with disease-specific (bladder cancer) mortality (DSM), defined as death from bladder cancer. Pretreatment tumor tissues were processed for immunofluorescence with anti-MRE11 antibody and analyzed using automated quantitative image analysis to calculate a normalized score for MRE11 based on nuclear-to-cytoplasmic (NC) signal ratio., Results: Of 465 patients from 6 trials, 168 patients had available tissue, of which 135 were analyzable for MRE11 expression (median age of 65 years [minimum-maximum, 34-90 years]; 111 [82.2%] men). Median (minimum-maximum) follow-up for alive patients was 5.0 (0.6-11.7) years. Median (Q1-Q3) MRE11 NC signal ratio was 2.41 (1.49-3.34). Patients with an MRE11 NC ratio above 1.49 (ie, above first quartile) had a significantly lower DSM (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.93; P = .03). The 4-year DSM was 41.0% (95% CI, 23.2%-58.0%) for patients with an MRE11 NC signal ratio of 1.49 or lower vs 21.0% (95% CI, 13.4%-29.8%) for a ratio above 1.49. MRE11 NC signal ratio was not significantly associated with overall survival (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.49-1.44)., Conclusions and Relevance: Higher MRE11 NC signal ratios were associated with better DSM after trimodality therapy. Lower MRE11 NC signal ratios identified a poor prognosis subgroup that may benefit from intensification of therapy.

Importance: The 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Grade D recommendation against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for all men has been controversial, with data documenting a shift to a higher stage of disease at diagnosis. The association between the Grade D recommendation and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) among contemporary cohorts, however, is unclear., Objective: To evaluate PCSM rates between 1999 and 2019, comparing trends in rates before and after the change in the 2012 USPSTF screening guideline to assess its association with PCSM., Exposure: The 2012 USPSTF Grade D recommendation against PSA screening for all men., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research maintained by the National Center for Health Statistics to collect data on cause of death for all individuals who died of prostate cancer in the US from 1999 to 2019. Analysis was performed from January to August 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: Trends in PCSM rates were calculated from 1999 to 2012 and from 2014 to 2019, with a washout year of 2013, using linear regression, with year and binary indicator of pre-2013 and post-2013 status as interaction terms. Trends were further analyzed by age, race and ethnicity, urbanization category, and US Census region. Other measures included diagnosis of localized or metastatic prostate cancer and overall cancer mortality., Results: A total of 618 095 patients died of prostate cancer in the US from 1999 to 2019. Age-adjusted PCSM decreased linearly at a rate of -0.273 per 100 000 population per year from 1999 to 2012 and stalled at a rate of -0.009 per 100 000 per year from 2014 to 2019 (P < .001). This finding was significant among men aged 60 years or older, especially among men aged 60 to 69 years, men aged 80 years or older, and among Black men. Men aged 60 to 64 years had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.0088 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by an increasing rate of 0.0014 per 100 000 per year. Men aged 65 to 69 years had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.024 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by an increasing rate of 0.0011 per 100 000 population per year. Men aged 80 years or older had the largest absolute difference between rates before and after 2013 compared with all other age groups, with a difference of 0.06 for men aged 80 to 84 years and 0.07 for men 85 aged years or older. Black men had a decreasing, age-adjusted PCSM rate of -0.700 per 100 000 population per year prior to 2013 followed by a flattened rate of -0.091 per 100 000 population per year. Changes were observed across races and ethnicities, urbanization categories, and US Census regions and were accompanied by increased diagnoses of metastatic disease, which are inconsistent with mortality trends across all malignant neoplasms., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study using comprehensive PCSM data through 2019 demonstrated decreasing PCSM rates that flattened or increased after the 2012 USPSTF Grade D recommendation, suggesting that decreased PSA screening may be a factor associated with this change. This change was seen across ages, races and ethnicities, urbanization categories, and US Census regions. The updated 2018 USPSTF guideline supporting shared decision-making may reverse these trends in the coming years.

Importance: Black patients are less likely than White patients to receive guideline-concordant cancer care in the US. Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a potentially superior technology to photon radiotherapy for tumors with complex anatomy, tumors surrounded by sensitive tissues, and childhood cancers., Objective: To evaluate whether there are racial disparities in the receipt of PBT among Black and White individuals diagnosed with all PBT-eligible cancers in the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study evaluated Black and White individuals diagnosed with PBT-eligible cancers between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2018, in the National Cancer Database, a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry that collects data on radiation treatment, even when it is received outside the reporting facility. American Society of Radiation Oncology model policies were used to classify patients into those for whom PBT is the recommended radiation therapy modality (group 1) and those for whom evidence of PBT efficacy is still under investigation (group 2). Propensity score matching was used to ensure comparability of Black and White patients' clinical characteristics and regional availability of PBT according to the National Academy of Medicine's definition of disparities. Data analysis was performed from October 4, 2021, to February 22, 2022., Exposure: Patients' self-identified race was ascertained from medical records., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was receipt of PBT, with disparities in this therapy's use evaluated with logistic regression analysis., Results: Of the 5 225 929 patients who were eligible to receive PBT and included in the study, 13.6% were Black, 86.4% were White, and 54.3% were female. The mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 63.2 (12.4) years. Black patients were less likely to be treated with PBT than their White counterparts (0.3% vs 0.5%; odds ratio [OR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.64-0.71). Racial disparities were greater for group 1 cancers (0.4% vs 0.8%; OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.44-0.55) than group 2 cancers (0.3% vs 0.4%; OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70-0.80). Racial disparities in PBT receipt among group 1 cancers increased over time (annual percent change = 0.09, P < .001) and were greatest in 2018, the most recent year of available data., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, Black patients were less likely to receive PBT than their White counterparts, and disparities were greatest for cancers for which PBT was the recommended radiation therapy modality. These findings suggest that efforts other than increasing the number of facilities that provide PBT will be needed to eliminate disparities.

Importance: Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a potentially superior technology to photon radiotherapy for tumors with complex anatomy, those surrounded by sensitive tissues, and childhood cancers., Objective: To assess patterns of use of PBT according to the present American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) clinical indications in the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: Individuals newly diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2018 were selected from the National Cancer Database. Data analysis was performed from October 4, 2021, to February 22, 2022. ASTRO's Model Policies (2017) were used to classify patients into group 1, for which health insurance coverage for PBT treatment is recommended, and group 2, for which coverage is recommended only if additional requirements are met., Main Outcomes and Measures: Use of PBT., Results: Of the 5 919 368 patients eligible to receive PBT included in the study, 3 206 902 were female (54.2%), and mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 62.6 (12.3) years. Use of PBT in the US increased from 0.4% in 2004 to 1.2% in 2018 (annual percent change [APC], 8.12%; P < .001) due to increases in group 1 from 0.4% in 2010 to 2.2% in 2018 (APC, 21.97; P < .001) and increases in group 2 from 0.03% in 2014 to 0.1% in 2018 (APC, 30.57; P < .001). From 2010 to 2018, among patients in group 2, PBT targeted to the breast increased from 0.0% to 0.9% (APC, 51.95%), and PBT targeted to the lung increased from 0.1% to 0.7% (APC, 28.06%) (P < .001 for both). Use of PBT targeted to the prostate decreased from 1.4% in 2011 to 0.8% in 2014 (APC, -16.48%; P = .03) then increased to 1.3% in 2018 (APC, 12.45; P < .001). Most patients in group 1 treated with PBT had private insurance coverage in 2018 (1039 [55.4%]); Medicare was the most common insurance type among those in group 2 (1973 [52.5%])., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study show an increase in the use of PBT in the US between 2004 to 2018; prostate was the only cancer site for which PBT use decreased temporarily between 2011 and 2014, increasing again between 2014 and 2018. These findings may be especially relevant for Medicare radiation oncology coverage policies.

Importance: Decipher (Decipher Biosciences Inc) is a genomic classifier (GC) developed to estimate the risk of distant metastasis (DM) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with prostate cancer., Objective: To validate the GC in the context of a randomized phase 3 trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: This ancillary study used RP specimens from the phase 3 placebo-controlled NRG/RTOG 9601 randomized clinical trial conducted from March 1998 to March 2003. The specimens were centrally reviewed, and RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor available in 2019 with a median follow-up of 13 years. Clinical-grade whole transcriptomes from samples passing quality control were assigned GC scores (scale, 0-1). A National Clinical Trials Network-approved prespecified statistical plan included the primary objective of validating the independent prognostic ability of GC for DM, with secondary end points of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS). Data were analyzed from September 2019 to December 2019., Intervention: Salvage radiotherapy (sRT) with or without 2 years of bicalutamide., Main Outcomes and Measures: The preplanned primary end point of this study was the independent association of the GC with the development of DM., Results: In this ancillary study of specimens from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, GC scores were generated from 486 of 760 randomized patients with a median follow-up of 13 years; samples from a total of 352 men (median [interquartile range] age, 64.5 (60-70) years; 314 White [89.2%] participants) passed microarray quality control and comprised the final cohort for analysis. On multivariable analysis, the GC (continuous variable, per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32; P = .006), PCSM (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.63; P < .001), and OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.06-1.29; P = .002) after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, Gleason score, T stage, margin status, entry prostate-specific antigen, and treatment arm. Although the original planned analysis was not powered to detect a treatment effect interaction by GC score, the estimated absolute effect of bicalutamide on 12-year OS was less when comparing patients with lower vs higher GC scores (2.4% vs 8.9%), which was further demonstrated in men receiving early sRT at a prostate-specific antigen level lower than 0.7 ng/mL (-7.8% vs 4.6%)., Conclusions and Relevance: This ancillary validation study of the Decipher GC in a randomized trial cohort demonstrated association of the GC with DM, PCSM, and OS independent of standard clinicopathologic variables. These results suggest that not all men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after surgery benefit equally from the addition of hormone therapy to sRT., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00002874.

Importance: Perirectal spacers are intended to lower the risk of rectal toxic effects associated with prostate radiotherapy. A quantitative synthesis of typical clinical results with specific perirectal spacers is limited., Objective: To evaluate the association between perirectal hydrogel spacer placement and clinical outcomes of men receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer., Data Sources: A systematic search was performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for articles published through September 2019., Study Selection: Studies comparing men who received a hydrogel spacer vs men who did not receive a spacer (controls) prior to prostate radiotherapy., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Via random-effects meta-analysis, group comparisons were reported using the weighted mean difference for continuous measures and the risk ratio for binary measures., Main Outcomes and Measures: Procedural results, the percentage volume of rectum receiving at least 70 Gy radiation (v70), early (≤3 months) and late (>3 months) rectal toxic effects, and early and late changes in bowel-related quality of life on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (minimal clinically important difference, 4 points)., Results: The review included 7 studies (1 randomized clinical trial and 6 cohort studies) involving 1011 men (486 who received a hydrogel spacer and 525 controls), with a median duration of patient follow-up of 26 months (range, 3-63 months). The success rate of hydrogel spacer placement was 97.0% (95% CI, 94.4%-98.8% [5 studies]), and the weighted mean perirectal separation distance was 11.2 mm (95% CI, 10.1-12.3 mm [5 studies]). Procedural complications were mild and transient, occurring in 0% to 10% of patients within the studies. The hydrogel spacer group received 66% less v70 rectal irradiation compared with controls (3.5% vs 10.4%; mean difference, -6.5%; 95% CI, -10.5% to -2.5%; P = .001 [6 studies]). The risk of grade 2 or higher rectal toxic effects was comparable between groups in early follow-up (4.5% in hydrogel spacer group vs 4.1% in control group; risk ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52-1.28; P = .38 [6 studies]) but was 77% lower in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (1.5% vs 5.7%; risk ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.99; P = .05 [4 studies]). Changes in bowel-related quality of life were comparable between groups in early follow-up (mean difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -3.1 to 3.4; P = .92 [2 studies]) but were greater in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (mean difference, 5.4; 95% CI, 2.8-8.0; P < .001 [2 studies])., Conclusions and Relevance: For men receiving prostate radiotherapy, injection of a hydrogel spacer was safe, provided prostate-rectum separation sufficient to reduce v70 rectal irradiation, and was associated with fewer rectal toxic effects and higher bowel-related quality of life in late follow-up.

Importance: In men with recurrent prostate cancer, addition of long-term antiandrogen therapy to salvage radiotherapy (SRT) was associated with overall survival (OS) in the NRG/RTOG 9601 study. However, hormone therapy has associated morbidity, and there are no validated predictive biomarkers to identify which patients derive most benefit from treatment., Objective: To examine the role of pre-SRT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels to personalize hormone therapy use with SRT., Interventions: Men were randomized to SRT plus high-dose nonsteroidal antiandrogen (bicalutamide, 150 mg/d) or placebo for 2 years., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of the multicenter RTOG 9601 double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted from 1998 to 2003 by a multinational cooperative group, men with a positive surgical margin or pathologic T3 disease after radical prostatectomy with pre-SRT PSA of 0.2 to 4.0 ng/mL were included. Analysis was performed between March 4, 2019, and December 20, 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included distant metastasis (DM), other-cause mortality (OCM), and grades 3 to 5 cardiac and neurologic toxic effects. Subgroup analyses were performed using the protocol-specified PSA stratification variable (1.5 ng/mL) and additional PSA cut points, including test for interaction. Competing risk analyses were performed for DM and other-cause mortality (OCM)., Results: Overall, 760 men with PSA elevation after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were included. The median (range) age of particpants was 65 (40-83) years. Antiandrogen assignment was associated with an OS benefit in the PSA stratum greater than 1.5 ng/mL (n = 118) with a 25% 12-year absolute benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.25-0.81), but not in the PSA of 1.5 ng/mL or less stratum (n = 642) (1% 12-year absolute difference; HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66-1.16). In a subanalysis of men with PSA of 0.61 to 1.5 (n = 253), there was an OS benefit associated with antiandrogen assignment (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.94). In those receiving early SRT (PSA ≤0.6 ng/mL, n = 389), there was no improvement in OS (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.79-1.70), an increased OCM hazard (subdistribution HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.17-3.20; P = .01), and an increased odds of late grades 3 to 5 cardiac and neurologic toxic effects (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.09-15.97; P = .05)., Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that pre-SRT PSA level may be a prognostic biomarker for outcomes of antiandrogen treatment with SRT. In patients receiving late SRT (PSA >0.6 ng/mL, hormone therapy was associated with improved outcomes. In men receiving early SRT (PSA ≤0.6 ng/mL), long-term antiandrogen treatment was not associated with improved OS. Future randomized clinical trials are needed to determine hormonal therapy benefit in this population., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002874.

Importance: Prostate cancer with adverse pathological features (ie, pT3 and/or positive margins) after prostatectomy may be managed with adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) or surveillance followed by early-salvage radiotherapy (ESRT) for biochemical recurrence. The optimal timing of postoperative radiotherapy is unclear., Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of postoperative ART and ESRT administered to patients with prostate cancer with adverse pathological features., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multi-institutional, propensity score-matched cohort study involved 1566 consecutive patients who underwent postprostatectomy ART or ESRT at 10 US academic medical centers between January 1, 1987, and December 31, 2013. Propensity score 1-to-1 matching was used to account for covariates potentially associated with treatment selection. Data were collected from January 1 to September 30, 2016. Data analysis was conducted from October 1, 2016, to October 21, 2017., Main Outcomes and Measures: Freedom from postirradiation biochemical failure, freedom from distant metastases, and overall survival. All outcomes were measured from date of surgery to address lead-time bias., Results: Of 1566 patients, 1195 with prostate-specific antigen levels of 0.1 to 0.5 ng/mL received ESRT and 371 patients with prostate-specific antigen levels lower than 0.1 ng/mL received ART. The median age (interquartile range) was 60 (55-65) years. After propensity score matching, the median (interquartile range) follow-up after surgery was similar between the ESRT and ART groups (73.3 [44.9-106.6] months vs 65.8 [40-107] months; P = .22). Adjuvant RT, compared with ESRT, was associated with higher freedom from biochemical failure (12-year actuarial rates: 69% [95% CI, 60%-76%] vs 43% [95% CI, 35%-51%]; effect size, 26%), freedom from distant metastases (95% [95% CI, 90%-97%] vs 85% [95% CI, 76%-90%]; effect size, 10%), and overall survival (91% [95% CI, 84%-95%] vs 79% [95% CI, 69%-86%]; effect size, 12%). Adjuvant RT, lower Gleason score and T stage, nodal irradiation, and postoperative androgen deprivation therapy were favorable prognostic features on multivariate analysis for biochemical failure. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the decreased risk of biochemical failure associated with ART remained significant unless more than 56% of patients in the ART group were cured by surgery alone. This threshold is greater than the estimated 12-year freedom from biochemical failure rate of 33% to 52% after radical prostatectomy alone, as determined by a contemporary dynamic nomogram., Conclusions and Relevance: Adjuvant RT, compared with ESRT, was associated with reduced biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and death for high-risk patients, pending prospective validation. These findings suggest that a greater proportion of patients with prostate cancer who have adverse pathological features may benefit from postprostatectomy ART rather than surveillance followed by ESRT.