Search

In the randomized, single-center, PKUFH phase 3 trial, dose-intensified (72 Gy) radiation therapy was compared with conventional (66 Gy) radiation therapy. In a previous study, we found no significant difference in biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) between the 2 cohorts at 4 years. In the current analysis, we provide 7-year outcomes. Patients with stage pT3-4, positive surgical margins, or a prostate-specific antigen increase ≥0.2 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either 72 Gy in 36 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions. All the patients underwent image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy. The primary endpoint was bPFS. Secondary endpoints were distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Between September 2011 and November 2016, 144 patients were enrolled with 73 and 71 in the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts, respectively. At a median follow-up of 89.5 months (range, 73-97 months), there was no difference in 7-year bPFS between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts (70.3% vs 61.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.41-1.29; P =.274). However, in patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10), the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with the 66-Gy cohort (66.5% vs 30.2%; HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.17-0.82; P =.012). In addition, in patients with multiple positive surgical margins, the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with single positive surgical margin (82.5% vs 57.5%; HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13-0.99; P =.037). The 7-year DMFS (88.4% vs 84.9%; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.39-2.23; P =.867), CSS (94.1% vs 95.5%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.42-3.39; P =.745), and OS (92.8% vs 94.1%; HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.51-3.24; P =.594) had no statistical differences between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts. The current 7-year bPFS results confirmed our previous findings that dose escalation (72 Gy) demonstrated no improvement in 7-year bPFS, DMFS, CSS, or OS compared with the 66-Gy regimen. However, patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10) or multiple positive surgical margins might benefit from the 72-Gy regimen, but this requires further prospective research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with advanced renal cancer (RCC) often have limited success with systemic therapy due to tumor heterogeneity. However, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has been shown to have a beneficial therapeutic effect for oligometastatic disease when used early. Despite this, current guidelines recommend the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as the first-line therapeutic agent for patients with recurrent or metastatic kidney cancer. Additionally, there is limited data on the combination of systemic treatment and SABR for extensive metastatic RCC due to concerns about high toxicity. Proton therapy offers a promising treatment option as it emits energy at a specific depth, generating high target doses while minimizing damage to normal tissue. This allows for precise treatment of various tumor lesions. In this case report, we describe a high-risk 65-year-old male with extensive pleural and thoracic lymph node metastases and 2 bone metastases of clear cell renal cancer. While the targeted therapy and immunotherapy effectively treated the bone metastases, it was not effective in treating the chest metastases, including the pleural and lymph node metastases. Thus, the patient received full-coverage radiotherapy with photon for primary renal tumor and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for thoracic metastases. The patient showed no evidence of disease for 1 year after the initial radiotherapy, and no severe SABR-related adverse effects were observed until now. The combination of targeted therapy and immunotherapy with full-coverage radiotherapy may be a promising treatment option for selected patients with extensive metastatic renal cancer, especially as proton therapy allows for more precise control of the beam and minimal damage to normal tissue. This case has motivated us to investigate the potential advantages of administering proton therapy concurrently with systemic therapy in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]