Search

A significant number of prostate cancer patients are long-term survivors after primary definitive therapy, and the occurrence of late side effects, such as second primary cancers, has gained interest. The aim of this editorial is to discuss the most current evidence on second primary cancers based on six retrospective studies published in 2021-2024 using large data repositories not accounting for all possible confounding factors, such as smoking or pre-existing comorbidities. Overall, prostate cancer patients treated with curative radiotherapy have an increased risk (0.7-1%) of the development of second primary cancers compared to patients treated with surgery up to 25 years after treatment. However, current evidence suggests that the implementation of intensity modulated radiation therapy is not increasing the risk of second primary cancers compared to conformal 3D-planned radiotherapy. Furthermore, increasing evidence indicates that highly conformal radiotherapy techniques may not increase the probability of second primary cancers compared to radical prostatectomy. Consequently, future studies should consider the radiotherapy technique and other confounding factors to provide a more accurate estimation of the occurrence of second primary cancers., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

For prostate cancer, the role of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) for cN0 or pN0 patients has been under discussion for years. Considering the recent publications of randomized controlled trials, the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) aimed to discuss and summarize the current literature. Modern trials have been recently published for both treatment-naïve patients (POP-RT trial) and patients after surgery (SPPORT trial). Although there are more reliable data to date, we identified several limitations currently complicating the definitions of general recommendations. For patients with cN0 (conventional or PSMA-PET staging) undergoing definitive radiotherapy, only men with high-risk factors for nodal involvement (e.g., cT3a, GS ≥ 8, PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml) seem to benefit from ENI. For biochemical relapse in the postoperative situation (pN0) and no PSMA imaging, ENI may be added to patients with risk factors according to the SPPORT trial (e.g., GS ≥ 8; PSA > 0.7 ng/ml). If PSMA-PET/CT is negative, ENI may be offered for selected men with high-risk factors as an individual treatment approach., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Patients sometimes report phosphene and phantosmia during radiation therapy (RT). However, the detail features and related factors are not well understood. Our prospective study aimed to investigate the characteristics of phantosmias and phosphenes, to identify factors that influence the occurrence, intensity and hedonic (pleasantness/unpleasantness) ratings of such sensations during RT., Methods: We included a total of 106 patients (37 women), who underwent RT in regions of the brain, ear, nose, throat (ENT), and other areas of the body for a duration of 43 ± 5 days. Medical history and treatment parameters were collected in a structured medical interview. Olfactory function was measured using the Sniffin' Stick Odor Identification Test at baseline. Phantosmia and phosphene were recorded weekly based on a self-report questionnaire., Results: There were 37% of the patients experiencing phantosmias, 51% experiencing phosphenes, and 29% simultaneously experiencing both sensations. Phosphenes were typically perceived as a flashily blue, white and/or purple light, phantosmias were typically perceived as a chemical-like, metallic or burnt smell. Younger age (F = 7.81, p < 0.01), radiation in the brain region (χ 2  = 14.05, p = 0.02), absence of taste problems (χ 2  = 10.28, p = 0.01), and proton RT (χ 2  = 10.57, p = 0.01) were related to these abnormal sensations. History of chemical/dust exposure predicted lower intensity (B = -1.52, p = 0.02) and lower unpleasantness (B = 0.49, p = 0.03) of phantosmia. In contrast, disease (tumor) duration (B = 0.11, p < 0.01), food allergy (B = 2.77, p < 0.01), and epilepsy (B = -1.50, p = 0.02) influence phosphenes intensity. Analgesics intake predicted a higher pleasantness of the phosphenes (B = 0.47, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Phantosmias and phosphenes are common during RT. The treatment settings and individual arousal level influence the occurrence, intensity and hedonic of such abnormal sensations. Phantosmias and phosphenes may involve more central neural than peripheral mechanism, and they could be elicited with activation of areas that are not regarded to be part of the olfactory or visual network., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The DEGRO Expert Commission on Prostate Cancer has revised the indication for radiation therapy of the primary prostate tumor in patients with synchronous distant metastases with low metastatic burden., Methods: The current literature in the PubMed database was reviewed regarding randomized evidence on radiotherapy of the primary prostate tumor with synchronous low metastatic burden., Results: In total, two randomized trials were identified. The larger study, the STAMPEDE trial, demonstrated an absolute survival benefit of 8% after 3 years for patients with low metastatic burden treated with standard of care (SOC) and additional radiotherapy (RT) (EQD2 ≤ 72 Gy) of the primary tumor. Differences in the smaller Horrad trial were not statistically significant, although risk reduction in the subgroup (< 5 bone metastases) was equal to STAMPEDE. The STOPCAP meta-analysis of both trials demonstrated the benefit of local radiotherapy for up to 4 bone lesions and an additional subanalysis of STAMPEDE also substantiated this finding in cases with M1a-only metastases., Conclusion: Therefore, due to the survival benefit after 3 years, current practice is changing. New palliative SOC is radiotherapy of the primary tumor in synchronously metastasized prostate cancer with low metastatic burden (defined as ≤ 4 bone metastases, with or without distant nodes) or in case of distant nodes only detected by conventional imaging., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Various randomized phase III clinical trials have compared moderately hypofractionated to normofractionated radiotherapy (RT). These modalities showed similar effectiveness without major differences in toxicity. This project was conducted by the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society. We aimed to investigate expert opinions on the use of moderately hypofractionated RT as a definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries., Methods: A 25-item, web-based questionnaire on moderate-hypofractionation RT was prepared by an internal committee. The experts of the DEGRO were asked to complete the questionnaire., Results: Fourteen active members of DEGRO completed the questionnaire. The questions described indications for selecting patients eligible to receive moderate hypofractionation based on clinical and pathological factors such as age, urinary symptoms, and risk-group. The questions also collected information on the technical aspects of selection criteria, including the definition of a clinical target volume, the use of imaging, protocols for bladder and rectal filling, the choice of a fractionation schedule, and the use of image guidance. Moreover, the questionnaire collected information on post-treatment surveillance after applying moderately hypofractionated RT., Conclusion: Although opinions varied on the use of moderate-hypofractionation RT, the current survey reflected broad agreement on the notion that moderately hypofractionated RT could be considered a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: The current article encompasses a literature review and recommendations for radiotherapy in nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer., Materials and Methods: A literature review focused on studies comparing metastasis-directed stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) vs. external elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) and studies analyzing recurrence patterns after local nodal treatment was performed. The DEGRO Prostate Cancer Expert Panel discussed the results and developed treatment recommendations., Results: Metastasis-directed radiotherapy results in high local control (often > 90% within a follow-up of 1-2 years) and can be used to improve progression-free survival or defer androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) according to prospective randomized phase II data. Distant progression after involved-node SABR only occurs within a few months in the majority of patients. ENRT improves metastases-free survival rates with increased toxicity in comparison to SABR according to retrospective comparative studies. The majority of nodal recurrences after initial local treatment of pelvic nodal metastasis are detected within the true pelvis and common iliac vessels., Conclusion: ENRT with or without a boost should be preferred to SABR in pelvic nodal recurrences. In oligometastatic prostate cancer with distant (extrapelvic) nodal recurrences, SABR alone can be performed in selected cases. Application of additional systemic treatments should be based on current guidelines, with ADT as first-line treatment for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Only in carefully selected patients can radiotherapy be initially used without additional ADT outside of the current standard recommendations. Results of (randomized) prospective studies are needed for definitive recommendations.

Due to its low fractionation sensitivity, also known as "alpha/beta ratio," in relation to its surrounding organs at risk, prostate cancer is predestined for hypofractionated radiation schedules assuming an increased therapeutic ratio compared to normofractionated regimens. While moderate hypofractionation (2.2-4 Gy) has been proven to be non-inferior to normal fractionation in several large randomized trials for localized prostate cancer, level I evidence for ultrahypofractionation (>4 Gy) was lacking until recently. An accumulating body of non-randomized evidence has recently been strengthened by the publication of two randomized studies comparing ultrahypofractionation with a normofractionated schedule, i.e., the Scandinavian HYPO-RT trial by Widmark et al. and the first toxicity results of the PACE‑B trial. In this review, we aim to give a brief overview of the current evidence of ultrahypofractionation, make an overall assessment of the level of evidence, and provide recommendations and requirements that should be followed before introducing ultrahypofractionation into routine clinical use.

Aim: To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer., Methods: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity., Results: Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1 × 10 Gy or 2 × 6 Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20 mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1 × 12 Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques., Conclusions: Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.

Objective: This article aims to provide an overview of the role of combined radiation and androgen deprivation (ADT) therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer., Materials and Methods: The current German, European, and NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines as well as relevant literature in the PubMed database which provide information on sub-classification within the intermediate-risk group and the use of ADT in terms of oncological outcome were reviewed., Results: Different recommendations for risk-group assessment of patients with localized prostate cancer are available. Subdivision of intermediate risk into a favorable and an unfavorable group seems to be justified to allow for a more individualized therapy in a quite heterogenous group of patients. So far, multiple randomized trials have shown a benefit when radiation therapy (RT) is combined with ADT. The use of dose-escalated RT without ADT also appears to be an adequate therapy associated with a very low rate of cancer-specific deaths. Therefore, taking into account the increased rate of toxicity associated with ADT, dose-escalated RT alone might be justified, especially in favorable intermediate-risk patients., Conclusion: Dose-escalated RT alone appears to be an appropriate treatment in favorable intermediate-risk patients. Addition of short course ADT (4-6 months) might improve outcomes in unfavorable intermediate-risk patients.

Aim: Overview on the use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) added to salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy., Methods: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published between January 2009 and May 2017, and assessed the validity of the information on outcome parameters including overall survival (OS) and treatment-related toxicity., Results: Two randomized controlled trials and nine relevant retrospective analyses were identified. The RTOG 9601 trial showed an OS improvement for the combination of 2 years of bicalutamide and SRT compared to SRT alone after a median follow-up of 13 years. This improvement appeared to be restricted to those patients with a prostate specific antigen (PSA) level before SRT of ≥0.7 ng/mL. The GETUG AFU-16 trial showed that after a median follow-up of 5 years, the addition of 6 months of goserelin to SRT improved progression-free survival (PFS; based on biochemical recurrence) as compared to SRT alone. ADT in both trials was not associated with increased major late toxicities. Results of retrospective series were inconsistent with a suggestion that the addition of ADT improved biochemical PFS especially in patients with high-risk factors such as Gleason Score ≥8 and in the group with initially negative surgical margins., Conclusions: ADT combined with SRT appears to improve OS in patients with a PSA level before SRT of ≥0.7 ng/mL. In patients without persistent PSA after prostatectomy and PSA levels of <0.7 ng/mL, ADT should not routinely be used, but may be considered in patients with additional risk factors such as Gleason Score ≥8 and negative surgical margins.

Aim: This article gives an overview on the current status of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer with a special focus on the applicability in routine use., Methods: Based on a recently published systematic review the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel added additional information that has become available since then and assessed the validity of the information on outcome parameters especially with respect to long-term toxicity and long-term disease control., Results: Several large-scale trials on moderate hypofractionation with single doses from 2.4-3.4 Gy have recently finished recruiting or have published first results suggestive of equivalent outcomes although there might be a trend for increased short-term and possibly even long-term toxicity. Large phase 3 trials on extreme hypofractionation with single doses above 4.0 Gy are lacking and only very few prospective trials have follow-up periods covering more than just 2-3 years., Conclusion: Until the results on long-term follow-up of several well-designed phase 3 trials become available, moderate hypofractionation should not be used in routine practice without special precautions and without adherence to the highest quality standards and evidence-based dose fractionation regimens. Extreme hypofractionation should be restricted to prospective clinical trials., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestsS. Höcht, D.M. Aebersold, C. Albrecht, D. Böhmer, M. Flentje, U. Ganswindt, T. Hölscher, T. Martin, F. Sedlmayer, F. Wenz, D. Zips and T. Wiegel state that they have no conflict of interests.The accompanying manuscript does not contain any studies carried out by the authors on humans or animals.

Purpose: Studies have shown that GIPC1/Synectin is an essential adaptor protein of receptors that play an important role in cancer progression and therapy resistance. This is the first study to explore the role of GIPC1/Synectin in radioresistance of prostate cancer and as a possible predictive marker for outcome of primary radiation therapy., Materials and Methods: The effect of RNA interference-mediated GIPC1/Synectin depletion on clonogenic cell survival after irradiation with 0, 2, 4, or 6 Gy was assayed in two different GIPC1/Synectin-expressing human prostate cancer cell lines. The clinical outcome data of 358 men who underwent radiotherapy of prostate cancer with a curative intention were analyzed retrospectively. Uni- and multivariate analysis was performed of prostate-specific antigen recurrence-free survival and overall survival in correlation with protein expression in pretreatment biopsy specimens. Protein expression was evaluated by standard immunohistochemistry methods., Results: In cell culture experiments, no change was detected in radiosensitivity after depletion of GIPC1/Synectin in GIPC1/Synectin-expressing prostate cancer cell lines. Furthermore, there was no correlation between GIPC1/Synectin expression in human pretreatment biopsy samples and overall or biochemical recurrence-free survival after radiotherapy in a retrospective analysis of the study cohort., Conclusion: Our results do not show a predictive or prognostic function of GIPC1/Synectin expression for the outcome of radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Furthermore, our in vitro results do not support a role of GIPC1 in the cellular radiation response. However, the role of GIPC1 in the progression of prostate cancer and its precursors should be subject to further research.