Search

Background: In case of oligo-recurrent prostate cancer (PC) following prostatectomy, 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT can be used to detect a specific site of recurrence and to initiate metastasis-directed radiation therapy (MDT). However, large heterogeneities exist concerning doses, treatment fields and radiation techniques, with some studies reporting focal radiotherapy (RT) to PSMA-PET/CT positive lesions only and other studies using elective RT strategies. We aimed to compare oncological outcomes and toxicity between PET/CT-directed RT (PDRT) and PDRT plus elective RT (eRT; i.e. prostate bed, pelvic or paraaortal nodes) in a large retrospective multicenter study. Methods: Data of 394 patients with oligo-recurrent 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT-positive PC treated between 04/2013 and 01/2018 in six different academic institutions were evaluated. Primary endpoint was biochemical-recurrence-free survival (bRFS). bRFS was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log rank testing. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to determine influence of treatment parameters. Results: In 204 patients (51.8%) RT was directed only to lesions seen on 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT (PDRT), 190 patients (48.2%) received PDRT plus eRT. PDRT plus eRT was associated with a significantly improved 3-year bRFS compared to PDRT alone (53 vs. 37%; p = 0.001) and remained an independent factor in multivariate analysis (p = 0.006, HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12–0.68). This effect was more pronounced in the subgroup of patients who were treated with PDRT and elective prostate bed radiotherapy (ePBRT) with a 3-year bRFS of 61% versus 22% (p <0.001). Acute and late toxicity grade ≥3 was 0.8% and 3% after PDRT plus eRT versus no toxicity grade ≥3 after PDRT alone. Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients with oligo-recurrent prostate cancer, elective irradiation of the pelvic lymphatics and the prostatic bed significantly improved bRFS when added to 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT-guided focal radiotherapy. These findings need to be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The present study aims to evaluate both early and late toxicity profiles of patients receiving immediate postoperative radiotherapy (RT; adjuvant RT or additive RT) compared to salvage RT.Methods: We evaluated 253 patients with prostate cancer treated with either immediate postoperative (adjuvant RT, n = 42; additive RT, n = 39) or salvage RT (n = 137). Thirty-five patients received salvage treatment but did not achieve a postoperative prostate specific antigen (PSA) level <0.1 ng/ml and thus were excluded from analysis.Results: A significantly higher rate of early grade 1/2 proctitis in the immediate postoperative RT group without additional pelvic RT was observed (p = 0.02). Patients in the immediate postoperative RT group without additional pelvic RT showed significantly more early urinary tract obstructions (p = 0.003). Toxicity rates of early (<3 months) and late (3-6 months) postoperative RT were similar (p > 0.05). Baseline recovery rate of erectile dysfunction was better in patients with immediate postoperative RT without additional pelvic RT (p = 0.02; hazard ratio (HR) = 2.22, 95%-confidence interval, 95%-CI: 1.12-4.37). Recovery rate of urinary incontinence showed no significant difference in all groups (p > 0.05).Conclusion: Patients receiving immediate postoperative RT (adjuvant or additive RT) without additional pelvic RT experience early gastrointestinal (GI) side effect proctitis and, as well as early genitourinary (GU) toxicity urinary tract obstruction more frequently than patients treated with salvage RT. Therefore, complete recovery after surgery is essential. However, we suggest basing the treatment decision on the patient's postoperative clinical condition and evaluation of any adverse risk factors, since many studies demonstrate a clear benefit for immediate postoperative RT (adjuvant or additive RT) in terms of oncological outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) are an evolving trend in the medical field. The acceptance of digital tools is high, and the need is growing. Objective: Young adults (18-40 years) confronted with a cancer diagnosis present unique needs and require special care. They often have a strong affinity and are familiar with modern technology. On that account, we implemented a web-based symptom and quality of life (QoL) assessment to address patients' attitudes and willingness to use mHealth tools. The study also aims to evaluate sociodemographic parameters that could influence patients' opinions. Methods: A total of 380 young patients aged 18-40 treated with radiotherapy between 2002 and 2017 were included in the trial. We assessed QoL via the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Core 30 (EORTC C30) questionnaire and added general questions about mHealth technology. The added questions inquired patients' opinions regarding general aspects, including technical advances in medicine, mobile and app assistance during cancer treatment, data transfer, and app-specific features. The survey was conducted for 12 months. Participation was voluntary and pseudonymized; prior written consent was obtained. Results: We achieved a participation rate of 57.6% (219/380) and a completion rate of 50.2% (110/219). The median age was 33 years (range 18-40). Of all participants, 89.1% (98/110) considered new technologies in medicine as positive; 10.9% (12/110) answered with neutral. Nearly all patients (96.4%, 106/110) stated that they would send further data via a web-based platform. Of all, 96.4% (106/110) considered the provided pseudonymization of their data as safe. We further asked the patients if they would use a mobile app for symptom and QoL assessment similar to the present web-based system: 74.5% (82/110) answered with yes and 25.5% (28/110) said they would not use a mobile app in the future. We tested the willingness to use an app on several sociodemographic parameters, such as age, gender, education, health insurance status, and cancer-related parameters: tumor stage, time since radiation treatment, and treatment intention. None of these parameters correlated with app use in this group of young adults. Patients who were generally positive regarding using an app rated several possible functions of a future app. The 3 most requested features were appointment reminders (89.0%, 73/82), contact overview of all involved clinics and physicians (87%, 71/82), and making an appointment via app (78%, 64/82). Conclusions: eHealth and mHealth tools should be available as an integrated part of a comprehensive cancer care approach. It provides automated, thorough documentation of health parameters during therapy and follow-up for doctors, medical staff, and tumor patients to optimize treatment. With this study, we could show that young adults are the ideal patient population to use eHealth/mHealth tools. Such tools offer further digital support and improve the patients' need for constant QoL during cancer care. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(1):e19727 doi:10.2196/19727 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mobile apps are an evolving trend in the medical field. To date, few apps in an oncological context exist. Objective: The aim was to analyze the attitude of health care professionals (HCPs) toward telemedicine, mHealth, and mobile apps in the field of oncology. Methods: We developed and conducted an online survey with 24 questions evaluating HCPs' general attitude toward telemedicine and patients using medical mobile apps. Specific questions on the possible functionality for patients and the resulting advantages and disadvantages for both the patients' and HCPs' daily clinical routine were evaluated. Results: A total of 108 HCPs completed the survey. In all, 88.9% (96/108) considered telemedicine useful and 84.3% (91/108) supported the idea of an oncological app complementing classical treatment. Automatic reminders, timetables, and assessment of side effects and quality of life during therapy were rated as the most important functions. In contrast, uncertainty regarding medical responsibility and data privacy were reasons mostly named by critics. Most (64.8%, 70/108) were in favor of an alert function due to data input needing further clarification, and 94% (66/70) were willing to contact the patient after a critical alert. In all, 93.5% (101/108) supported the idea of using the collected data for scientific research. Moreover, 75.0% (81/108) believed establishing a mobile app could be beneficial for the providing hospital. Conclusions: A majority of HCPs are in favor of telemedicine and the use of oncological apps by patients. Assessing side effects can lead to quicker response and thus lower inconvenience for patients. Clinical data, such as life quality and treatment satisfaction, could be used to evaluate and improve the therapy workflow. Eventually, a mobile app would enhance the patients' relationship to their treating department because they are in permanent contact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stereotactic radiotherapy (RT) has been established as a valid treatment alternative in patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS). There is ongoing controversy regarding the optimal fractionation. Hearing preservation may be the primary goal for patients with VS, followed by maintenance of quality of life (QoL).Methods: From 2002 to 2015, 184 patients with VS were treated with radiosurgery (RS) or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT). A survey on current symptoms and QoL was conducted between February and June 2016.Results: Median follow-up after RT was 7.5 years (range 0-14.4 years). Mean overall survival (OS) after RT was 31.1 years, with 94 and 87% survival at 5 and 10 years, respectively [corrected]. Mean progression-free survival (PFS) was 13.3 years, with 5‑ and 10-year PFS of 92%. Hearing could be preserved in RS patients for a median of 36.3 months (range 2.3-13.7 years). Hearing worsened in 17 (30%) cases. Median hearing preservation for FSRT was 48.7 months (range 0.0-13.8 years); 29 (23%) showed hearing deterioration. The difference in hearing preservation was not significant between RS and FSRT (p = 0.3). A total of 123/162 patients participated in the patient survey (return rate 76%). The results correlate well with the information documented in the patient files for tinnitus and facial and trigeminal nerve toxicity. Significant differences appeared regarding hearing impairment, gait uncertainty, and imbalance.Conclusion: These data confirm that RS and FSRT are comparable in terms of local control for VS. RS should be reserved for smaller lesions, while FSRT can be offered independently of tumor size. Patient self-reported outcome during follow-up is of high value. The established questionnaire could be validated in the independent cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The European Association of Urology (EAU) proposed a risk stratification (high vs. low risk) for patients with biochemical recurrence (BR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Here we investigated whether this stratification accurately predicts outcome, particularly in patients staged with PSMA-PET., Methods: For this study, we used a retrospective database including 1222 PSMA-PET-staged prostate cancer patients who were treated with salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for BR, at 11 centers in 5 countries. Patients with lymph node metastases (pN1 or cN1) or unclear EAU risk group were excluded. The remaining cohort comprised 526 patients, including 132 low-risk and 394 high-risk patients., Results: The median follow-up time after SRT was 31.0 months. The 3-year biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) was 85.7 % in EAU low-risk versus 69.4 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.002). The 3-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) was 94.4 % in low-risk versus 87.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.005). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 99.0 % in low-risk versus 99.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.925). In multivariate analysis, EAU risk group remained a statistically significant predictor of BPFS (p = 0.003, HR 2.022, 95 % CI 1.262-3.239) and MFS (p = 0.013, HR 2.986, 95 % CI 1.262-7.058)., Conclusion: Our data support the EAU risk group definition. EAU risk grouping for BCR reliably predicted outcome in patients staged lymph node-negative after RP and with PSMA-PET before SRT. To our knowledge, this is the first study validating the EAU risk grouping in patients treated with PSMA-PET-planned SRT., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Approximately 20-40% of patients with prostate cancer (PC) who undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) experience relapse, with the majority of these cases developing pelvic lymph node (LN) metastases. Taking new data from the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) era into account, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 2009 contouring guideline for the pelvic LNs from 2009 was updated by the NRG Oncology group in 2020 (NRG 2020)., Objective: To evaluate and validate the updated NRG 2020 guideline with our established LN atlas., Design, Setting, and Participants: We screened 1653 PSMA PET/computed tomography (CT) data sets for patients with biochemical relapse who underwent a PET scan between November 2012 and November 2017. After screening, we developed an LN atlas using data from 233 patients., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: We evaluated LN overlap (OL) with the RTOG 2009 and NRG 2020 contouring guidelines. OL was defined as within (>90%), partly within (10-90%), or outside (<10%)., Results and Limitations: In comparison to the RTOG 2009 guideline, 403 (52%), 134 (17%), and 241 (31%) of the LNs were not, were partly, or were fully covered within the overall group, respectively. By contrast, using the NRG 2020 guideline, 302 (39%), 190 (24%), and 286 (37%) of the LNs were not, were partly, or were fully covered, respectively (p < 0.001). Limitations include the retrospective design with missing data and no histopathological confirmation of the PET results., Conclusions: The updated NRG 2020 contouring guideline improves coverage of the pelvic LNs in patients undergoing salvage radiation therapy. However, PET/CT should be considered whenever possible to ensure coverage of untypical LN spread., Patient Summary: We compared the 2009 and 2020 guidelines on the radiation area for the pelvis for patients with recurrent prostate cancer that has spread to lymph nodes. The newer guideline provides better coverage of pelvic lymph nodes than the older one and is useful in planning radiation therapy. However, a scan of the pelvis using the newest technique should be considered for individual patients to ensure coverage of untypical lymph nodes., (Copyright © 2022 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)