Biochemical failure and the temporal kinetics of prostate-specific antigen after radiation therapy with androgen deprivation
ABSTRACT The accuracy of the American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology consensus definition of biochemical failure (BF) after radiation therapy (RT) and androgen deprivation (AD) has been questioned, because posttreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels typically rise after release from AD, and misclassification of BF may be made. The temporal kinetics of posttreatment PSA levels was examined to define the error in the classification of BF.
Between December 1, 1991 and April 30, 1998, 688 men with T1c-T3 NX/0 M0 prostate cancer received three-dimensional conformal RT alone (n = 586) or in combination with either short-term (STAD: 3 to 12 months, n = 82) or long-term (LTAD: 12 to 36 months, n = 20) AD. Follow-up, calculated from the end of all treatment, was >/=48 months. The mean posttreatment PSA was calculated in 3-month intervals.
The median posttreatment clinical follow-up period was 76 months (range, 48-152 months). The posttreatment PSA values from the end of all treatment for the RT+STAD-BF group showed an initial period of rise followed by a period of decline at 30 months and then a continued rise again. The decline in the mean posttreatment PSA is explained in part by stabilization in PSA level after 3 consecutive rises. Nonbiochemical failures (NBF) after RT+STAD had a relatively constant mean PSA over time of approximately 0.5 ng/mL. Unlike the RT+STAD-NBF profile, the RT+LTAD-NBF profile rose continuously and steadily to a level approaching 1 ng/mL. The RT+LTAD-BF profile rose continuously but at a slower rate over time. Nine RT+STAD-NBF patients (22%) and 2 RT+LTAD-BF (29%) patients experienced 3 consecutive rises followed by a subsequent decline and stabilization of PSA compared to 10 RT-BF patients (5%). Redistributing these misclassified patients to their respective NBF groups changed the mean posttreatment PSA profiles as follows: The RT+LTAD-BF profile rose constantly and steadily with a doubling time of approximately 16 months, and the RT+LAD-NF initially rose to a value of approximately 0.5 ng/mL, then at 36 months began to decline.
The temporal kinetics of posttreatment PSA after RT+AD and RT alone are different. The American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology definition for biochemical failure overestimates BF in 20-30% after RT+AD compared to 5% after RT alone.
Article: Cancer de la prostateProgrès en Urologie 11/2007; 17(6):1159-1230. DOI:10.1016/S1166-7087(07)74785-1 · 0.77 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To correlate tumor oxygenation status with long-term biochemical outcome after prostate brachytherapy. Custom-made Eppendorf PO(2) microelectrodes were used to obtain PO(2) measurements from the prostate (P), focused on positive biopsy locations, and normal muscle tissue (M), as a control. A total of 11,516 measurements were obtained in 57 men with localized prostate cancer immediately before prostate brachytherapy was given. The Eppendorf histograms provided the median PO(2), mean PO(2), and % <5 mm Hg or <10 mm Hg. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined using both the former American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) (three consecutive raises) and the current Phoenix (prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2 ng/mL) definitions. A Cox proportional hazards regression model evaluated the influence of hypoxia using the P/M mean PO(2) ratio on BF. With a median follow-up time of 8 years, 12 men had ASTRO BF and 8 had Phoenix BF. On multivariate analysis, P/M PO(2) ratio <0.10 emerged as the only significant predictor of ASTRO BF (p = 0.043). Hormonal therapy (p = 0.015) and P/M PO(2) ratio <0.10 (p = 0.046) emerged as the only independent predictors of the Phoenix BF. Kaplan-Meier freedom from BF for P/M ratio <0.10 vs. ≥0.10 at 8 years for ASTRO BF was 46% vs. 78% (p = 0.03) and for the Phoenix BF was 66% vs. 83% (p = 0.02). Hypoxia in prostate cancer (low mean P/M PO(2) ratio) significantly predicts for poor long-term biochemical outcome, suggesting that novel hypoxic strategies should be investigated.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 03/2012; 82(3):e433-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.037 · 4.18 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To quantify the radiotherapy dose-response of prostate cancer, adjusted for prognostic factors in a mature cohort of men treated relatively uniformly at a single institution. The study cohort consisted of 1,530 men treated with three-dimensional conformal external-beam radiotherapy between 1989 and 2002. Patients were divided into four isocenter dose groups: <70 Gy (n = 43), 70-74.9 Gy (n = 552), 75-79.9 Gy (n = 568), and > or =80 Gy (n = 367). The primary endpoints were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), defined by American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and Phoenix (nadir + 2.0 ng/mL) criteria, and freedom from distant metastases (FFDM). Multivariate analyses were performed and adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated. Logit regression dose-response functions were determined at 5 and 8 years for FFBF and at 5 and 10 years for FFDM. Radiotherapy dose was significant in multivariate analyses for FFBF (ASTRO and Phoenix) and FFDM. Adjusted 5-year estimates of ASTRO FFBF for the four dose groups were 60%, 68%, 76%, and 84%. Adjusted 5-year Phoenix FFBFs for the four dose groups were 70%, 81%, 83%, and 89%. Adjusted 5-year and 10-year estimates of FFDM for the four dose groups were 96% and 93%, 97% and 93%, 99% and 95%, and 98% and 96%. Dose-response functions showed an increasing benefit for doses > or =80 Gy. Doses of > or =80 Gy are recommended for most men with prostate cancer. The ASTRO definition of biochemical failure does not accurately estimate the effects of radiotherapy at 5 years because of backdating, compared to the Phoenix definition, which is less sensitive to follow-up and more reproducible over time.International Journal of Radiation OncologyBiologyPhysics 07/2007; 68(3):682-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.01.008 · 4.18 Impact Factor