Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Summary

Current standard treatment for prostate cancer involves giving patients approximately 40 doses of radiotherapy, one dose per day over an 8 week period. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of giving two separate high doses of a special type of precision radiotherapy to the prostate and then 5 weeks (instead of 8 weeks) of standard radiotherapy. Hypothesis: It is safe to give patients an extra two doses of high-precision radiotherapy prior to commencing a shorter period of standard radiotherapy for prostate cancer.


Clinical Trial Description

Prostate cancer accounts for one third of all new cancer diagnoses in men and approximately 30% of men will have External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) as primary local therapy. Local persistence of prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy is under-appreciated. Prostate cancer has a long natural history and the consequences of local persistence may not be realized for many years. Prostate cancer has a slow growth with a potential doubling time ranging from weeks to months (median 42 days) which has led to the hypothesis that prostate cancer will behave more like a late reacting tissue(1). Brenner et al. (2) used data from prostate Low Dose Rate (LDR) permanent seed implants and EBRT series to derive an alpha/beta of approximately 1.5. Many groups have also calculated the alpha/beta ratio to be in the < 3.0 range(3). If the alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer is lower than the surrounding normal tissues (Brenner et al. have estimated the alpha/beta for the rectum to be over 5.0), doses greater than 2 Gy (hypofractionation) will afford an advantage as there will be a greater sensitivity of prostate cancer to radiation, as compared to the bladder or rectum. This benefit has been exploited for many years with High Dose Rate (HDR) brachytherapy using Iridium -192. Typical doses for HDR are 19Gy in two fractions in addition to 46Gy in 23 fractions of EBRT (4). With reference to our own institutional data from HDR brachytherapy we calculated the dose distribution in recently treated patients. Due to the nature of the iridium dose distribution, there are considerable areas of much higher dose delivered; 200% of the dose (38Gy) to 12.7% of the target volume, 150% (13.75Gy) to 32.6% of the target volume and 125% (11.9Gy) to 60.1% of the target. Despite the high doses to the periphery of the prostate it is possible to limit the dose to the rectum and bladder to 1cc < 75% (14.25Gy) and the 1cc urethra to <125% (23.75Gy) (4). HDR brachytherapy series have reported durable long term Biochemical Failure Free Survival (BFFS), which are as good or better than comparable external beam or surgical series(5). However despite the low toxicity and excellent biochemical outcomes, HDR brachytherapy utilization in Australia is low, with under 300 cases in total per year. This is due to the logistical difficulty of HDR brachytherapy, anaesthetic requirements, nursing care and patient discomfort. There have been five published studies investigating stereotactic boost in addition to standard fractionation EBRT without using brachytherapy, four reports with the Cyberknife platform (6-9) and one with Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) (10). All of these series have early follow up (FU) with reported BFFS between 77% and 100%. The largest experience is from Katz et al. (8) who reported 73 patients with both intermediate (n= 41) and high risk (n=32) disease. They treated patients with the Cyberknife platform to deliver between 18 and 21 Gy in three fractions in addition to 45 Gy in 25 fractions EBRT. With a median follow up of 33 months, BFFS was 89.5% and 77.7% for the intermediate and high risk patients respectively. A 5 mm expansion from the prostate to the Planned Treatment Volume (PTV) was used except posteriorly, where the margin was 3mm. There was 7% Grade 2 acute genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, with late Grade 2 estimates at three years of 5.5% (GU) and 8.2% (GI). Three other series using Cyberknife to mimic HDR were reported between 2008 and 2012 (6, 7, 9). These studies used margins of 0-2 mm posteriorly and 3-5 mm in other directions and reported low rates of Grade 2 and Grade 3 toxicity. Two of these reports specifically attempted to reproduce the heterogeneity of HDR with large areas of the PTV receiving >125% (40% to 45%) and >150% (5% to 10%) of the prescribed dose. Miralbell et al. (10) reported a Linac based IMRT boost in 50 patients in 2010. This series used an endorectal balloon but no image guidance, which may be the cause of their unacceptably high five year estimates of late GI Grade 2 toxicity of 26%. Primary objective: The primary study goal is to assess the acute toxicity of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) boost with three increasing dose levels. Secondary objectives: - Nadir PSA at three months and over duration of follow-up - Three year and five year Freedom From Biochemical Failure (FFBF) (Nadir + 2.0) - Planning feasibility (Minor and Major planning violations) - Late Gastrointestinal and Genitourinary Toxicity (modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale) - Patient reported QOL (EPIC-SF-12) Hypothesis: It is safe to dose escalate prostate cancer treatment with a stereotactic boost of up to 30Gy in two fractions to the dominant nodule combined with external beam radiotherapy of 46Gy in 23 fractions with < 15% Grade 2 acute morbidity and < 5% Grade 3 acute morbidity. ;


Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


NCT number NCT02004223
Study type Interventional
Source Royal North Shore Hospital
Contact
Status Completed
Phase N/A
Start date January 2014
Completion date December 2018

See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Recruiting NCT05613023 - A Trial of 5 Fraction Prostate SBRT Versus 5 Fraction Prostate and Pelvic Nodal SBRT Phase 3
Recruiting NCT05540392 - An Acupuncture Study for Prostate Cancer Survivors With Urinary Issues Phase 1/Phase 2
Recruiting NCT05156424 - A Comparison of Aerobic and Resistance Exercise to Counteract Treatment Side Effects in Men With Prostate Cancer Phase 1/Phase 2
Completed NCT03177759 - Living With Prostate Cancer (LPC)
Completed NCT01331083 - A Phase II Study of PX-866 in Patients With Recurrent or Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer Phase 2
Recruiting NCT05540782 - A Study of Cognitive Health in Survivors of Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruiting NCT04742361 - Efficacy of [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT in Patients With Biochemial Recurrent Prostate Cancer Phase 3
Completed NCT04400656 - PROState Pathway Embedded Comparative Trial
Completed NCT02282644 - Individual Phenotype Analysis in Patients With Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer With CellSearch® and Flow Cytometry N/A
Recruiting NCT06037954 - A Study of Mental Health Care in People With Cancer N/A
Recruiting NCT06305832 - Salvage Radiotherapy Combined With Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) With or Without Rezvilutamide in the Treatment of Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer Phase 2
Recruiting NCT05761093 - Patient and Physician Benefit/ Risk Preferences for Treatment of mPC in Hong Kong: a Discrete Choice Experiment
Completed NCT04838626 - Study of Diagnostic Performance of [18F]CTT1057 for PSMA-positive Tumors Detection Phase 2/Phase 3
Recruiting NCT03101176 - Multiparametric Ultrasound Imaging in Prostate Cancer N/A
Completed NCT03290417 - Correlative Analysis of the Genomics of Vitamin D and Omega-3 Fatty Acid Intake in Prostate Cancer N/A
Completed NCT00341939 - Retrospective Analysis of a Drug-Metabolizing Genotype in Cancer Patients and Correlation With Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamics Data
Completed NCT01497925 - Ph 1 Trial of ADI-PEG 20 Plus Docetaxel in Solid Tumors With Emphasis on Prostate Cancer and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Phase 1
Recruiting NCT03679819 - Single-center Trial for the Validation of High-resolution Transrectal Ultrasound (Exact Imaging Scanner ExactVu) for the Detection of Prostate Cancer
Completed NCT03554317 - COMbination of Bipolar Androgen Therapy and Nivolumab Phase 2
Completed NCT03271502 - Effect of Anesthesia on Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter in Patients Undergoing Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy N/A