Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Approach to Patients with High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Radiation Oncology Perspective

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

High-risk localized prostate cancer is a challenging clinical entity to treat, with heterogeneous responses to an evolving array of multidisciplinary treatment approaches. In addition, this disease state is growing in incidence due to a variety of factors, including shifting recommendations that discouraged routine prostate cancer screening. Current guidelines now incorporate an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening and evaluation. More work is underway to improve targeted screening for certain at-risk populations and to implement greater personalization in the use of diagnostic tools. Once diagnosed with high-risk localized disease, a multimodality treatment paradigm is warranted. Radiation—in its various forms and combinations—plays a large and continually evolving role in the management of high-risk prostate cancer, yet treatment outcomes are still suboptimal. There is a growing need to improve upon current treatment approaches, and better personalize a particular treatment recommendation based on both tumor and patient characteristics, as well as patient preference and goals of therapy. Given that treatment generally requires more than one therapy, there are notable implications on long-term quality of life, especially with respect to overlapping and cumulative side effects of local and systemic therapies, respectively. The desire for aggressive therapy to optimize cancer control outcomes must be weighed against the risk of morbidities and overtreatment and discussed with each patient so that an informed decision about treatment and care can be determined. High-level evidence to support treatment recommendations, where available, is critical for a data-driven and tailored approach to address all goals of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kamran SC, D’Amico AV. Radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2020;34(1):45–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280(11):969–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Punnen S, Cooperberg MR. The epidemiology of high-risk prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23(4):331–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burgess L, Aldrighetti CM, Ghosh A, Niemierko A, Chino F, Huynh MJ, et al. Association of the USPSTF Grade D recommendation against prostate-specific antigen screening with prostate cancer-specific mortality. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5): e2211869.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Butler SS, Muralidhar V, Zhao SG, Sanford NN, Franco I, Fullerton ZH, et al. Prostate cancer incidence across stage, NCCN risk groups, and age before and after USPSTF Grade D recommendations against prostate-specific antigen screening in 2012. Cancer. 2020;126(4):717–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Muralidhar V, Chen MH, Reznor G, Moran BJ, Braccioforte MH, Beard CJ, et al. Definition and validation of “favorable high-risk prostate cancer”: implications for personalizing treatment of radiation-managed patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;93(4):828–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bolla M, Van Tienhoven G, Warde P, Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO, Storme G, et al. External irradiation with or without long-term androgen suppression for prostate cancer with high metastatic risk: 10-year results of an EORTC randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(11):1066–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Thomsen FB, Brasso K, Christensen IJ, Johansson JE, Angelsen A, Tammela TL, et al. Survival benefit of early androgen receptor inhibitor therapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term follow-up of the SPCG-6 study. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England: 1990). 2015;51(10):1283–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fossa SD, Wiklund F, Klepp O, Angelsen A, Solberg A, Damber JE, et al. Ten- and 15-yr Prostate cancer-specific mortality in patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced or aggressive intermediate prostate cancer, randomized to lifelong endocrine treatment alone or combined with radiotherapy: final results of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-7. Eur Urol. 2016;70(4):684–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mason MD, Parulekar WR, Sydes MR, Brundage M, Kirkbride P, Gospodarowicz M, et al. Final report of the intergroup randomized study of combined androgen-deprivation therapy plus radiotherapy versus androgen-deprivation therapy alone in locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(19):2143–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Horwitz EM, Bae K, Hanks GE, Porter A, Grignon DJ, Brereton HD, et al. Ten-year follow-up of radiation therapy oncology group protocol 92–02: a phase III trial of the duration of elective androgen deprivation in locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(15):2497–504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bolla M, de Reijke TM, Van Tienhoven G, Van den Bergh AC, Oddens J, Poortmans PM, et al. Duration of androgen suppression in the treatment of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(24):2516–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nabid A, Carrier N, Martin AG, Bahary JP, Lemaire C, Vass S, et al. Duration of androgen deprivation therapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a randomized phase III trial. Eur Urol. 2018;74(4):432–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zapatero A, Guerrero A, Maldonado X, Alvarez A, Gonzalez San Segundo C, Cabeza Rodriguez MA, et al. High-dose radiotherapy with short-term or long-term androgen deprivation in localised prostate cancer (DART01/05 GICOR): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(3):320–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Butler SS, Dee EC, Lamba N, Sha ST, Mahal BA, Whitbeck A, et al. Validation of a subclassification for high-risk prostate cancer in a prospective cohort. Cancer. 2020;126(10):2132–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Roach M 3rd, DeSilvio M, Lawton C, Uhl V, Machtay M, Seider MJ, et al. Phase III trial comparing whole-pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant versus adjuvant combined androgen suppression: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(10):1904–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lawton CA, DeSilvio M, Roach M 3rd, Uhl V, Kirsch R, Seider M, et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: updated analysis of RTOG 94–13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69(3):646–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Pommier P, Chabaud S, Lagrange JL, Richaud P, Le Prise E, Wagner JP, et al. Is there a role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate adenocarcinoma? Update of the long-term survival results of the GETUG-01 randomized study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(4):759–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. •• Murthy V, Maitre P, Kannan S, Panigrahi G, Krishnatry R, Bakshi G, et al. Prostate-only versus whole-pelvic radiation therapy in high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer (POP-RT): outcomes from phase III randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2021:Jco2003282. This study evaluated the potential benefit of whole-pelvic RT (WPRT) in high-risk prostate cancer using contemporary radiation techniques. This phase III trial randomized 224 patients to either WPRT or prostate-only RT with 2 years of ADT, finding that, with a median follow-up of 68 months, there was a biochemical failure-free survival benefit to WPRT (HR 0.23, 95%CI 0.10–0.52, p<0.0001) over prostate-only RT. This was similarly observed for the endpoints of disease-free survival (HR 0.40, 95%CI 0.22–0.73, p=0.002) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR 0.35, 95%CI 0.15–0.82, p=0.01).

  21. Beckendorf V, Guerif S, Le Prisé E, Cosset JM, Bougnoux A, Chauvet B, et al. 70 Gy versus 80 Gy in localized prostate cancer: 5-year results of GETUG 06 randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(4):1056–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dearnaley DP, Jovic G, Syndikus I, Khoo V, Cowan RA, Graham JD, et al. Escalated-dose versus control-dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: long-term results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(4):464–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Heemsbergen WD, Al-Mamgani A, Slot A, Dielwart MF, Lebesque JV. Long-term results of the Dutch randomized prostate cancer trial: impact of dose-escalation on local, biochemical, clinical failure, and survival. Radiother Oncol. 2014;110(1):104–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Shipley WU, Verhey LJ, Munzenrider JE, Suit HD, Urie MM, McManus PL, et al. Advanced prostate cancer: the results of a randomized comparative trial of high dose irradiation boosting with conformal protons compared with conventional dose irradiation using photons alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32(1):3–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Morris WJ, Tyldesley S, Rodda S, Halperin R, Pai H, McKenzie M, et al. Androgen suppression combined with elective nodal and dose escalated radiation therapy (the ASCENDE-RT Trial): an analysis of survival endpoints for a randomized trial comparing a low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost to a dose-escalated external beam boost for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(2):275–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rodda S, Tyldesley S, Morris WJ, Keyes M, Halperin R, Pai H, et al. ASCENDE-RT: an analysis of treatment-related morbidity for a randomized trial comparing a low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost with a dose-escalated external beam boost for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(2):286–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Oh J, Tyldesley S, Pai H, McKenzie M, Halperin R, Duncan G, et al. An updated analysis of the survival endpoints of ASCENDE-RT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2023;115(5):1061–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoskin PJ, Rojas AM, Ostler PJ, Bryant L, Lowe GJ. Randomised trial of external-beam radiotherapy alone or with high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Mature 12-year results. Radiother Oncol. 2020;154:214–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. De Bari B, Daidone A, Alongi F. Is high dose rate brachytherapy reliable and effective treatment for prostate cancer patients? A review of the literature. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2015;94(3):360–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Demanes DJ, Ghilezan MI. High-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy. 2014;13(6):529–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. •• Kerkmeijer LGW, Groen VH, Pos FJ, Haustermans K, Monninkhof EM, Smeenk RJ, et al. Focal boost to the intraprostatic tumor in external beam radiotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer: results From the FLAME Randomized Phase III Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2021:Jco2002873. This trial evaluated the potential benefit of a microboost to the visible intraprostatic lesion on mpMRI in high-risk prostate cancer patients. A total of 571 patients were randomized to receive radiation to the entire prostate +/- a simultaneous integrated focal boost up to 95 Gy to the intraprostatic lesion. After a median follow-up of 72 months, biochemical disease-free survival was significantly higher in the focal boost arm compared to the standard arm (HR 0.45, 95%CI 0.28–0.71, p<0.001) with no associated increased risk of GU toxicity.

  32. Rosenthal SA, Hu C, Sartor O, Gomella LG, Amin MB, Purdy J, et al. Effect of chemotherapy with docetaxel with androgen suppression and radiotherapy for localized high-risk prostate cancer: the Randomized Phase III NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(14):1159–68.

  33. Sartor O, Karrison TG, Sandler HM, Gomella LG, Amin MB, Purdy J, et al. Androgen deprivation and radiotherapy with or without docetaxel for localized high-risk prostate cancer: long-term follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial. Eur Urol. 2023;84(2):156–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Hjälm-Eriksson M, Thellenberg-Karlsson C, Åström L, Franzen L, Fransson AS, et al. Docetaxel versus surveillance after radical radiotherapy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer-results from the prospective, randomised, open-label phase III SPCG-13 trial. Eur Urol. 2019;76(6):823–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. • Attard G, Murphy L, Clarke NW, Cross W, Jones RJ, Parker CC, et al. Abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of primary results from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. Lancet (London, England). 2022;399(10323):447–60. This meta-analysis found that the addition of abiraterone acetate + oral prednisolone +/- enzalutamide to ADT in high-risk disease patients was associated with improvements in metastasis-free survival (HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.44-0.64, p<0.0001), prostate cancer-specific survival (HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.37-0.65, p<0.0001), and OS (HR 0.60, 95%CI 0.48-0.73, p<0.0001). There was no difference in metastasis-free survival when combining enzalutamide and abiraterone concurrently compared with abiraterone alone, although the combination of enzalutamide and abiraterone did result in additional toxicity, thus establishing that adding abiraterone to standard therapy with RT is appropriate for men with very high-risk prostate cancer.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Widmark A, Gunnlaugsson A, Beckman L, Thellenberg-Karlsson C, Hoyer M, Lagerlund M, et al. Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the HYPO-RT-PC randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet (London, England). 2019;394(10196):385–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. •• van As N, Tree A, Patel J, Ostler P, Van Der Voet H, Loblaw DA, et al. 5-year outcomes from PACE B: an international phase III randomized controlled trial comparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) vs. conventionally fractionated or moderately hypo fractionated external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2023;117(4):e2-e3. This ongoing trial was recently presented at the American Society for Radiation Oncology 2023 Annual Meeting. This trial compares stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to conventional or moderately hypofractionated RT in 874 men with low or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The 5-year results demonstrated that five-fraction prostate SBRT is non-inferior to control radiotherapy with no statistically significant increases in toxicity.

  38. Correa RJM, Loblaw A. Stereotactic body radiotherapy: hitting harder, faster, and smarter in high-risk prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12: 889132.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. • Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet (London, England). 2020;395(10231):1208–16. This trial sought to understand whether PSMA PET-CT improved accuracy of staging and affected management in men with high-risk prostate cancer, randomizing 302 men to either Ga-68 PSMA PET-CT or conventional imaging with CT abdomen/pelvis + bone scan. Subjects then went on to have crossover imaging unless three or more distant metastases were found. In those who received PSMA PET-CT as 1stst line imaging, the PET-CT resulted in a change of treatment management in 28% of patients (compared to 15% of patients with conventional imaging, p=0.008). Among patients who underwent second-line imaging, management changed occurred in 5% following conventional imaging and 27% of patients following PSMA PET-CT.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Cox 3, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    Sophia C. Kamran MD

  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, TRC 4 West, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Neha Vapiwala MD

Authors
  1. Sophia C. Kamran MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neha Vapiwala MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SCK and NV wrote the main manuscript text and SCK prepared the table. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophia C. Kamran MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kamran, S.C., Vapiwala, N. Approach to Patients with High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Radiation Oncology Perspective. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 25, 84–96 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01163-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01163-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation