Contouring of prostate tumors on multiparametric MRI: Evaluation of clinical delineations in a multicenter radiotherapy trial

PURPOSE: To date no guidelines are available for contouring prostate cancer inside the gland, as visible on multiparametric (mp-) MRI. We assessed inter-institutional differences in interpretation of mp-MRI in the multicenter phase III FLAME trial. METHODS: We analyzed clinical delineations on mp-MRI and clinical characteristics from 260 patients across three institutes. We performed a logistic regression analysis to examine each institute's weighting of T2w, ADC and Ktrans intensity maps in the delineation of the cancer. As reviewing of all delineations by an expert panel is not feasible, we made a selection based on discrepancies between a published tumor probability (TP) model and each institute's clinical delineations using Areas Under the ROC Curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: Regression coefficients for the three institutes were -0.07, -0.27 and -0.11 for T2w, -1.96, -0.53 and -0.65 for ADC and 0.15, 0.20 and 0.62 for Ktrans, with significant differences between institutes for ADC and Ktrans. AUC analysis showed median AUC values of 0.92, 0.80 and 0.79. Five patients with lowest AUC values were reviewed by a uroradiologist. CONCLUSION: Regression coefficients revealed considerably different interpretations of mp-MRI in tumor contouring between institutes and demonstrated the need for contouring guidelines. Based on AUC values outlying delineations could efficiently be identified for review.status: publishe

Primary endpoint analysis of the multicentre phase II hypo-FLAME trial for intermediate and high risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Local recurrences after radiotherapy for prostate cancer (PCa) often originate at the location of the macroscopic tumour(s). Since PCa cells are known to be sensitive to high fraction doses, hypofractionated whole gland stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in conjunction with a simultaneous ablative microboost to the macroscopic tumour(s) within the prostate could be a way to reduce the risk of local failure. We investigated the safety of this treatment strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with intermediate or high risk PCa were enrolled in a prospective phase II trial, called hypo-FLAME. All patients were treated with extreme hypofractionated doses of 35 Gy in 5 weekly fractions to the whole prostate gland with an integrated boost up to 50 Gy to the multiparametric (mp) MRI-defined tumour(s). Treatment-related toxicity was measured using the CTCAE v4.0. The primary endpoint of the trial was treatment-related acute toxicity. RESULTS: Between April 2016 and December 2018, 100 men were treated in 4 academic centres. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 6 months. The median mean dose delivered to the visible tumour nodule(s) on mpMRI was 44.7 Gy in this trial. No grade ≥3 acute genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was observed. Furthermore, 90 days after start of treatment, the cumulative acute grade 2 GU and GI toxicity rates were 34.0% and 5.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous focal boosting to the macroscopic tumour(s) in addition to whole gland prostate SBRT is associated with acceptable acute GU and GI toxicity.status: publishe

Knowledge-Based Assessment of Focal Dose Escalation Treatment Plans in Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE: In a randomized focal dose escalation radiation therapy trial for prostate cancer (FLAME), up to 95 Gy was prescribed to the tumor in the dose-escalated arm, with 77 Gy to the entire prostate in both arms. As dose constraints to organs at risk had priority over dose escalation and suboptimal planning could occur, we investigated how well the dose to the tumor was boosted. We developed an anatomy-based prediction model to identify plans with suboptimal tumor dose and performed replanning to validate our model. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We derived dose-volume parameters from planned dose distributions of 539 FLAME trial patients in 4 institutions and compared them between both arms. In the dose-escalated arm, we determined overlap volume histograms and derived features representing patient anatomy. We predicted tumor D98% with a linear regression on anatomic features and performed replanning on 21 plans. RESULTS: In the dose-escalated arm, the median tumor D50% and D98% were 93.0 and 84.7 Gy, and 99% of the tumors had a dose escalation greater than 82.4 Gy (107% of 77 Gy). In both arms organs at risk constraints were met. Five out of 73 anatomic features were found to be predictive for tumor D98%. Median predicted tumor D98% was 4.4 Gy higher than planned D98%. Upon replanning, median tumor D98% increased by 3.0 Gy. A strong correlation between predicted increase in D98% and realized increase upon replanning was found (ρ = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Focal dose escalation in prostate cancer was feasible with a dose escalation to 99% of the tumors. Replanning resulted in an increased tumor dose that correlated well with the prediction model. The model was able to identify tumors on which a higher boost dose could be planned. The model has potential as a quality assessment tool in focal dose escalated treatment plans.status: publishe