Commentary: Opportunities for research in molecular radiotherapy

Cancer has been treated with radiopharmaceuticals for 80 years. A recent National Cancer Research Institute report from the Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Working Group reviews the current status of molecular radiotherapy and has highlighted the barriers to and opportunities for increased research activities. The report recommends a number of actions to promote this field, which in the dawning age of personalized medicine and theragnostics is of increasing importance, particularly with the clinical introduction of a range of new commercial radiotherapeutics at costs in line with those seen for conventional chemotherapeutics. These recommendations recognize the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to the development of molecular radiotherapy and the particular need for investment in radiopharmacies and personalized dosimetry. There are many areas to be investigated including adaptive treatment planning, the use of radiosensitizers and translational radiation biology. Progress in these areas will result in significant patient benefit and more cost-effective use of increasingly expensive therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals. A concerted effort from the community, from funding bodies and from health service providers is now needed to address the scientific and logistical changes necessary to realize the potential offered by this currently underused treatment modality

Radium-223 in asymptomatic patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases treated in an international early access program

Radium-223; mCRPC, asymptomatic; Bone metastasesRadio-223; mCRPC, asintomático; Metástasis de huesoRadi-223; mCRPC, asimptomàtic; Metàstasis d'osBACKGROUND: Radium-223, a targeted alpha therapy, is used to treat symptomatic patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastases. Data for radium-223 in asymptomatic CRPC patients with bone metastases are lacking. METHODS: This was a prospective, single-arm phase 3b study. Patients with metastatic CRPC (malignant lymphadenopathy not exceeding 6 cm was allowed, visceral disease was excluded) received radium-223, 55 kBq/kg intravenously, every 4 weeks for up to 6 cycles. Co-primary endpoints were safety and overall survival. Post hoc analyses were performed according to baseline asymptomatic or symptomatic disease status. Asymptomatic status was defined as no pain and no opioid use at baseline. RESULTS: Seven hundred eight patients received ≥1 radium-223 injection: 548 (77%) were symptomatic to various degrees, and 135 (19%) were asymptomatic. Asymptomatic patients had more favorable baseline disease characteristics than symptomatic. A lower proportion of asymptomatic versus symptomatic patients had received prior abiraterone (25% vs 35%) and prior docetaxel (52% vs 62%). A higher proportion of asymptomatic (71%) versus symptomatic (55%) patients completed radium-223 treatment. Overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.486), time to disease progression (HR 0.722) and time to first symptomatic skeletal event (HR 0.328) were better in asymptomatic than symptomatic patients. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) response rates were similar (46% vs 47%), and ALP normalization (44% vs 25%) and prostate-specific antigen response rates (21% vs 13%) were higher in asymptomatic than symptomatic patients. A lower proportion of asymptomatic patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs, 61% vs 79%), grade 3-4 TEAEs (29% vs 40%) and drug-related TEAEs (28% vs 44%). There were two treatment-related deaths, both in patients with baseline symptomatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Using radium-223 earlier in the disease course, when patients are asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic, may enable patients to complete treatment and optimize treatment outcome compared to symptomatic patients, and therefore may allow sequencing with other life-prolonging therapie

Effect of radium-223 dichloride (Ra-223) on hospitalisation: An analysis from the phase 3 randomised Alpharadin in Symptomatic Prostate Cancer Patients (ALSYMPCA) trial

Symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) commonly occur in patients with bone metastases, often leading to hospitalisations and decreased quality-of-life. In the ALSYMPCA trial, radium-223 significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58e0.83, P < 0.001) and prolonged time to first SSE (hazard ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 e0.83, P Z 0.00037) and subsequent SSE (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.51e0.83, P Z 0.00039) versus placebo in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer with symptomatic bone metastases and no known visceral metastases. Health care resource use (HCRU), including hospitalisation events and days, were prospectively collected in ALSYMPCA. We assessed health care resource use for the first 12 months post-randomisation. Significantly fewer radium-223 (218/589; 37.0%) versus placebo patients (133/292; 45.5%) had at least one hospitalisation event (P Z 0.016). However, mean number of hospitalisation events per patient was similar (radium-223 0.69 versus placebo 0.79, P Z 0.226), likely due to the significantly longer follow-up time for radium-223 (7.82 months versus 6.92 months for placebo;P < 0.001). There were significantly fewer hospitalisation days per patient for radium-223 (4.44 versus 6.68, respectively, P Z 0.004). The reduction in hospitalisation days with radium-223 was observed both before first SSE (2.35 days versus 3.36 days, respectively) and after SSE (7.74 days versus 9.19 days, respectively). Our data suggest that this reduced hospital days along with the survival benefit and reduction in time to SSEs with radium- 223 treatment may contribute to improvements in health-related quality-of-life in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer with symptomatic bone metastases (ALSYMPCA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699751.)

Hematologic Safety of Radium-223 Dichloride: Baseline Prognostic Factors Associated With Myelosuppression in the ALSYMPCA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Myelosuppression is common in patients with progressive castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases. Radium-223 prolongs overall survival in these patients but may cause myelosuppression; understanding risk factors will improve clinical decision making. We describe hematologic safety of radium-223 in ALSYMPCA and post hoc analyses identifying patients at increased risk for hematologic toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Hematologic parameters and adverse events were analyzed. Multivariate analyses assessing baseline risk factors for hematologic toxicities were performed separately for radium-223 and placebo patients. RESULTS: Nine hundred one patients received radium-223 (n = 600) or placebo (n = 301); 65% of radium-223 and 48% of placebo patients had the full 6 cycles. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was more common in radium-223 versus placebo patients (6% vs. 2%). Logistic regression analyses identified significant baseline predictors for grade 2-4 hematologic toxicities related to radium-223 treatment: extent of disease (6-20 vs. < 6 bone metastases; odds ratio [OR] = 2.76; P = .022) and elevated prostate-specific antigen (OR = 1.65; P = .006) for anemia; prior docetaxel (OR = 2.16; P = .035), decreased hemoglobin (OR = 1.35; P = .008), and decreased platelets (OR = 1.44; P = .030) for thrombocytopenia. Neutropenia events were too few in placebo patients for a comparative analysis. There were no significant associations between hematologic toxicities and number of radium-223 injections received (4-6 vs. 1-3). CONCLUSION: Radium-223 has a favorable safety profile with a low myelosuppression incidence. Understanding baseline factors associated with myelosuppression may assist clinicians in avoiding severe myelosuppression events with radium-223

Short Androgen Suppression and Radiation Dose Escalation in Prostate Cancer:12-Year Results of EORTC Trial 22991 in Patients With Localized Intermediate-Risk Disease

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22991 (NCT00021450) showed that 6 months of concomitant and adjuvant androgen suppression (AS) improves event- (EFS, Phoenix) and clinical disease-free survival (DFS) of intermediate- and high-risk localized prostatic carcinoma, treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) at 70-78 Gy. We report the long-term results in intermediate-risk patients treated with 74 or 78 Gy EBRT, as per current guidelines. Of 819 patients randomly assigned between EBRT or EBRT plus AS started on day 1 of EBRT, 481 entered with intermediate risk (International Union Against Cancer TNM 1997 cT1b-c or T2a with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥ 10 ng/mL or Gleason ≤ 7 and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, N0M0) and had EBRT planned at 74 (342 patients, 71.1%) or 78 Gy (139 patients, 28.9%). We report the trial primary end point EFS, DFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) by intention-to-treat stratified by EBRT dose at two-sided α = 5%. At a median follow-up of 12.2 years, 92 of 245 patients and 132 of 236 had EFS events in the EBRT plus AS and EBRT arm, respectively, mostly PSA relapse (48.7%) or death (45.1%). EBRT plus AS improved EFS and DFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53; CI, 0.41 to 0.70; P &lt; .001 and HR = 0.67; CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P = .008). At 10 years, DMFS was 79.3% (CI, 73.4 to 84.0) with EBRT plus AS and 72.7% (CI, 66.2 to 78.2) with EBRT (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.02; P = .065). With 140 deaths (EBRT plus AS: 64; EBRT: 76), 10-year OS was 80.0% (CI, 74.1 to 84.7) with EBRT plus AS and 74.3% (CI, 67.8 to 79.7) with EBRT, but not statistically significantly different (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.04; P = .082). Six months of concomitant and adjuvant AS statistically significantly improves EFS and DFS in intermediate-risk prostatic carcinoma, treated by irradiation at 74 or 78 Gy. The effects on OS and DMFS did not reach statistical significance

European Association of Nuclear Medicine Focus 5:Consensus on Molecular Imaging and Theranostics in Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND: In prostate cancer (PCa), questions remain on indications for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and PSMA radioligand therapy, integration of advanced imaging in nomogram-based decision-making, dosimetry, and development of new theranostic applications.OBJECTIVE: We aimed to critically review developments in molecular hybrid imaging and systemic radioligand therapy, to reach a multidisciplinary consensus on the current state of the art in PCa.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The results of a systematic literature search informed a two-round Delphi process with a panel of 28 PCa experts in medical or radiation oncology, urology, radiology, medical physics, and nuclear medicine. The results were discussed and ratified in a consensus meeting.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Forty-eight statements were scored on a Likert agreement scale and six as ranking options. Agreement statements were analysed using the RAND appropriateness method. Ranking statements were analysed using weighted summed scores.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After two Delphi rounds, there was consensus on 42/48 (87.5%) of the statements. The expert panel recommends PSMA PET to be used for staging the majority of patients with unfavourable intermediate and high risk, and for restaging of suspected recurrent PCa. There was consensus that oligometastatic disease should be defined as up to five metastases, even using advanced imaging modalities. The group agreed that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA should not be administered only after progression to cabazitaxel and that [223Ra]RaCl2 remains a valid therapeutic option in bone-only metastatic castration-resistant PCa. Uncertainty remains on various topics, including the need for concordant findings on both [18F]FDG and PSMA PET prior to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy.CONCLUSIONS: There was a high proportion of agreement among a panel of experts on the use of molecular imaging and theranostics in PCa. Although consensus statements cannot replace high-certainty evidence, these can aid in the interpretation and dissemination of best practice from centres of excellence to the wider clinical community.PATIENT SUMMARY: There are situations when dealing with prostate cancer (PCa) where both the doctors who diagnose and track the disease development and response to treatment, and those who give treatments are unsure about what the best course of action is. Examples include what methods they should use to obtain images of the cancer and what to do when the cancer has returned or spread. We reviewed published research studies and provided a summary to a panel of experts in imaging and treating PCa. We also used the research summary to develop a questionnaire whereby we asked the experts to state whether or not they agreed with a list of statements. We used these results to provide guidance to other health care professionals on how best to image men with PCa and what treatments to give, when, and in what order, based on the information the images provide.</p

A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a 6 month dietary and physical activity intervention for prostate cancer patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Treatment with Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer is associated with changes in body composition including increased fat and decreased lean mass; increased fatigue, and a reduction in quality of life. No study to date has evaluated the effect of dietary and physical activity modification on the side-effects related to ADT. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a 6-month dietary and physical activity intervention for prostate cancer survivors receiving ADT to minimise the changes in body composition, fatigue and quality of life, typically associated with ADT.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Men are recruited to this study if their treatment plan is to receive ADT for at least 6 months. Men who are randomised to the intervention arm receive a home-based tailored intervention to meet the following guidelines a) ≥ 5 servings vegetables and fruits/day; b) 30%-35% of total energy from fat, and < 10% energy from saturated fat/day; c) 10% of energy from polyunsaturated fat/day; d) limited consumption of processed meats; e) 25-35 gm of fibre/day; f) alcoholic drinks ≤ 28 units/week; g) limited intake of foods high in salt and/or sugar. They are also encouraged to include at least 30 minutes of brisk walking, 5 or more days per week. The primary outcomes are change in body composition, fatigue and quality of life scores. Secondary outcomes include dietary intake, physical activity and perceived stress. Baseline information collected includes: socio-economic status, treatment duration, perceived social support and health status, family history of cancer, co-morbidities, medication and supplement use, barriers to change, and readiness to change their health behaviour. Data for the primary and secondary outcomes will be collected at baseline, 3 and 6 months from 47 intervention and 47 control patients.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results of this study will provide detailed information on diet and physical activity levels in prostate cancer patients treated with ADT and will test the feasibility and efficacy of a diet and physical activity intervention which could provide essential information to develop guidelines for prostate cancer patients to minimise the side effects related to ADT.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN trial number ISCRTN75282423</p