Journal of Personalized Medicine (Nov 2022)

1.5T MR-Guided Daily-Adaptive SBRT for Prostate Cancer: Preliminary Report of Toxicity and Quality of Life of the First 100 Patients

  • Filippo Alongi,
  • Michele Rigo,
  • Vanessa Figlia,
  • Luca Nicosia,
  • Rosario Mazzola,
  • Niccolò Giaj Levra,
  • Francesco Ricchetti,
  • Giovanna Trapani,
  • Giorgio Attinà,
  • Claudio Vitale,
  • Edoardo Pastorello,
  • Antonio De Simone,
  • Davide Gurrera,
  • Stefania Naccarato,
  • Gianluisa Sicignano,
  • Ruggero Ruggieri,
  • Francesco Cuccia

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12121982
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 12
p. 1982

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: The present study reports the preliminary outcomes in terms of adverse events and quality of life in the first 100 patients treated with 1.5T MR-guided daily-adaptive stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Methods: From October 2019 to December 2020, 100 patients, enrolled in a prospective study, received MR-guided SBRT for prostate cancer. Rectal spacer insertion was optional and administered in 37 patients. In total, 32 patients received androgen deprivation therapy in accordance with international guidelines. A prospective collection of data regarding toxicity and quality of life was performed. Results: The median age was 71 years (range, 52–84). The median total dose delivered was 35 Gy (35–36.25 Gy) in five sessions, either on alternate days (n = 25) or consecutive days (n = 75). For acute toxicity, we recorded: seven cases of acute G2 urinary pain and four cases of G2 gastrointestinal events. The median follow-up was 12 months (3–20), recording three late G2 urinary events and one G3 case, consisting of a patient who required a TURP 8 months after the treatment. For gastrointestinal toxicity, we observed 3 G ≥ 2 GI events, including one patient who received argon laser therapy for radiation-induced proctitis. Up to the last follow-up, all patients are alive and with no evidence of biochemical relapse, except for an M1 low-volume patient in distant progression two months after radiotherapy. QoL evaluation reported a substantial resolution of any discomfort within the second follow-up after radiotherapy, with the only exception being sexual items. Notably, after one year, global health items were improved compared to the baseline assessment. Conclusions: This study reports very promising outcomes in terms of adverse events and QoL, supporting the role of 1.5T MR-guided SBRT for prostate cancer. To date, this series is one of the first and largest available in the literature. Long-term results are warranted.

Keywords