Prostate Cancer Treatment-Related Toxicity: Comparison between 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT) and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) Techniques

Simple Summary Despite the potential benefits of conformal radiotherapy techniques, such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for the treatment of prostate cancer, their actual clinical impact has been under-investigated. This paper illustrates the results of a mono-institutional registry trial, with the aim to compare gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity rates among patients that underwent radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer using 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) or VMAT. Overall, we enrolled 83 consecutive patients, treated with a prescribed dose of 70 Gy in 28 fractions (50.6% with 3D-CRT and 49.4% with VMAT). After a median follow-up of 77.26 months, the patients in the VMAT group had a lower (although not statistically significant) rate of late GI and GU toxicity. Rates of G >= 2 toxicities were low among the whole cohort of these patients treated with IGRT. VMAT allowed for a dose reduction to the rectum and bladder for the large majority of the parameters; nonetheless, the only parameter correlated with late GI toxicity G >= 2 was a rectal dose limit V66 > 8.5%. Objective: This paper illustrates the results of a mono-institutional registry trial, aimed to test whether gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity rates were lower in localized prostate cancer patients treated with image-guided volumetric modulated arc therapy (IG-VMAT) compared to those treated with IG-3D conformal radiation therapy (IG-3DCRT). Materials and Methods: Histologically proven prostate cancer patients with organ-confined disease, treated between October 2008 and September 2014 with moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy, were reviewed. Fiducial markers were placed in the prostate gland by transrectal ultrasound guide. The prescribed total dose was 70 Gy in 28 fractions. The mean and median dose volume constraints for bladder and rectum as well as total volume of treatment were analyzed as potentially prognostic factors influencing toxicity. The Kaplan-Meier method was applied to calculate survival. Results: Overall, 83 consecutive patients were included. Forty-two (50.6%) patients were treated with 3D-CRT and 41 (49.4%) with the VMAT technique. The median follow-up for toxicity was 77.26 months for the whole cohort. The VMAT allowed for a dose reduction to the rectum and bladder for the large majority of the considered parameters; nonetheless, the only parameter correlated with a clinical outcome was a rectal dose limit V66 > 8.5% for late GI toxicity G >= 2 (p = 0.045). Rates of G >= 2 toxicities were low among the whole cohort of these patients treated with IGRT. The analysis for rectum dose volume histograms (DVHs) showed that a severe (grade >= 2) late GI toxicity was related with the rectal dose limit V66 > 8.5% (p = 0.045). Conclusions: This study shows that moderate hypofractionation is feasible and safe in patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. Daily IGRT may decrease acute and late toxicity to organs at risk and improve clinical benefit and disease control rate, cutting down the risk of PTV geographical missing. The adoption of VMAT allows for promising results in terms of OAR sparing and a reduction in toxicity that, also given the small sample, did not reach statistical significance.