Mednet Logo

Abstract

Background

Adjuvant radiotherapy has been shown to halve the risk of biochemical progression for patients with high-risk disease after radical prostatectomy. Early salvage radiotherapy could result in similar biochemical control with lower treatment toxicity. We aimed to compare biochemical progression between patients given adjuvant radiotherapy and those given salvage radiotherapy.

Methods

We did a phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial across 32 oncology centres in Australia and New Zealand. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years and had undergone a radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate with pathological staging showing high-risk features defined as positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension, or seminal vesicle invasion; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and had a postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration of 0·10 ng/mL or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a minimisation technique via an internet-based, independently generated allocation to either adjuvant radiotherapy within 6 months of radical prostatectomy or early salvage radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. Allocation sequence was concealed from investigators and patients, but treatment assignment for individual randomisations was not masked. Patients were stratified by radiotherapy centre, preoperative PSA, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and seminal vesicle invasion status. Radiotherapy in both groups was 64 Gy in 32 fractions to the prostate bed without androgen deprivation therapy with real-time review of plan quality on all cases before treatment. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical progression. Salvage radiotherapy would be deemed non-inferior to adjuvant radiotherapy if freedom from biochemical progression at 5 years was within 10% of that for adjuvant radiotherapy with a hazard ratio (HR) for salvage radiotherapy versus adjuvant radiotherapy of 1·48. The primary analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00860652.

Findings

Between March 27, 2009, and Dec 31, 2015, 333 patients were randomly assigned (166 to adjuvant radiotherapy; 167 to salvage radiotherapy). Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·3-7·5). An independent data monitoring committee recommended premature closure of enrolment because of unexpectedly low event rates. 84 (50%) patients in the salvage radiotherapy group had radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. 5-year freedom from biochemical progression was 86% (95% CI 81-92) in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 87% (82-93) in the salvage radiotherapy group (stratified HR 1·12, 95% CI 0·65-1·90; pnon-inferiority=0·15). The grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity rate was lower in the salvage radiotherapy group (90 [54%] of 167) than in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (116 [70%] of 166). The grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity rate was similar between the salvage radiotherapy group (16 [10%]) and the adjuvant radiotherapy group (24 [14%]).

Interpretation

Salvage radiotherapy did not meet trial specified criteria for non-inferiority. However, these data support the use of salvage radiotherapy as it results in similar biochemical control to adjuvant radiotherapy, spares around half of men from pelvic radiation, and is associated with significantly lower genitourinary toxicity.

Funding

New Zealand Health Research Council, Australian National Health Medical Research Council, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Council NSW, Auckland Hospital Charitable Trust, Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Seed Funding, Cancer Research Trust New Zealand, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Cancer Institute NSW, Prostate Cancer Foundation Australia, and Cancer Australia.

Related Questions

What is your radiotherapy fractionation recommendation for favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer who has ~70 cc prostate?

4
7 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology · Michigan Healthcare Professionals, PC

This may seem controversial in 2026 and seems to contradict evidence, but I just wanted to relay what I've seen. I was a fairly early adopter of moderate hypo-fractionation, not the first, but not the last - probably around 2012-2013. I pretty much changed to that for all patients for around 11-12 y...

Is there any evidence for combining surgery and XRT +/- ADT for treatment of localized high risk prostate cancer?

2
1 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology

Presumably, this is a question inquiring about planned post-operative RT. If so, surgery followed by adjuvant, post-operative radiation therapy (PORT) has been profiled extensively in several RCTs: EORTC 22911, SWOG 8794, ARO 96-02, FinnProstataX. The two more recent trials, ARO 96-02 and FinnProsta...

What is your PSA threshold for obtaining PSMA PET for biochemical failure after RP?

5
2 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology · Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine

I typically order a PSMA PET after ~0.20. Sometimes lower if there are multiple aggressive features or poor prognostic factors (i.e. SVI with no lymph node dissection and persistently positive PSA of 0.15 after RP). This approach seems to be a reasonable threshold to me based on two considerations: ...

Would you consider radical prostatectomy for a young male with unfavorable intermediate risk cT3a prostate cancer and PSMA PET concerning for regional lymph nodes involvement but negative conventional imaging?

2
3 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology

I would approach this scenario by considering two main issues. The first issue is what the probability of the patient truly having pN+ disease based on cN+ findings on advanced imaging. There have recently been two trials published from the Netherlands, PEPPER (using 68¸Ga-PSMA-11) and SALT (using 1...

What is your criteria for undetectable PSA value after prostatectomy?

1
2 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology · Varian Medical Systems/Allegheny health network

In the era of ultra-sensitive PSA, reading below threshold of .2 ng/ml also reflects biochemical recurrence especially in the right context. That being said, if values are low like above, we generally repeat PSA to see the trend rather than act on treatment on single value.

Do you consider tertiary grade pattern, LVI or PNI on prostatectomy specimens as adverse features to recommend EBRT and ADT for patients with unfavorable intermediate prostate CA after prostatectomy with undetectable PSA?

3
1 Answers

Mednet Member
Mednet Member
Radiation Oncology

No, I don’t think there is any current available evidence to define a benefit for ADT in the post-operative setting for patients with an undetectable PSA. The two major trials which define a benefit for ADT in this setting, RTOG 9601 and GETUG AFU-16 had a lower limit of a PSA of 0.2 at treatment in...