Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jun 15;20(1):102.
doi: 10.1186/s13014-025-02665-0.

Risk-adapted intensification therapy in high-risk prostate cancer: how relevant is the role of radiation dose

A Zapatero  1 , M Roch  2 , C Martín de Vidales  3 , P Castro  2 , N Montes  4   5 , A Cruz Conde  3 , Laura Fernández-Banda  3 , Laura Zaragoza  3 , Sara Carroceda  3 , F García Vicente  2   6
Affiliations

Risk-adapted intensification therapy in high-risk prostate cancer: how relevant is the role of radiation dose

A Zapatero et al. Radiat Oncol. .

Abstract

Background/purpose: Dose escalation has demonstrated a significant improvement in biochemical recurrence in high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa). We evaluated the impact on overall survival (OS) of dose intensification with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in a cohort of HRPCa patients treated in a single institution.

Methods and materials: Between January 1997 and January 2024, a total of 1451 consecutive localized PCa patients were treated with primary EBRT alone as part of a prospective institutional program for risk-adapted dose-intensification radiotherapy. For the present analysis, we specifically selected a cohort of 424 consecutive HRPCa patients with a minimum follow-up (FU) of 5 years. The median RT dose was 79.2 Gy (interquartile range [IQR] 74.9-80.3). Short and long-term hormones were administered in 56 (13%) and 350 (83%) of patients respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate overall survival (OS). Cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM), and cause specific survival (CSS) were estimated using competing risk regression.

Results: Median patient age was 69 years (IQR 65-72) and median FU was 118 months (IQR 88.0-135.0). At the time of analysis, 54 of 424 patients (13%) had died. The leading cause of death was cardiovascular disease in 16/54 patients (4%), followed by PCa in 15 patients (3%). At 10 and 15 years, the KM estimated OS rates were 91% (95% CI 87-93) and 71% (95% CI 61-79), respectively. The corresponding rates for MFS were 87% (95% CI 83-90) and 60% (95% CI 49-68), and for CSS were 97% (95% CI 95-99) and 90% (95% CI 49-81), respectively. In multivariate analysis, when adjusted for patient age, T stage, Gleason/ISUP group, PSA and length of hormone-therapy, higher radiation dose remained significantly associated with an improved OS (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.84-0.94), MFS (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90-0.98) and CSS (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.84-0.94).

Conclusions: The present study confirms that radiation dose intensification is paramount in the treatment of HRPCa with independence of duration of ADT.

Keywords: Androgen deprivation; High-risk prostate cancer; Metastasis-free survival; Overall survival; Radiation dose escalation; Radiotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. This is retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort, not a clinical trial. But, all patients signed an ICF prior to radiation therapy as clinical practice in all cases. Consent for publication: Not applicable. The clinical research of the present manuscripts comply with international and national standards for such work (such as the Declaration of Helsinki ) Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Kaplan Meier curves for overall survival and metastasis-free survival
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Cumulative incidence of cause specific mortality from the Fine and Gray models
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Kaplan Meier curve for overall survival by radiation dose
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Kaplan Meier curve for metastasis-free survival by radiation dose
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Cause –specific mortality curves from the Fine and Gray models by radiation dose
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Brunckhorst O, Darraugh J, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2024 Update. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2024;86(2):148–63. 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.027. - PubMed
    1. Heemsbergen WD, Al-Mamgani A, Slot A, Dielwart MF, Lebesque JV. Long-term results of the Dutch randomized prostate cancer trial: impact of dose-escalation on local, biochemical, clinical failure, and survival. Radiother Oncol. 2014;110:104–9. - PubMed
    1. Beckendorf V, Guerif S, Le Prisé E, et al. 70 Gy versus 80 Gy in localized prostate cancer: 5-year results of GETUG 06 randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(4):1056–63. - PubMed
    1. Dearnaley DP, Jovic G, Syndikus I, et al. Escalated-dose versus control-dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: long-term results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(4):464–73. - PubMed
    1. Morris WJ, Tyldesley S, Rodda S, et al. Androgen suppression combined with elective nodal and dose escalated radiationtherapy (the ASCENDE-RT trial): an analysis of survival endpoints for a randomized trial comparing a low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost to a dose-escalated external beam boost for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98:275–85. - PubMed