ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Oncol.

Sec. Radiation Oncology

Volume 15 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1577359

Focal boosted IMRT treatment of prostate cancer to 84 Gy in 28 fractions: Preliminary clinical outcomes, toxicity, and dosimetry

Provisionally accepted
Jacob  Michael HandsJacob Michael Hands1,2Michael  WhalenMichael Whalen1Harold  FrazierHarold Frazier1Shawn  Haji-MomenianShawn Haji-Momenian1Ramez  AndrawisRamez Andrawis1Destie  ProvenzanoDestie Provenzano1Julie  E BaumanJulie E Bauman1,2Fayez  EstephanFayez Estephan2Hamid  AghdamHamid Aghdam2Dongjun  ChenDongjun Chen1Sharad  GoyalSharad Goyal2Martin  Ojong-NtuiMartin Ojong-Ntui2Yuan  RaoYuan Rao1*
  • 1School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., United States
  • 2George Washington University Hospital, Washington, D.C., District of Columbia, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

The FLAME trial reported that focal boosting of prostate tumors up to 95 Gy in 35 fractions improves biochemical control (disease free survival). However, this treatment (regimen) is not commonly used in the United States. Methods: We investigated a focally boosted treatment of 84 Gy in 28 fractions (EQD2 108 Gy, BED 252 Gy). We retrospectively evaluated men with unfavorable-intermediate risk (uIR) and high risk (HR) prostate cancer treated with focal boost IMRT between 2019-2022. Results: Twenty men were included in the analysis, 2 (10%) uIR and 18 (90%) HR. 6 (30%) GG2, 3 (15% ) GG3, 7 (30%) GG4, and 4 (20%) GG5. There were 13 (65%) stage cT1, 4 (20%) cT2 and 3 (15%) cT3. One (5%) patient received short term ADT, 18 (95%) long term ADT, and 1 (5%) refused ADT. 18 (90%) men received elective pelvic nodal radiation. The mean baseline PSA was 25.1 ng/mL (range 4.2-73.4). The median baseline IPSS score was 11.1 . 4 patients had severe baseline urinary symptoms (IPSS ≥20). The mean baseline prostate volume was 57.4 cc (range 26.8-198.3). The mean volume of the 84 Gy boost target was 7.1 cc (range 2.3-15.0) and the mean proportion of the prostate boosted was 14.8% (range 2% -47%). Patients met all per-protocol normal tissue criteria of NRG-GU005, except for bladder D0.03cc with mean reported 79.2 (<73.5 Gy). At a median follow up of 42 months (range 18-63)), no patients have developed recurrence, metastasis, or death from prostate cancer. One patient died at 18 months from unrelated metastatic colorectal cancer. Acute grade 1-2 GU toxicity occurred in 13 (65%) patients, and acute grade 1-2 GI toxicity occurred in 4 (20%) patients. No patients developed grade 3+ acute or late GU or GI toxicity.A novel 28-fraction focal boosted IMRT treatment is feasible and has an acceptable preliminary toxicity profile. Oncologic results are promising but require longer follow up and prospective study.

Keywords: radiation oncologist, IMRT, SBRT, Radiotoxicity, Dosimetry

Received: 15 Feb 2025; Accepted: 08 Apr 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Hands, Whalen, Frazier, Haji-Momenian, Andrawis, Provenzano, Bauman, Estephan, Aghdam, Chen, Goyal, Ojong-Ntui and Rao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Yuan Rao, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., United States

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Research integrity at Frontiers

94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good

Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.


Find out more