Toxicity profile and Patient-Reported outcomes following salvage Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy to the prostate Bed: The POPART multicentric prospective study

Background: While SBRT to the prostate has become a valuable option as a radical treatment, limited data support its use in the postoperative setting. Here, we report the updated results of the multicentric Post-Prostatectomy Ablative Radiation Therapy (POPART) trial, investigating possible predictors of toxicities and patient-reported outcomes. Methods: Patients with PSA levels between 0.1–2.0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy received Linac-based SBRT to the prostate bed in five fractions every other day for a total dose of 32.5 Gy (EQD21.5 = 74.3 Gy). Late toxicity was assessed using CTCAE v.5 scale, while EPIC-CP, ICIQ-SF, IIEF 5 questionnaires and PSA levels measured quality of life and biochemical control. Pre- and post-treatment scores were compared using a paired t-test, with MID established at > 0.5 pooled SD from the baseline. A logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate potential associations between specific patient/tumor/treatment factors and outcome deterioration. Results: From April 2021 to April 2023 a total of 50 pts were enrolled and treated. Median follow-up was 12.2 (3–27) months. No late ≥ G2 GI or GU toxicity was registered. Late G1 urinary and rectal toxicities occurred in 46 % and 4 % of patients, respectively. Among 47 patients completing all EPIC-CP domains, four (9 %) showed worsened QoL, and eleven (26 %) developed erectile dysfunction correlating with PTV D2% (P = 0.032). At Multivariate analysis bladder wall D10cc independently correlated with late G1 GU toxicity (P = 0.034). Median post-treatment PSA nadir was 0.04 ng/mL (0.00 – 0.84). At the last follow-up, six patients presented with biochemical failure, including two nodal relapses. Conclusions: Our findings show that post-prostatectomy SBRT did not result in increased toxicity nor a significant decline in QoL measures, thus showing that it can be safely extended to the postoperative setting. Long-term follow-up and randomized comparisons with different RT schedules are needed to validate this approach.