onc brain

About · curated by Nick Boehling, MD · @nb2276

Supportive

3 studies Subscribe via RSS →

Consensus

GUAM International Consensus Guideline

ForProstate cancer RT, intact or post-prostatectomy, acute or late GU AEs

TL;DR48-expert modified Delphi (15 countries) sets first RT-specific GU adverse event management consensus; 76% favor moderate hypofractionation over SBRT at baseline IPSS 15–19.

Reported via UroToday →

Why it mattersRadiation oncology

The RT-technique domain is the read: 76% favored moderate hypofractionation over SBRT at baseline IPSS 15–19 and 85% a full bladder at simulation and treatment, yet no dose-volume constraint reached consensus. The presenter pointed to margin reduction instead, citing MIRAGE (2-mm MRI-guided vs 4-mm CT-guided, late G≥2 GU 51% → 27%).

Monday clinic

In a man with severe LUTS headed for prostate cancer RT, this panel position supports considering a prophylactic bladder outlet procedure (85%) with ≥8 weeks recovery before RT (94%); it does not extend to irritative-predominant symptoms (95% against). The longer read

12 details

Systematic review (183 articles) plus 3-round modified Delphi, May 2025 to February 2026. 48 experts from 15 countries: 34 radiation oncologists, 7 medical oncologists, 7 urologic oncologists. Consensus = ≥75% agreement; independently peer reviewed, endorsed by ASTRO and ESTRO.

Men with GU adverse events associated with prostate cancer RT, split by intact prostate vs postoperative and, when intact, obstructive vs irritative predominance. Five domains: acute medical management, RT technique, bladder outlet obstruction, urology referral indications, hyperbaric oxygen. Recommendations assume UTI has been excluded.

76% favored moderate hypofractionation over SBRT at baseline IPSS 15–19; 85% recommended a full bladder at simulation and treatment. After a bladder outlet procedure, 94% would wait ≥8 weeks and 66% ≥12 weeks before RT; only 52% considered SBRT safe afterward. No dose-volume constraint reached consensus.

Agreement figures and IPSS threshold distributions are tabulated in the bullets. The manuscript reports consensus on 31 key questions; the source covers a subset.

SettingPreferred first-lineSubsequent options, in order
Intact prostate, obstructiveAlpha blockersPDE5-Is, NSAIDs, steroids, anti-spasmodics
Intact prostate, irritativeAnti-spasmodicsAlpha blockers, NSAIDs, phenazopyridine, cranberry products
Post-prostatectomyAnti-spasmodicsNot reported in source
StatementPanel agreement
Against prophylactic medication before symptom onset80%
Add a second agent rather than switch when first-line inadequate80%
Alpha blockers do not or probably do not help postoperatively74%
Moderate hypofractionation over SBRT at baseline IPSS 15–1976%
Full bladder at simulation and treatment85%
Refer IPSS ≥20 for bladder outlet procedure consideration74%
Wait ≥8 weeks after outlet procedure before RT94%
Wait ≥12 weeks after outlet procedure before RT66%
SBRT safe after outlet procedure once obstruction resolved52%
Consider prophylactic outlet procedure pre-RT for severe LUTS85%
No outlet procedure when irritative symptoms predominate95%
IPSS thresholdPanelists selecting
10–1416%
15–1961%
20–2421%
≥252%
IPSS thresholdPanelists selecting
15–1934%
20–2447%
25–2915%
≥304%

The presenter cited MIRAGE for margin reduction (2-mm MRI-guided vs 4-mm CT-guided, late G≥2 GU 51% → 27%) and CHHiP, PROFIT, RTOG 0415 and the HYDRA meta-analysis as showing no consistent late GU increase with moderate hypofractionation. RICH-ART was cited as randomized support for hyperbaric oxygen in late radiation cystitis; no effect size reported in source.

men receiving prostate cancer RT, intact prostate or post-prostatectomy, with acute or late GU adverse events
Does not represent non-radiation populations such as BPH or overactive bladder, from which management was previously extrapolated.

Several quoted positions fall below the group's own ≥75% bar (74%, 74%, 66%, 52%). The source gives 60% for IPSS ≥15 and 61% for the 15–19 band without reconciling them. Outlet-procedure questions were voted by a panel with 34 radiation oncologists and 7 urologic oncologists.

A default sequence for symptom management and an IPSS-anchored fractionation preference now exist where practice was improvised. Still unsettled, per the working group: dose-volume constraints, reliability of urethral contouring, and RT-specific evidence for commonly used medications. Four ongoing trials are named (BEFORE, RadTARGET, RELIEF, DESTINATION-2) and the document is intended to be living.

Modified Delphi guideline; every percentage is panel opinion, not an outcome. Changes practice by standardizing GU symptom management and IPSS-based fractionation choice where no RT-specific guideline existed.

  • Optimal dose-volume constraints for GU adverse events
  • Reliability of urethral contouring
  • RT-specific evidence for commonly used GU symptom medications
📚 Sources · 📄 1 paper
📄 PAPER · UroToday
ASTRO 2026: International Consensus Guideline on Management of Genitourinary Adverse Events Associated with Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy
Abstract
ASTRO 2026, prostate cancer, management of genitourinary adverse events associated with prostate cancer radiation therapy, MIRAGE trial.
📝 https://www.urotoday.com/conference-highlights/astro-2026/astro-2026-prostate-cancer/172248-astro-2026-international-consensus-guideline-on-management-of-genitourinary-adverse-events-associated-with-prostate-cancer-radiation-therapy.html?mtm_campaign=Dornisch_SocialASTRO26_ID172248
Early signal

Testosterone Treatment in Prostate Cancer Survivors (Bhasin RCT) NCT03716739

ForHypogonadal men post-RP, pT2 Gleason 3+3/3+4, undetectable PSA ≥2 yr

TL;DRSexual activity +0.91 daily events vs placebo (95% CI 0.56-1.26, P<.001), zero biochemical recurrences, 12wk TRT in hypogonadal men post-RP for Gleason 3+3/3+4.

Why it mattersRadiation oncology

Men treated with RT or ADT were excluded, so the zero-BCR signal does not transfer to post-RT survivors, the hypogonadal population a radiation oncologist actually follows. Post-RT pts retain prostate tissue, and this trial offers no data on TRT against that background.

Monday clinic

In hypogonadal men with undetectable PSA ≥2 years after RP for pT2 Gleason 3+3 or 3+4 disease, this supports short-term TRT as an evidence-backed option for sexual symptoms; it does not extend to post-RT, post-ADT, or higher-grade survivors. The longer read

10 details 1 trial watching

Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group phase 2 (SPIRIT), 2 academic centers, 1:1, N=136. Enrollment May 2019 to last visit May 2025; target revised from 142 to 134 with DSMB concurrence.

Men ≥40 post-RP for organ-confined pT2N0M0, Gleason 3+3 or 3+4, preop PSA <10, undetectable PSA ≥2 yr. Hypogonadal (T <275 ng/dL and/or free T ≤70 pg/mL) plus low libido, ED, or fatigue. Mean age 68.6; 38% Gleason 6, 62% Gleason 7.

Testosterone cypionate 100 mg IM weekly × 12 wk vs placebo. Total T rose 349 ng/dL (95% CI 283-415) more than placebo; adherence 95% vs 94%.

Primary efficacy: change in sexual activity (PDQ question 4). Primary safety: biochemical recurrence (≥2 consecutive PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL). Secondary: desire, erectile function, affect, body composition, VO2 peak, stair-climb power.

No biochemical recurrence in either arm. Erythrocytosis in 3 TRT pts; SAEs 1 vs 3; no MACE or VTE. One TRT pt had detectable PSA 0.1 to <0.2 ng/mL during treatment.

Described by the authors as the first randomized placebo-controlled trial of TRT in prostate cancer survivors; prior support for TRT after RP rested on observational series. Many guidelines still list prostate cancer history as a TRT contraindication.

hypogonadal men with low-grade pT2 disease and durably undetectable PSA after RP
Does not represent men treated with RT or ADT, or those with high-grade disease.

Baseline recurrence risk in this cohort is so low that 0 vs 0 BCR carries little information about harm. Erectile function did not move despite EPIC-26 gains, and no P value adjustment was made across secondaries.

The efficacy case for TRT in this population is now randomized and exceeds the MCID. The safety case remains a short-horizon absence of events, which justifies a larger long-term trial rather than settling the contraindication.

EndpointTreatment effect (95% CI)P
Sexual activity (PDQ-4), 1° EP0.91 (0.56 to 1.26)<.001
Sexual desire (DISF-SD)2.96 (1.46 to 4.45)<.001
EPIC-26 sexual domain5.35 (1.63 to 9.07).005
Erectile function (IIEF)0.93 (−0.43 to 2.29).18
Energy1.43 (−0.53 to 3.40).15
PANAS positive affect0.60 (−0.85 to 2.04).42
PANAS negative affect−1.39 (−2.53 to −0.25).02
EventPlaceboTestosterone
Biochemical recurrence00
≥1 AE, pts (events)47 (138)49 (160)
SAEs, pts (events)1 (1)3 (3)
Erythrocytosis (Hb >18 g/dL)03 (3)
MACE00
VTE00
Bone fractures3 (3)0
CONSORT flow
Randomized136
↓
Testosterone cypionate
allocated 68
Placebo
allocated 68

Efficacy primary met in a clean double-blind RCT, but the question that gates practice (oncologic safety) is untestable at N=136 and 12 wk; authors frame it as proof-of-concept.

📚 Sources · 📄 1 paper
📄 PAPER Bhasin; Burnett; Gagliano-Juc&#xe1; et al. · JAMA internal medicine (2026-07)
Testosterone Treatment in Prostate Cancer Survivors With Hypogonadism: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: A majority of men with prostate cancer have low-grade cancer and an excellent prognosis after radical prostatectomy. Hypogonadism and associated symptoms impair quality of life in prostate cancer survivors. Many guidelines, citing a lack of randomized clinical trials showing safety and efficacy of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT), consider a history of prostate cancer a contraindication for TRT.<br/><br/>OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term safety and efficacy of TRT in prostate cancer survivors with symptomatic hypogonadism.<br/><br/>DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 2 trial was conducted at 2 academic medical centers in men 40 years and older with organ-confined, low-grade prostate cancer (Gleason score of 6 [3&#x2009;+&#x2009;3] or 7 [3&#x2009;+&#x2009;4]). Participants had undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for at least 2 years after radical prostatectomy, a mean of 2 testosterone levels less than 275 ng/dL, and low libido, erectile dysfunction, or fatigue. Patients were allocated using concealed, block randomization, with stratification for age (40-60 years or >60 years) and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5I) use. The first participant was randomized on May 13, 2019, and the last study visit was completed on May 16, 2025.<br/><br/>INTERVENTION: Testosterone cypionate, 100 mg, or placebo intramuscularly weekly for 12 weeks.<br/><br/>MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary efficacy outcome was sexual activity. Secondary outcomes included sexual desire, erectile function, well-being, body composition, aerobic capacity, and physical function. The safety outcome was biochemical recurrence (PSA&#x2009;&#x2265;&#x2009;0.2 ng/mL).<br/><br/>RESULTS: A total of 136 men were randomized, 68 to receive testosterone cypionate, 100 mg, and 68 to receive placebo, and 125 men completed the study. Groups were similar at baseline (mean [SD] age, 68.6 [6.5] years; 52 [38%] had a Gleason score of 6; and 84 [62%] had a Gleason score of 7). No participant in either group experienced biochemical recurrence. TRT significantly increased sexual activity more than placebo, adjusted for PDE5I use and age (between-group difference, 0.91 daily events [95% CI, 0.56-1.26]; P&#x2009;<&#x2009;.001). TRT increased sexual desire and prostate cancer quality-of-life sexual domain score, and decreased negative affect more than placebo. Erectile function did not change. TRT significantly improved body composition, loaded stair-climbing power, and peak aerobic performance (VO2 peak) compared with placebo.<br/><br/>CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, TRT for 12 weeks in men treated with radical prostatectomy for low-grade prostate cancer significantly improved sexual activity, sexual desire, well-being, body composition, physical function, and aerobic performance compared to placebo without biochemical recurrence. The trial was neither long enough nor large enough to evaluate clinical recurrence or long-term safety; this proof-of-concept trial was essential for rationalizing a larger, long-term study. These findings do not apply to men with high-grade prostate cancer or those treated with androgen deprivation therapy or radiation therapy.<br/><br/>TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03716739.
Consensus

EANO Consensus Statement on Radiation Necrosis

ForPost-cranial-RT pts with a new enhancing lesion, glioma or brain metastases

TL;DRDelphi consensus: 53/57 statements reached ≥80% agreement across 20 experts; perfusion MRI + amino acid PET preferred, bevacizumab for steroid-refractory RN.

Why it mattersRadiation oncology

The dose-volume numbers are the transferable part: V12Gy ~10 cm³ carrying 5-10% symptomatic necrosis in single-fraction SRS, and hypofractionated brain+target V20Gy (3fx) or V24Gy (5fx) <20 cm³ holding RN needing resection under 4%. That is a planning constraint, and it gates the single-session vs hypofractionated choice for larger or eloquent-region metastases.

Monday clinic

For a patient 6-24 months out from SRS or cranial RT with a new enhancing lesion, this supports going to perfusion MRI plus amino acid PET before calling progression; it does not settle mixed lesions, where the panel still points to tissue. The longer read

11 details 5 trials watching

Three-round Delphi. 57 statements drafted after literature review across epidemiology-pathophysiology (n=8), causes (n=10), imaging (n=10), histopathology (n=9), management (n=20), plus an exploratory research set of 8. Consensus prespecified at ≥80% agreement on a 5-point Likert scale.

The voting panel, not patients: 15 volunteers (2 radiation/clinical oncologists, 4 neuro-oncologists, 4 medical oncologists, 2 neurosurgeons, 1 neuropathologist, 1 neuroradiologist, 1 nuclear medicine physician), expanded by 5 more in round 1 (4 neuro-oncologists, 1 radiation/clinical oncologist) to 20 total. Clinically the scope is RN after RT for primary glial or metastatic brain tumors.

RN is called uncommon below EQD2 ~40 Gy (α/β 2 Gy), rising with dose per fraction, total dose and irradiated volume. V12Gy ~10 cm³ carries a 5-10% symptomatic necrosis risk after single-session SRS; for hypofractionated SRT, brain-plus-target V20Gy (3fx) or V24Gy (5fx) <20 cm³ associates with <10% any necrosis and <4% RN requiring resection. Re-irradiation risk stays under 10% at cumulative EQD2 100-110 Gy and reaches up to 25% above 130 Gy.

Consensus reached on 53 of 57 statements after three rounds. Diagnostic and management statements are tabulated separately in the details; the four that failed to reach 80% are not identified in the available text.

ModalitySettingSensitivitySpecificity
T1 contrast-enhanced MRI aloneWHO grade 3-4 glioma68%77%
T1 contrast-enhanced MRI aloneBrain metastases79%76%
DSC rCBVGrade 3-4 glioma87-90%86-88%
DSC rCBVBrain metastases (418 lesions)83%78%
MR spectroscopy Cho/NAAGlioma (455 pts)88%86%
Amino acid PETBrain metastases (~400 pts)82%84%

The document's practical contribution is a decision sequence rather than a new treatment: advanced MRI first, amino acid PET to add confidence, tissue when doubt persists, and treatment triggered only by symptoms of >7 days with increasing severity. Its most consequential position is moving bevacizumab from rescue to an expected next step at a defined steroid threshold (dependence >4 weeks or dexamethasone 8 mg/day), which is a lower bar than many centres apply.

symptomatic cerebral RN after RT for glioma or brain metastases, in centres with perfusion MRI and amino acid PET access
Does not represent spinal or head-and-neck RN, pseudoprogression within the first months after chemoradiation, or the late enlarging cysts after SRT that the panel says are pathogenetically separate.

Agreement percentages measure how a self-selected 20-person European panel voted, and the panel skews neuro-oncology (8 of 20) over radiation oncology (3 of 20) for a complication defined by dose and volume. FET and F-DOPA availability is largely European, so the imaging algorithm's top tier is not reproducible in most centres worldwide. The 4 non-consensus statements are not enumerated in the accessible text, so the reader cannot see where the panel actually split.

Delphi expert-opinion document, no efficacy endpoint. Agreement measured against opinion, not outcomes; authors state absence of Level 1 evidence and call for randomised trials.

📚 Sources · 📄 1 paper
📄 PAPER Duerinck, Johnny; Van Den Bent, Martin; Brandal, Petter et al. · Neuro-Oncology (2026-07)
The European Association for Neuro-oncology (EANO) Consensus Statement on Radiation Necrosis
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Radiation necrosis (RN) complicates neuro-oncological care, mimicking tumor recurrence and lacking high-level evidence for standardized management. Methods A European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) expert panel utilized a three-round Delphi process to create a comprehensive expert opinion document based on the available current scientific evidence. A series of statements, derived from the published literature were created by the experts in each field. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% agreement using a 5-point Likert scale. Results After three rounds among 20 experts that included adaptation of statements, the Delphi process reached a consensus (≥80% agreement) on 53 statements out of 57. RN occurs in 4% to 30% of patients, typically appearing 6 to 24 months after radiotherapy for primary (glial) or metastatic brain tumors. Experts identified perfusion MRI and amino acid PET as the most suitable imaging modalities for differentiation from tumor recurrence. While histopathology remains the gold standard, identifying viable tumor cells in irradiated gliomas is challenging due to overlapping cytological features with reactive glia. For symptomatic management, corticosteroids may be tried, and bevacizumab is recommended for corticosteroid-refractory cases, with evidence suggesting profound efficacy even at low doses. Surgery is considered effective for rapid symptom relief and definitive diagnosis in accessible lesions. Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy (LITT) can be considered an additional treatment option for symptomatic RN. Conclusions Despite the absence of Level 1 evidence, these Delphi-survey-formulated recommendations provide actionable guidance for clinical practice. There is a need for prospective randomized trials focusing on symptomatic RN.