IMPORTANCE Complete metastatic ablation of oligometastatic prostate cancer may provide an alternative to early initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). OBJECTIVE To determine if stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) improves oncologic outcomes in men with oligometastatic prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Observation vs Stereotactic Ablative Radiation for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer (ORIOLE) phase 2 randomized study accrued participants from 3 US radiation treatment facilities affiliated with a university hospital from May 2016 to March 2018 with a data cutoff date of May 20, 2019, for analysis. Of 80 men screened, 54 men with recurrent hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and 1 to 3 metastases detectable by conventional imaging who had not received ADT within 6 months of enrollment or 3 or more years total were randomized. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive SABR or observation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was progression at 6 months by prostate-specific antigen level increase, progression detected by conventional imaging, symptomatic progression, ADT initiation for any reason, or death. Predefined secondary outcomes were toxic effects of SABR, local control at 6 months with SABR, progression-free survival, Brief Pain Inventory (Short Form)-measured quality of life, and concordance between conventional imaging and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted positron emission tomography in the identification of metastatic disease. RESULTS In the 54 men randomized, the median (range) age was 68 (61-70) years for patients allocated to SABR and 68 (64-76) years for those allocated to observation. Progression at 6 months occurred in 7 of 36 patients (19%) receiving SABR and 11 of 18 patients (61%) undergoing observation (P = .005). Treatment with SABR improved median progression-free survival (not reached vs 5.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11-0.81; P = .002). Total consolidation of PSMA radiotracer-avid disease decreased the risk of new lesions at 6 months (16% vs 63%; P = .006). No toxic effects of grade 3 or greater were observed. T-cell receptor sequencing identified significant increased clonotypic expansion following SABR and correlation between baseline clonality and progression with SABR only (0.082085 vs 0.026051; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Treatment with SABR for oligometastatic prostate cancer improved outcomes and was enhanced by total consolidation of disease identified by PSMA-targeted positron emission tomography. SABR induced a systemic immune response, and baseline immune phenotype and tumor mutation status may predict the benefit from SABR. These results underline the importance of prospective randomized investigation of the oligometastatic state with integrated imaging and biological correlates.

Purpose Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a recognized target for imaging prostate cancer. Here we present initial safety, biodistribution, and radiation dosimetry results with [18F]DCFPyL, a second-generation fluorine-18-labeled small-molecule PSMA inhibitor, in patients with prostate cancer. Procedures Biodistribution was evaluated using sequential positron-emission tomography (PET) scans in nine patients with prostate cancer. Time-activity curves from the most avid tumor foci were determined. The radiation dose to selected organs was estimated using OLINDA/EXM. Results No major radiotracer-specific adverse events were observed. Physiologic accumulation was observed in known sites of PSMA expression. Accumulation in putative sites of prostate cancer was observed (SUVmax up to >100, and tumor-to-blood ratios up to >50). The effective radiation dose from [18F]DCFPyL was 0.0139 mGy/MBq or 5 mGy (0.5 rem) from an injected dose of 370 MBq (10 mCi). Conclusions [18F]DCFPyL is safe with biodistribution as expected, and its accumulation is high in presumed primary and metastatic foci. The radiation dose from [18F]DCFPyL is similar to that from other PET radiotracers.

As PSMA-targeted PET is expected to be evaluated in larger prospective trials, the dissemination of potential diagnostic pitfalls and the biologic underpinning of those findings will be of increased importance.

No abstract