What is the best treatment approach for a patient with early-stage prostate cancer, classified as cT1c N0 (clinical tumor stage 1c, no regional lymph node involvement) with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease and an initial Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) level of 5.8, considering Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) followed by Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT)?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 21, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Treatment of cT1c N0 Unfavorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer with SBRT and ADT

Yes, you can treat this patient with SBRT followed by short-term ADT (4-6 months), as this approach is explicitly recommended by current European guidelines for unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. 1

Guideline-Based Recommendation

The 2024 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR guidelines provide a weak recommendation to offer ultrahypofractionated IMRT/IGRT or SBRT using either 36.25 Gy (40 Gy to the prostate) in 5 fractions or 42.7 Gy in 7 fractions delivered on alternate days for intermediate-risk disease. 1 This should be combined with short-term ADT (4-6 months) for unfavorable intermediate-risk patients. 1

Why This Approach Works

  • SBRT has demonstrated superior outcomes in unfavorable intermediate-risk disease: A large propensity-weighted analysis of 28,028 patients showed that SBRT without ADT was associated with improved overall survival compared to conventional radiotherapy with ADT (HR 0.81,95% CI 0.67-0.99, P=0.04). 2

  • The PSA of 5.8 ng/mL is favorable: This relatively low PSA within the intermediate-risk range suggests better prognosis, though the "unfavorable" designation (likely due to Gleason 3+4 with >50% cores positive, or Gleason 4+3, or multiple intermediate-risk factors) still warrants ADT addition. 1, 3, 4

  • Short-term ADT improves outcomes: Multiple randomized trials (TROG 9601, DFCI 95096, RTOG 8610) demonstrated cancer-specific survival benefit when 4-6 months of ADT is added to radiotherapy in intermediate-risk disease. 1

Specific Treatment Protocol

SBRT Dosing Options

Choose one of these evidence-based regimens:

  • 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions (or 40 Gy to prostate with margin reduction) delivered on alternate days 1
  • 42.7 Gy in 7 fractions delivered on alternate days 1

ADT Duration and Timing

  • Duration: 4-6 months total 1
  • Timing: Neoadjuvant and concurrent with SBRT is the most common approach, though the exact timing remains somewhat flexible 1, 5
  • Agent options: LHRH agonist (with antiandrogen cover to prevent flare) or LHRH antagonist 1

Critical Caveats and Pitfalls

Patient Selection Matters

  • Good urinary function is essential: SBRT can exacerbate obstructive symptoms, so patients with significant baseline lower urinary tract symptoms may be better candidates for surgery. 1, 6
  • Confirm "unfavorable" classification: Ensure the patient truly has unfavorable features (Gleason 4+3, or >50% positive cores, or multiple intermediate-risk factors) rather than favorable intermediate-risk disease, as this affects ADT necessity. 3, 4

Alternative Approaches to Consider

  • Brachytherapy boost: For unfavorable intermediate-risk patients with good urinary function, HDR or LDR brachytherapy boost combined with IMRT/VMAT plus short-term ADT (4-6 months) is an alternative option with a weak recommendation. 1
  • Conventional dose-escalated RT: IMRT/VMAT with 76-78 Gy or moderate hypofractionation (60 Gy/20 fx or 70 Gy/28 fx) combined with short-term ADT has a strong recommendation and longer follow-up data. 1

Evidence Strength Considerations

  • SBRT carries only a weak recommendation in the 2024 EAU guidelines, reflecting that while safe and effective, it has shorter follow-up data compared to conventional fractionation. 1
  • No level 1 evidence exists for SBRT specifically in unfavorable intermediate-risk disease with long-term oncologic outcomes, though emerging data is promising. 5, 2
  • Pelvic nodal irradiation is NOT standard with SBRT for intermediate-risk disease; only the prostate should be treated. 5

Expected Outcomes and Monitoring

Biochemical Control

  • 2-year biochemical control: 82-100% 5
  • 3-year biochemical control: 56-100% 5
  • PSA should reach ≤1.0 ng/mL within 16 months after completion of treatment 6, 7

Toxicity Expectations

  • Acute GU toxicity (Grade 2+): 0-89% (highly variable by technique) 5
  • Chronic GU toxicity (Grade 2+): 2-56.7% 5
  • Acute GI toxicity (Grade 2+): 0-18% 5
  • Chronic GI toxicity (Grade 2+): 0-40% 5

Follow-up Schedule

  • PSA every 6 months for first 5 years, then annually 7
  • Biochemical recurrence defined as: PSA rise ≥2 ng/mL above nadir 7

When NOT to Use This Approach

Do not offer SBRT if:

  • Patient has significant baseline obstructive urinary symptoms (consider surgery instead) 6
  • Patient has favorable intermediate-risk disease with life expectancy >10 years and prefers active surveillance (this is a reasonable option for highly selected favorable intermediate-risk patients) 1, 3
  • Patient has cribriform or intraductal histology (these patients should be excluded from less aggressive approaches) 1

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Guideline

Prostate Cancer Management

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Gleason 3+4 Prostate Cancer Treatment Options

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.