Literature DB >> 17482880

Escalated-dose versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial.

David P Dearnaley1, Matthew R Sydes, John D Graham, Edwin G Aird, David Bottomley, Richard A Cowan, Robert A Huddart, Chakiath C Jose, John Hl Matthews, Jeremy Millar, A Rollo Moore, Rachel C Morgan, J Martin Russell, Christopher D Scrase, Richard J Stephens, Isabel Syndikus, Mahesh K B Parmar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In men with localised prostate cancer, conformal radiotherapy (CFRT) could deliver higher doses of radiation than does standard-dose conventional radical external-beam radiotherapy, and could improve long-term efficacy, potentially at the cost of increased toxicity. We aimed to present the first analyses of effectiveness from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial.
METHODS: The MRC RT01 trial included 843 men with localised prostate cancer who were randomly assigned to standard-dose CFRT or escalated-dose CFRT, both administered with neoadjuvant androgen suppression. Primary endpoints were biochemical-progression-free survival (bPFS), freedom from local progression, metastases-free survival, overall survival, and late toxicity scores. The toxicity scores were measured with questionnaires for physicians and patients that included the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), the Late Effects on Normal Tissue: Subjective/Objective/Management (LENT/SOM) scales, and the University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA PCI) scales. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered at the Current Controlled Trials website http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN47772397.
FINDINGS: Between January, 1998, and December, 2002, 843 men were randomly assigned to escalated-dose CFRT (n=422) or standard-dose CFRT (n=421). In the escalated group, the hazard ratio (HR) for bPFS was 0.67 (95% CI 0.53-0.85, p=0.0007). We noted 71% bPFS (108 cumulative events) and 60% bPFS (149 cumulative events) by 5 years in the escalated and standard groups, respectively. HR for clinical progression-free survival was 0.69 (0.47-1.02; p=0.064); local control was 0.65 (0.36-1.18; p=0.16); freedom from salvage androgen suppression was 0.78 (0.57-1.07; p=0.12); and metastases-free survival was 0.74 (0.47-1.18; p=0.21). HR for late bowel toxicity in the escalated group was 1.47 (1.12-1.92) according to the RTOG (grade >/=2) scale; 1.44 (1.16-1.80) according to the LENT/SOM (grade >/=2) scales; and 1.28 (1.03-1.60) according to the UCLA PCI (score >/=30) scale. 33% of the escalated and 24% of the standard group reported late bowel toxicity within 5 years of starting treatment. HR for late bladder toxicity according to the RTOG (grade >/=2) scale was 1.36 (0.90-2.06), but this finding was not supported by the LENT/SOM (grade >/=2) scales (HR 1.07 [0.90-1.29]), nor the UCLA PCI (score >/=30) scale (HR 1.05 [0.81-1.36]).
INTERPRETATION: Escalated-dose CFRT with neoadjuvant androgen suppression seems clinically worthwhile in terms of bPFS, progression-free survival, and decreased use of salvage androgen suppression. This additional efficacy is offset by an increased incidence of longer term adverse events.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17482880     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70143-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  238 in total

Review 1.  Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice.

Authors:  M Teoh; C H Clark; K Wood; S Whitaker; A Nisbet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Comparison of seed brachytherapy or external beam radiotherapy (70 Gy or 74 Gy) in 919 low-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  G Goldner; R Pötter; J J Battermann; M P Schmid; C Kirisits; S Sljivic; M van Vulpen
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 3.621

3.  Consideration of the likely benefit from implementation of prostate image-guided radiotherapy using current margin sizes: a radiobiological analysis.

Authors:  G S J Tudor; Y L Rimmer; T B Nguyen; M A Cowen; S J Thomas
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Be it resolved that in the modern era, the best method for dose escalation is brachytherapy: The con position.

Authors:  D Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 5.  Technological advances in radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mehee Choi; Arthur Y Hung
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  Combining radiation therapy and androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer-a critical review.

Authors:  A Dal Pra; F L Cury; L Souhami
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  Radiation therapy in prostate cancer: a risk-adapted strategy.

Authors:  A J Hayden; C Catton; T Pickles
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.677

8.  SEOM clinical guidelines for treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  José Ángel Arranz Arija; Javier Cassinello Espinosa; Miguel Ángel Climent Durán; Fernando Rivero Herrero
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.405

9.  Radiation therapy to the primary tumor in locally advanced prostate cancer is not "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted".

Authors:  Nicholas G Zaorsky; Mark A Hallman; Marc C Smaldone
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-10

10.  Radiation-induced acid ceramidase confers prostate cancer resistance and tumor relapse.

Authors:  Joseph C Cheng; Aiping Bai; Thomas H Beckham; S Tucker Marrison; Caroline L Yount; Katherine Young; Ping Lu; Anne M Bartlett; Bill X Wu; Barry J Keane; Kent E Armeson; David T Marshall; Thomas E Keane; Michael T Smith; E Ellen Jones; Richard R Drake; Alicja Bielawska; James S Norris; Xiang Liu
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 14.808

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.