Literature DB >> 25130995

Short-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy versus intermediate-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy, with or without zoledronic acid, in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (TROG 03.04 RADAR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 factorial trial.

James W Denham1, David Joseph2, David S Lamb3, Nigel A Spry2, Gillian Duchesne4, John Matthews5, Chris Atkinson6, Keen-Hun Tai5, David Christie7, Lizbeth Kenny8, Sandra Turner9, Nirdosh Kumar Gogna10, Terry Diamond11, Brett Delahunt12, Christopher Oldmeadow13, John Attia14, Allison Steigler14.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether 18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy, with or without 18 months of zoledronic acid, is more effective than 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression plus radiotherapy with or without zoledronic acid.
METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, 2 × 2 factorial trial in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (either T2a N0 M0 prostatic adenocarcinomas with prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥10 μg/L and a Gleason score of ≥7, or T2b-4 N0 M0 tumours regardless of PSA and Gleason score). We randomly allocated patients by computer-generated minimisation--stratified by centre, baseline PSA, tumour stage, Gleason score, and use of a brachytherapy boost--to one of four groups in a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Patients in the control group were treated with neoadjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly) for 6 months (short-term) and radiotherapy alone (designated STAS); this procedure was either followed by another 12 months of androgen suppression with leuprorelin (intermediate-term; ITAS) or accompanied by 18 months of zoledronic acid (4 mg every 3 months for 18 months, intravenously; STAS plus zoledronic acid) or by both (ITAS plus zoledronic acid). The primary endpoint was prostate cancer-specific mortality. This analysis represents the first, preplanned assessment of oncological endpoints, 5 years after treatment. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00193856.
FINDINGS: Between Oct 20, 2003, and Aug 15, 2007, 1071 men were randomly assigned to STAS (n=268), STAS plus zoledronic acid (n=268), ITAS (n=268), and ITAS plus zoledronic acid (n=267). Median follow-up was 7·4 years (IQR 6·5-8·4). Cumulative incidences of prostate cancer-specific mortality were 4·1% (95% CI 2·2-7·0) in the STAS group, 7·8% (4·9-11·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 7·4% (4·6-11·0) in the ITAS group, and 4·3% (2·3-7·3) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group. Cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 17·0% (13·0-22·1), 18·9% (14·6-24·2), 19·4% (15·0-24·7), and 13·9% (10·3-18·8), respectively. Neither prostate cancer-specific mortality nor all-cause mortality differed between control and experimental groups. Cumulative incidence of PSA progression was 34·2% (28·6-39·9) in the STAS group, 39·6% (33·6-45·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 29·2% (23·8-34·8) in the ITAS group, and 26·0% (20·8-31·4) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group. Compared with STAS, no difference was noted in PSA progression with ITAS or STAS plus zoledronic acid; however, ITAS plus zoledronic acid reduced PSA progression (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·53-0·95; p=0·021). Cumulative incidence of local progression was 4·1% (2·2-7·0) in the STAS group, 6·1% (3·7-9·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 1·5% (0·5-3·7) in the ITAS group, and 3·4% (1·7-6·1) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group; no differences were noted between groups. Cumulative incidences of bone progression were 7·5% (4·8-11·1), 14·6% (10·6-19·2), 8·4% (5·5-12·2), and 7·6% (4·8-11·2), respectively. Compared with STAS, STAS plus zoledronic acid increased the risk of bone progression (SHR 1·90, 95% CI 1·14-3·17; p=0·012), but no differences were noted with the other two groups. Cumulative incidence of distant progression was 14·7% (10·7-19·2) in the STAS group, 17·3% (13·0-22·1) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 14·2% (10·3-18·7) in the ITAS group, and 11·1% (7·6-15·2) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group; no differences were recorded between groups. Cumulative incidence of secondary therapeutic intervention was 25·6% (20·5-30·9), 28·9% (23·5-34·5), 20·7% (16·1-25·9), and 15·3% (11·3-20·0), respectively. Compared with STAS, ITAS plus zoledronic acid reduced the need for secondary therapeutic intervention (SHR 0·67, 95% CI 0·48-0·95; p=0·024); no differences were noted with the other two groups. An interaction between trial factors was recorded for Gleason score; therefore, we did pairwise comparisons between all groups. Post-hoc analyses suggested that the reductions in PSA progression and decreased need for secondary therapeutic intervention with ITAS plus zoledronic acid were restricted to tumours with a Gleason score of 8-10, and that ITAS was better than STAS in tumours with a Gleason score of 7 or lower. Long-term morbidity and quality-of-life scores were not affected adversely by 18 months of androgen suppression or zoledronic acid.
INTERPRETATION: Compared with STAS, ITAS plus zoledronic acid was more effective for treatment of prostate cancers with a Gleason score of 8-10, and ITAS alone was effective for tumours with a Gleason score of 7 or lower. Nevertheless, these findings are based on secondary endpoint data and post-hoc analyses and must be regarded cautiously. Long- term follow-up is necessary, as is external validation of the interaction between zoledronic acid and Gleason score. STAS plus zoledronic acid can be ruled out as a potential therapeutic option. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, Abbott Pharmaceuticals Australia, New Zealand Health Research Council, New Zealand Cancer Society, University of Newcastle (Australia), Calvary Health Care (Calvary Mater Newcastle Radiation Oncology Fund), Hunter Medical Research Institute, Maitland Cancer Appeal, Cancer Standards Institute New Zealand.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25130995     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70328-6

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


  33 in total

Review 1.  Trial Watch: Immunotherapy plus radiation therapy for oncological indications.

Authors:  Erika Vacchelli; Norma Bloy; Fernando Aranda; Aitziber Buqué; Isabelle Cremer; Sandra Demaria; Alexander Eggermont; Silvia Chiara Formenti; Wolf Hervé Fridman; Jitka Fucikova; Jérôme Galon; Radek Spisek; Eric Tartour; Laurence Zitvogel; Guido Kroemer; Lorenzo Galluzzi
Journal:  Oncoimmunology       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 8.110

2.  The STAMPEDE trial: paradigm-changing data through innovative trial design.

Authors:  Bradley C Carthon; Emmanuel S Antonarakis
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.241

Review 3.  Bone antiresorptive agents in the treatment of bone metastases associated with solid tumours or multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Evangelos Terpos; Cyrille B Confavreux; Philippe Clézardin
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2015-10-07

4.  Prostate cancer: androgen suppression duration and zoledronic acid: under the RADAR.

Authors:  Lisa Hutchinson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Prostate cancer: Androgen suppression duration and zoledronic acid: under the RADAR.

Authors:  Lisa Hutchinson
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 6.  Biochemical Changes in the Niche Following Tumor Cell Invasion.

Authors:  A M Decker; F C Cackowski; Y Jung; R S Taichman
Journal:  J Cell Biochem       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 4.429

7.  Long-term outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy under an early salvage policy for patients with T3-T4N0M0 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Takashi Mizowaki; Yoshiki Norihisa; Kenji Takayama; Itaru Ikeda; Haruo Inokuchi; Kiyonao Nakamura; Tomomi Kamba; Takahiro Inoue; Toshiyuki Kamoto; Osamu Ogawa; Masahiro Hiraoka
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-04       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Time Interval to Biochemical Failure as a Surrogate End Point in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Randomized Trial NRG/RTOG 9202.

Authors:  James J Dignam; Daniel A Hamstra; Herbert Lepor; David Grignon; Harmar Brereton; Adam Currey; Seth Rosenthal; Kenneth L Zeitzer; Varagur M Venkatesan; Eric M Horwitz; Thomas M Pisansky; Howard M Sandler
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-12-07       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Clinical and translational pharmacology of drugs for the prevention and treatment of bone metastases and cancer-induced bone loss.

Authors:  Maria Rita Dionísio; André Mansinho; Catarina Abreu; Joana Cavaco-Silva; Sandra Casimiro; Luís Costa
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 10.  The very-high-risk prostate cancer: a contemporary update.

Authors:  R Mano; J Eastham; O Yossepowitch
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 5.554

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.