Literature DB >> 25601342

Standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent and consolidation carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without cetuximab for patients with stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (RTOG 0617): a randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study.

Jeffrey D Bradley1, Rebecca Paulus2, Ritsuko Komaki3, Gregory Masters4, George Blumenschein3, Steven Schild5, Jeffrey Bogart6, Chen Hu2, Kenneth Forster7, Anthony Magliocco7, Vivek Kavadi8, Yolanda I Garces9, Samir Narayan10, Puneeth Iyengar11, Cliff Robinson12, Raymond B Wynn13, Christopher Koprowski14, Joanne Meng15, Jonathan Beitler16, Rakesh Gaur17, Walter Curran16, Hak Choy11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare overall survival after standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.
METHODS: In this open-label randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study in 185 institutions in the USA and Canada, we enrolled patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0-1, adequate pulmonary function, and no evidence of supraclavicular or contralateral hilar adenopathy. We randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) patients to receive either 60 Gy (standard dose), 74 Gy (high dose), 60 Gy plus cetuximab, or 74 Gy plus cetuximab. All patients also received concurrent chemotherapy with 45 mg/m(2) paclitaxel and carboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy separated by 3 weeks were given consisting of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (AUC 6). Randomisation was done with permuted block randomisation methods, stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histology; treatment group assignments were not masked. Radiation dose was prescribed to the planning target volume and was given in 2 Gy daily fractions with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The use of four-dimensional CT and image-guided radiation therapy were encouraged but not necessary. For patients assigned to receive cetuximab, 400 mg/m(2) cetuximab was given on day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m(2), and was continued through consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00533949.
FINDINGS: Between Nov 27, 2007, and Nov 22, 2011, 166 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard-dose chemoradiotherapy, 121 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy, 147 to standard-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab, and 110 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab. Median follow-up for the radiotherapy comparison was 22.9 months (IQR 27.5-33.3). Median overall survival was 28.7 months (95% CI 24.1-36.9) for patients who received standard-dose radiotherapy and 20.3 months (17.7-25.0) for those who received high-dose radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.09-1.76; p=0.004). Median follow-up for the cetuximab comparison was 21.3 months (IQR 23.5-29.8). Median overall survival in patients who received cetuximab was 25.0 months (95% CI 20.2-30.5) compared with 24.0 months (19.8-28.6) in those who did not (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84-1.35; p=0.29). Both the radiation-dose and cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries. We recorded no statistical differences in grade 3 or worse toxic effects between radiotherapy groups. By contrast, the use of cetuximab was associated with a higher rate of grade 3 or worse toxic effects (205 [86%] of 237 vs 160 [70%] of 228 patients; p<0.0001). There were more treatment-related deaths in the high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab groups (radiotherapy comparison: eight vs three patients; cetuximab comparison: ten vs five patients). There were no differences in severe pulmonary events between treatment groups. Severe oesophagitis was more common in patients who received high-dose chemoradiotherapy than in those who received standard-dose treatment (43 [21%] of 207 patients vs 16 [7%] of 217 patients; p<0.0001).
INTERPRETATION: 74 Gy radiation given in 2 Gy fractions with concurrent chemotherapy was not better than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and might be potentially harmful. Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no benefit in overall survival for these patients. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25601342      PMCID: PMC4419359          DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71207-0

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


  18 in total

1.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  A comment on futility monitoring.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2002-08

3.  Results of a Phase I trial of concurrent chemotherapy and escalating doses of radiation for unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Steven E Schild; William L McGinnis; David Graham; Shauna Hillman; Tom R Fitch; Donald Northfelt; Yolanda I Garces; Homayoon Shahidi; Loren K Tschetter; Paul L Schaefer; Alex Adjei; James Jett
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  EGFR expression as a predictor of survival for first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: analysis of data from the phase 3 FLEX study.

Authors:  Robert Pirker; Jose R Pereira; Joachim von Pawel; Maciej Krzakowski; Rodryg Ramlau; Keunchil Park; Filippo de Marinis; Wilfried E E Eberhardt; Luis Paz-Ares; Stephan Störkel; Karl-Maria Schumacher; Anja von Heydebreck; Ilhan Celik; Kenneth J O'Byrne
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  The randomization and stratification of patients to clinical trials.

Authors:  M Zelen
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1974-09

6.  Repeated assessment of results in clinical trials of cancer treatment.

Authors:  J L Haybittle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1971-10       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration.

Authors:  N Mantel
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep       Date:  1966-03

8.  Higher biologically effective dose of radiotherapy is associated with improved outcomes for locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma treated with chemoradiation: an analysis of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

Authors:  Mitchell Machtay; Kyounghwa Bae; Benjamin Movsas; Rebecca Paulus; Elizabeth M Gore; Ritsuko Komaki; Kathy Albain; William T Sause; Walter J Curran
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Phase II study of cetuximab in combination with chemoradiation in patients with stage IIIA/B non-small-cell lung cancer: RTOG 0324.

Authors:  George R Blumenschein; Rebecca Paulus; Walter J Curran; Francisco Robert; Frank Fossella; Maria Werner-Wasik; Roy S Herbst; Philip O Doescher; Hak Choy; Ritsuko Komaki
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Sequential vs. concurrent chemoradiation for stage III non-small cell lung cancer: randomized phase III trial RTOG 9410.

Authors:  Walter J Curran; Rebecca Paulus; Corey J Langer; Ritsuko Komaki; Jin S Lee; Stephen Hauser; Benjamin Movsas; Todd Wasserman; Seth A Rosenthal; Elizabeth Gore; Mitchell Machtay; William Sause; James D Cox
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  576 in total

1.  Characteristics of Participation in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Electronic Data Capture Components of NRG Oncology Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Stephanie L Pugh; Joseph P Rodgers; Katherine A Yeager; Ronald C Chen; Benjamin Movsas; Roseann Bonanni; James Dignam; Deborah W Bruner
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 2.  Blood-based biomarkers for precision medicine in lung cancer: precision radiation therapy.

Authors:  Dirk De Ruysscher; Jianyue Jin; Tim Lautenschlaeger; Jin-Xiong She; Zhongxing Liao; Feng-Ming Spring Kong
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging in precision radiation therapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Hannah Bainbridge; Ahmed Salem; Rob H N Tijssen; Michael Dubec; Andreas Wetscherek; Corinne Van Es; Jose Belderbos; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Fiona McDonald
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12

Review 4.  Radiomics in precision medicine for lung cancer.

Authors:  Julie Constanzo; Lise Wei; Huan-Hsin Tseng; Issam El Naqa
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12

5.  Proton Beam Radiotherapy and Concurrent Chemotherapy for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Final Results of a Phase 2 Study.

Authors:  Joe Y Chang; Vivek Verma; Ming Li; Wencheng Zhang; Ritsuko Komaki; Charles Lu; Pamela K Allen; Zhongxing Liao; James Welsh; Steven H Lin; Daniel Gomez; Melenda Jeter; Michael O'Reilly; Ronald X Zhu; Xiaodong Zhang; Heng Li; Radhe Mohan; John V Heymach; Ara A Vaporciyan; Stephen Hahn; James D Cox
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 6.  Making Checkpoint Inhibitors Part of Treatment of Patients With Locally Advanced Lung Cancers: The Time Is Now.

Authors:  Mark G Kris; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Tiana Kordbacheh; Jamie Chaft; Jia Luo; Anne Tsao; Stephen Swisher
Journal:  Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book       Date:  2020-03

7.  The evolution of proton beam therapy: Current and future status.

Authors:  Xiufang Tian; Kun Liu; Yong Hou; Jian Cheng; Jiandong Zhang
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-11-14

8.  Dose escalation for unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: end of the line?

Authors:  Julian C Hong; Joseph K Salama
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2016-02

9.  Consuming a Ketogenic Diet while Receiving Radiation and Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Lung Cancer and Pancreatic Cancer: The University of Iowa Experience of Two Phase 1 Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Amir Zahra; Melissa A Fath; Emyleigh Opat; Kranti A Mapuskar; Sudershan K Bhatia; Daniel C Ma; Samuel N Rodman; Travis P Snyders; Catherine A Chenard; Julie M Eichenberger-Gilmore; Kellie L Bodeker; Logan Ahmann; Brian J Smith; Sandy A Vollstedt; Heather A Brown; Taher Abu Hejleh; Gerald H Clamon; Daniel J Berg; Luke I Szweda; Douglas R Spitz; John M Buatti; Bryan G Allen
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 10.  Proton Therapy in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Shane Mesko; Daniel Gomez
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2018-11-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.