F Casas1, I Henríquez2, A Bejar3, X Maldonado4, A Alvarez5, C González-Sansegundo5, A Boladeras6, F Ferrer6, A Hervás7, I Herruzo8, M Caro9, I Rodriguez10, C Ferrer11. 1. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Clínic, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain. fcasas@clinic.cat. 2. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Sant Joan, Reus, Spain. 3. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain. 4. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Vall d'Hebrón, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain. 6. Radiation Oncology Department, Duran y Reynals, Hospitalet Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. 7. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain. 8. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Carlos Haya, Málaga, Spain. 9. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain. 10. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital la Paz, Madrid, Spain. 11. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Provincial, Castellón, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We compared biochemical control and quality of life with intermittent (6 months) versus continuous (36 months) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a non-inferiority randomized phase 3 trial in patients with biochemical failure (BF) afterexternal beam radical radiotherapy (EBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were stratified according to the Gleason score (GS) and were classified as low risk with a GS < 6 and 7 (3 + 4) and high risk with a GS of 7 (4 + 3) and >7. Patients were followed with PSA determinations and quality-of-life assessments (QLQ C-30 and QLQ PR-25) every 6 months for a period of 3 years. BF after radiation was defined as a PSA level of nadir +2 ng/ml. Disease progression (DP) after ADT was defined as PSA ≥4 ng/ml (BF) and/or metastases. RESULTS:Seventy-seven patients were included in this multicenter phase 3 trial from 2005 to 2009. Thirty-eight and 39 patients were included in the intermittent and continuous groups, respectively. The median follow-up for both groups was 48 months (40-68). DP after ADT in the intermittent group was seen in three patients (distant metastases in one patient) versus 0 in the continuous group. The QLQ-C30 and QLQ PR-25 scores did not show any statistically difference between the two ADT groups. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were seen in DP and QLQ between intermittent (6 months) and continuous (36 months) ADT in patients with BF after EBRT.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We compared biochemical control and quality of life with intermittent (6 months) versus continuous (36 months) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a non-inferiority randomized phase 3 trial in patients with biochemical failure (BF) after external beam radical radiotherapy (EBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients were stratified according to the Gleason score (GS) and were classified as low risk with a GS < 6 and 7 (3 + 4) and high risk with a GS of 7 (4 + 3) and >7. Patients were followed with PSA determinations and quality-of-life assessments (QLQ C-30 and QLQ PR-25) every 6 months for a period of 3 years. BF after radiation was defined as a PSA level of nadir +2 ng/ml. Disease progression (DP) after ADT was defined as PSA ≥4 ng/ml (BF) and/or metastases. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were included in this multicenter phase 3 trial from 2005 to 2009. Thirty-eight and 39 patients were included in the intermittent and continuous groups, respectively. The median follow-up for both groups was 48 months (40-68). DP after ADT in the intermittent group was seen in three patients (distant metastases in one patient) versus 0 in the continuous group. The QLQ-C30 and QLQ PR-25 scores did not show any statistically difference between the two ADT groups. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were seen in DP and QLQ between intermittent (6 months) and continuous (36 months) ADT in patients with BF after EBRT.
Entities:
Keywords:
External beam radiotherapy; Intermittent androgen deprivation therapy; Prostate cancer
Authors: Mark K Buyyounouski; Alexandra L Hanlon; Debra F Eisenberg; Eric M Horwitz; Steven J Feigenberg; Robert G Uzzo; Alan Pollack Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-09-19 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Johan F Langenhuijsen; Dirk Badhauser; Berthold Schaaf; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; J Alfred Witjes; Peter F A Mulders Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2011-05-10 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: B A Mahal; M-H Chen; C L Bennett; M W Kattan; O Sartor; K Stein; A V D'Amico; P L Nguyen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Maha Hussain; Catherine M Tangen; Donna L Berry; Celestia S Higano; E David Crawford; Glenn Liu; George Wilding; Stephen Prescott; Subramanian Kanaga Sundaram; Eric Jay Small; Nancy Ann Dawson; Bryan J Donnelly; Peter M Venner; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Paul F Schellhammer; David I Quinn; Derek Raghavan; Benjamin Ely; Carol M Moinpour; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Ian M Thompson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Claude Schulman; Erik Cornel; Vsevolod Matveev; Teuvo L Tammela; Jan Schraml; Henri Bensadoun; Wolfgang Warnack; Raj Persad; Marek Salagierski; Francisco Gómez Veiga; Edwina Baskin-Bey; Beatriz López; Bertrand Tombal Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Xavier Bonfill; Ingrid Arevalo-Rodriguez; Laura Martínez García; Maria Jesús Quintana; Diana Buitrago-Garcia; Diego Lobos Urbina; José Antonio Cordero Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 3.989