| Literature DB >> 28149931 |
Brian C Baumann1, Paul Sargos2, Libni J Eapen3, Jason A Efstathiou4, Ananya Choudhury5, Amit Bahl6, Vedang Murthy7, Leslie K Ballas8, Valérie Fonteyne9, Pierre M Richaud2, Mohamed S Zaghloul10, John P Christodouleas11.
Abstract
Local-regional recurrence for patients with ≥pT3 disease after radical cystectomy is a significant problem. Chemotherapy has not been shown to reduce the risk of local-regional recurrences in randomized prospective trials, and salvage therapies for local-regional failure are rarely successful. There is promising evidence, particularly from a recent Egyptian NCI trial, that radiation therapy plus chemotherapy can significantly reduce local recurrences compared to chemotherapy alone, and that this improvement in local-regional control may translate to meaningful improvements in disease-free and overall survival with acceptable toxicity. In light of the high rates of local failure following cystectomy for locally advanced disease and the progress that has been made in identifying patients at high risk of failure and the patterns of failure in the pelvis, the NCCN guidelines were revised in 2016 to include post-operative radiotherapy as an option to consider for patients with ≥pT3 disease. Despite advances in our understanding of the problem of local-regional failure after cystectomy and the potential role of adjuvant radiotherapy, the question of whether adjuvant radiotherapy should have a defined role for patients with locally advanced urothelial carcinoma has not yet been determined. The results of the NRG, European, Indian, and Egyptian trials on adjuvant radiotherapy are eagerly awaited. While none of these trials on their own may provide definitive conclusions, their aggregate outcomes will help clarify whether this treatment should have a role in the management of patients with locally advanced bladder cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Adjuvant radiation; bladder cancer; radical cystectomy
Year: 2017 PMID: 28149931 PMCID: PMC5271478 DOI: 10.3233/BLC-160081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bladder Cancer
Fig.1PENN risk stratification for predicting local-regional recurrence after radical cystectomy.
Fig.2(A) Five year cumulative incidence of local-regional failure by location of recurrence for stage ≥pT3 patients. Local-regional failures were defined as recurrences in the pelvic lymph nodes or soft tissues before or within 3 months of evidence of distant failure. The pelvic sidewall nodes are the common iliac, external/internal iliac, and obturator nodes (from top to bottom). The structures in the middle of the pelvis are the presacral nodal region (superiorly) and the cystectomy bed. (B) Five year cumulative incidence of local-regional failure by site for ≥pT3 patients with positive vs. negative surgical margins.
Summary of trials of adjuvant radiation therapy that are currently open or in development
| NRG | GETUG-AFU | Tata Memorial Hospital | Proposed NCRI Trial | University of Ghent | NCI Cairo | |
| Trial Registration ID | NCT02316548 | N/A | NCT02951325 | N/A | NCT02397434 | N/A |
| Stage Eligibility | Includes: pT3b/pT4a/pT4b pN0-2 with negative margins and ≥10 nodes dissected OR High risk: pT3a/pT3b/pT4a/pT4b pN0-2 with <10 nodes dissected and/or positive margins | Includes: One or more of the following: ≥pT3 or pN1-2Excludes: pN3 disease, R1 disease with neobladder diversion | Includes: One or more of the following: ≥pT3 disease, positive lymph nodes (pN+), <10 lymph nodes removed, positive surgical marginsOR cT3-T4 or cN1-3 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy | Includes: One or more of the following: ≥pT3, pelvic nodal disease, or positive surgical margins | Includes: One or more of the following: ≥pT3 and LVI, pT4,<10 lymph nodes removed, positive lymph nodes, or positive surgical margins | Includes: One or more of the following: ≥pT3, grade 3, or pelvic nodal diseaseExcludes: positive surgical margins, <10 lymph nodes removed, non-urothelial histology |
| Excludes: pN3 disease | ||||||
| Primary Endpoint | Pelvic recurrence-free survival (PRFS) | PRFS | PRFS | PRFS and late radiation therapy related side effects at 1 and 2 years | Acute toxicity and feasibility | Event-free survival (EFS) |
| Hypothesis | The 2-year PRFS is estimated to be 70% with standard treatment Adjuvant RT will improve the 2-year PRFS to 85% | The 3-year PRFS is estimated to be 72% with standard treatment Adjuvant RT will improve the 3-year PRFS to 87% | The 2-year PRFS for high-risk bladder cancer patients is estimated to be 70% with standard treatment Adjuvant RT will improve the 2 year PRFS to 85% | The 2-year PRFS is estimated to be 75% with standard treatment Adjuvant RT will improve the 3-year PRFS to 85% | No more than 25% ± 10% of the patients will develop severe toxicity (i.e. grade ≥3 RTOG toxicity requiring hospitalization and/or surgical re-intervention) after adjuvant EBRT | The 2-year EFS is estimated to be 50% without adjuvant radiation Adjuvant RT will improve the 2-year EFS to 70% |
| Stratification | 1. neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant chemotherapy | 1. High risk (pT3b/pT4a/pT4b pN0-2 with negative margins and 10 or more nodes dissected) vs. very High risk (pT3a/pT3b/pT4a/pT4b pN0-2 with less than 10 nodes dissected and/or with positive margins) | 1. neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant chemotherapy | 1. treating center | N/A | N/A |
| 2. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy | ||||||
| Randomization | 1 : 1 | 1 : 3 | 1 : 1 | 1 : 1 | Single arm | 1 : 1 |
| Accrual goal | 185 | 115 | 153 | 390 | 76 | 182 |
| CTVs | Per the international consensus (Baumann et al. IJROBP, 2016) | Per the international consensus (Baumann et al. IJROBP, 2016) | Per the international consensus (Baumann et al. IJROBP, 2016) | Per the international consensus (Baumann et al. IJROBP, 2016) | Pelvic lymph nodal regions for negative margin patients plus cystectomy for positive margin patients | Per the international consensus (Baumann et al. IJROBP, 2016) |
| Dose fractionation | IMRT radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 for both R0 and R1 patients | IMRT radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 for both R0 and R1 patients | IMRT radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 for R0 and 54 Gy/28 as simultaneous in-field boost for R1 patients (cystectomy bed boost) | IMRT radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 for both R0 and R1 patients | IMRT radiotherapy 50 Gy/25 for both R0 and R1 patients. Simultaneous integrated boost to 64 Gy for positive lymph nodes | IMRT or 3D radiotherapy 50 Gy/25 |