Ruud C Wortel1, Esther Oomen-de Hoop1, Wilma D Heemsbergen1, Floris J Pos2, Luca Incrocci3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: l.incrocci@erasmusmc.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The phase 3 Hypofractionated Irradiation for Prostate Cancer trial compared hypofractionated radiation therapy with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Similar 5-year relapse-free survival rates were achieved in both groups, but noninferiority of hypofractionation was not confirmed for genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Here, we present the secondary trial endpoint on patient-reported quality of life. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 820 patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer were randomized to hypofractionation (19 fractions of 3.4 Gy) or conventional fractionation (39 fractions of 2.0 Gy). Quality of life was measured using a validated questionnaire, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of LifeQuestionnaire Prostate Cancer 25 module. Subscales (score range, 0-100) on urinary symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, symptoms related to androgen deprivation therapy, sexual function, and sexual activity were analyzed. Changes from baseline of at least 5 points were considered clinically relevant. Inferiority of hypofractionation for separate subscales was rejected if the mean difference in the 3-year incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between treatments was <8.0%. RESULTS: A total of 697 men were eligible for this quality-of-life analysis. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups. At 3-year follow-up, the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration of urinary symptoms was 33% for both treatments (difference 0.49% in favor of conventional fractionation; 90% confidence interval, -7.20% to 8.18%). Such deterioration of gastrointestinal symptoms was reported in 38% of patients receiving hypofractionation versus 36% of patients receiving conventional fractionation (2.03% in favor of conventional fractionation; 90% confidence interval, -6.18% to 10.23%). Therefore, we could not demonstrate noninferiority of hypofractionation for genitourinary and gastrointestinal quality of life. For all other subscales, noninferiority of hypofractionation was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: Noninferiority of the hypofractionated treatment was not demonstrated for genitourinary and gastrointestinal quality of life, and therefore we cannot rule out that relevant differences may exist between both treatments. Noninferiority of hypofractionation was demonstrated for symptoms related to androgen deprivation therapy, sexual activity, and sexual function.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The phase 3 Hypofractionated Irradiation for Prostate Cancer trial compared hypofractionated radiation therapy with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Similar 5-year relapse-free survival rates were achieved in both groups, but noninferiority of hypofractionation was not confirmed for genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Here, we present the secondary trial endpoint on patient-reported quality of life. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 820 patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer were randomized to hypofractionation (19 fractions of 3.4 Gy) or conventional fractionation (39 fractions of 2.0 Gy). Quality of life was measured using a validated questionnaire, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Prostate Cancer 25 module. Subscales (score range, 0-100) on urinary symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, symptoms related to androgen deprivation therapy, sexual function, and sexual activity were analyzed. Changes from baseline of at least 5 points were considered clinically relevant. Inferiority of hypofractionation for separate subscales was rejected if the mean difference in the 3-year incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between treatments was <8.0%. RESULTS: A total of 697 men were eligible for this quality-of-life analysis. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups. At 3-year follow-up, the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration of urinary symptoms was 33% for both treatments (difference 0.49% in favor of conventional fractionation; 90% confidence interval, -7.20% to 8.18%). Such deterioration of gastrointestinal symptoms was reported in 38% of patients receiving hypofractionation versus 36% of patients receiving conventional fractionation (2.03% in favor of conventional fractionation; 90% confidence interval, -6.18% to 10.23%). Therefore, we could not demonstrate noninferiority of hypofractionation for genitourinary and gastrointestinal quality of life. For all other subscales, noninferiority of hypofractionation was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: Noninferiority of the hypofractionated treatment was not demonstrated for genitourinary and gastrointestinal quality of life, and therefore we cannot rule out that relevant differences may exist between both treatments. Noninferiority of hypofractionation was demonstrated for symptoms related to androgen deprivation therapy, sexual activity, and sexual function.
Authors: Dalia Ahmad Khalil; Danny Jazmati; Dirk Geismar; Jörg Wulff; Christian Bäumer; Paul Heinz Kramer; Theresa Steinmeier; Stefanie Schulze Schleitthoff; Sandija Plaude; Martin Bischoff; Stephan Tschirdewahn; Boris Hadaschik; Beate Timmermann Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: John N Staffurth; Joanne S Haviland; Anna Wilkins; Isabel Syndikus; Vincent Khoo; David Bloomfield; Chris Parker; John Logue; Christopher Scrase; Alison Birtle; Zafar Malik; Miguel Panades; Chinnamani Eswar; John Graham; Martin Russell; Catherine Ferguson; Joe M O'Sullivan; Clare A Cruickshank; David Dearnaley; Emma Hall Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2021-09-03
Authors: Antonio Lazo; Alejandro de la Torre-Luque; Gregorio Arregui; Daniel Rivas; Ana Serradilla; Joaquin Gómez; Francisca Jurado; María Isabel Núñez; Escarlata López Journal: Biology (Basel) Date: 2022-03-11