| Literature DB >> 32461298 |
Shaista Hafeez1,2, Emma Patel3, Amanda Webster3, Karole Warren-Oseni4,2, Vibeke Hansen5, Helen McNair4,2, Elizabeth Miles3, Rebecca Lewis6, Emma Hall6, Robert Huddart4,2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are unfit and unsuitable for standard radical treatment with cystectomy or daily radiotherapy present a large unmet clinical need. Untreated, they suffer high cancer specific mortality and risk significant disease-related local symptoms. Hypofractionated radiotherapy (delivering higher doses in fewer fractions/visits) is a potential treatment solution but could be compromised by the mobile nature of the bladder, resulting in target misses in a significant proportion of fractions. Adaptive 'plan of the day' image-guided radiotherapy delivery may improve the precision and accuracy of treatment. We aim to demonstrate within a randomised multicentre phase II trial feasibility of plan of the day hypofractionated bladder radiotherapy delivery with acceptable rates of toxicity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with T2-T4aN0M0 MIBC receiving 36 Gy in 6-weekly fractions are randomised (1:1) between treatment delivered using a single-standard plan or adaptive radiotherapy using a library of three plans (small, medium and large). A cone beam CT taken prior to each treatment is used to visualise the anatomy and select the most appropriate plan depending on the bladder shape and size. A comprehensive radiotherapy quality assurance programme has been instituted to ensure standardisation of radiotherapy planning and delivery. The primary endpoint is to exclude >30% acute grade >3 non-genitourinary toxicity at 3 months for adaptive radiotherapy in patients who received >1 fraction (p0=0.7, p1=0.9, α=0.05, β=0.2). Secondary endpoints include local disease control, symptom control, late toxicity, overall survival, patient-reported outcomes and proportion of fractions benefiting from adaptive planning. Target recruitment is 62 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by the London-Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee (13/LO/1350). The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals, conference presentations and submission to regulatory authorities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01810757. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: bladder disorders; oncology; radiation oncology; radiotherapy; urological tumours
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32461298 PMCID: PMC7259864 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Trial schema. RTOG, Radiation TherapyOncology Group.
Schedule of assessments
| Visit/assessment | Prerandomisation | Up to 14 days pretreatment | On treatment (before each fraction) | 4 weeks after completion of radiotherapy | 3 months after completion of radiotherapy | 6 months after completion of radiotherapy | 12 months after completion of radiotherapy | 24 months after completion of radiotherapy | Annually thereafter |
| Histological confirmation of bladder cancer | X | ||||||||
| Radiological assessment of bladder cancer (minimum CT abdomen and pelvis and chest X-ray) | X* | ||||||||
| Acute toxicity assessment (CTCAE V.4) | | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Full blood count, urea and electrolytes | X | X† | |||||||
| Patient-reported outcomes questionnaire (IBDQ, KHQ and EQ5D) | X | X‡ | X | X | |||||
| Cystoscopy under general anaesthetic with tumor bed biopsy | X | ||||||||
| Late toxicity assessment (CTCAE V.4 and RTOG) | X | X | X | ||||||
| Flexible cystoscopy with visual inspection of tumor bed | X | X | |||||||
| Assessment of disease status | X | X |
*Baseline radiological assessment should take place ideally within 4 weeks and within a maximum of 6 weeks prior to randomisation.
†Full blood count, urea and electrolytes prior to fractions 2, 4 and 6 only.
‡PRO questionnaire at fraction 6 only.
CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; IBDQ, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire; KHQ, King’s Health Questionnaire; RTOG, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.
Clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) expansion details
| Patient randomisation | CTV to PTV expansion (cm) | ||||
| Laterally | Anteriorly | Posteriorly | Superiorly | Inferiorly | |
| Standard plan | |||||
| PTV standard | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Adaptive plan | |||||
| PTV small | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| PTV medium | 0.5 | 1.5 | 1 | 1.5 | 0.5 |
| PTV large | 0.8 | 2 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 0.8 |
Target volume constraints
| Dose constraints | Optimal | Mandatory |
| PTV D98% | ≥95% of prescribed dose | ≥90% of prescribed dose |
| PTV D50% | ±1% of prescribed dose | – |
| PTV D2% | ≤105% of prescribed dose | ≤107% of prescribed dose |
| Normal tissue D1cc | – | ≤110% of prescribed dose |
PTV D98% is the dose received by 98% of planning target volume (PTV).
PTV D50% is the dose received by 50% of PTV.
PTV D2% is the dose received by 2% of PTV.
Normal tissue D1cc is the dose received by 1 cm3 of normal tissue outside the PTV.
Organ at risk dose constraint guide
| Organ at risk | Constraint* | ||
| Dose level | Optimal | Mandatory | |
| Rectum | 17 Gy | 50% | 80% |
| 28 Gy | 20% | 60% | |
| 33 Gy | 15% | 50% | |
| 36 Gy | 5% | 30% | |
| Other bowel | V25 | 139 cm3 | 208 cm3 |
| V28 | 122 cm3 | 183 cm3 | |
| V31 | 105 cm3 | 157cm3 | |
| V33 | 84 cm3 | 126 cm3 | |
| V36 | 26 cm3 | 39 cm3 | |
| Femoral heads | 28 Gy | – | 50% |
*The constraints provided serve only as a guide with recommendation that the optimal constraints particularly for other bowel should be met for the small plan and mandatory constraints should be met for medium plan.