Dataset Information

Randomized noninferiority trial of reduced high-dose volume versus standard volume radiation therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: results of the BC2001 trial (CRUK/01/004).

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To test whether reducing radiation dose to uninvolved bladder while maintaining dose to the tumor would reduce side effects without impairing local control in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Methods and materials

In this phase III multicenter trial, 219 patients were randomized to standard whole-bladder radiation therapy (sRT) or reduced high-dose volume radiation therapy (RHDVRT) that aimed to deliver full radiation dose to the tumor and 80% of maximum dose to the uninvolved bladder. Participants were also randomly assigned to receive radiation therapy alone or radiation therapy plus chemotherapy in a partial 2 × 2 factorial design. The primary endpoints for the radiation therapy volume comparison were late toxicity and time to locoregional recurrence (with a noninferiority margin of 10% at 2 years).

Results

Overall incidence of late toxicity was less than predicted, with a cumulative 2-year Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3/4 toxicity rate of 13% (95% confidence interval 8%, 20%) and no statistically significant differences between groups. The difference in 2-year locoregional recurrence free rate (RHDVRT - sRT) was 6.4% (95% confidence interval -7.3%, 16.8%) under an intention to treat analysis and 2.6% (-12.8%, 14.6%) in the "per-protocol" population.

Conclusions

In this study RHDVRT did not result in a statistically significant reduction in late side effects compared with sRT, and noninferiority of locoregional control could not be concluded formally. However, overall low rates of clinically significant toxicity combined with low rates of invasive bladder cancer relapse confirm that (chemo)radiation therapy is a valid option for the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

SUBMITTER: Huddart RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3753507 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeFluorouracil plus cisplatin and radiation twice a day (FCT) is an established chemoradiation (CRT) regimen for selective bladder-sparing treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Gemcitabine and once daily radiation (GD) is a well-supported alternative. The current trial evaluates these regimens.MethodsPatients with cT2-4a muscle-invasive bladder cancer were randomly assigned to FCT or GD. Patients underwent transurethral resection and induction CRT to 40 Gy. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) received consolidation CRT to 64 Gy and others underwent cystectomy. We administered adjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy. The primary end point was the rate of freedom from distant metastasis at 3 years (DMF3). The trial was not statistically powered to compare regimens, but to assess whether either regimen exceeded a DMF3 benchmark of 75%. Toxicity and efficacy end points, including CR and bladder-intact distant metastasis free survival at 3 years (BI-DMFS3), were assessed.ResultsFrom December 2008 to April 2014, 70 patients were enrolled, of which 66 were eligible for analysis, 33 per arm. Median follow-up was 5.1 years (range, 0.4 to 7.8 years) for eligible living patients. DMF3 was 78% and 84% for FCT and GD, respectively. BI-DMFS3 was 67% and 72%, respectively. Postinduction CR rates were 88% and 78%, respectively. Of 33 patients in the FCT arm, 21 (64%) experienced treatment-related grade 3 and 4 toxicities during protocol treatment, with 18 (55%), two (6%), and two patients (6%) experiencing grade 3 and 4 hematologic, GI, and genitourinary toxicity, respectively. For the 33 patients in the GD arm, these figures were 18 (55%) overall and 14 (42%), three (9%) and two patients (6%), respectively.ConclusionBoth regimens demonstrated DMF3 greater than 75%. There were fewer toxicities observed in the GD arm. Either gemcitabine and once daily radiation or a cisplatin-based regimen could serve as a base for future trials of systemic therapy.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This paper presents the protocol for an ongoing study to evaluate a telemedicine follow-up intervention for patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers. Diabetes-related foot ulcers represent challenges for patients and the health services. The large increase in the prevalence of diabetes, combined with the aging population, means that the absolute number of patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers is likely to continue to increase. Health care services therefore need to provide close clinical follow-up care for people with diabetes both in primary and specialist care. Information and communication technologies may enable more integrated treatment and care pathways across organizational boundaries. However, we lack knowledge about the effect of telemedicine follow-up and how such services can be optimally organized. OBJECTIVE:To present the design and methods of a study evaluating a telemedicine follow-up intervention for patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers. METHODS:The study is designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial (noninferiority trial) involving municipalities or municipality districts (clusters) belonging to one clinical site in Western Norway. The study includes patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes presenting with a new foot ulcer at the initial visit to the clinic. Patients in the intervention group receive telemedicine follow-up care in the community. The key ingredient in the intervention is the close integration between health care levels. The intervention is facilitated by the use of an interactive wound platform consisting of a Web-based ulcer record combined with a mobile phone, enabling counseling and communication between nurses in the community and specialist health care. Patients in the control group receive standard hospital outpatient care. The primary endpoint in the trial is healing time; secondary outcomes include amputation and death, patient-reported outcome measures, and follow-up data on the recurrence of foot ulcers. In addition, qualitative substudies are being performed to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the ongoing processes during the trial with the patients in the intervention and control groups and those health care professionals either working in primary care or in specialist care delivering the intervention. RESULTS:The project has been funded. The inclusion of patients started in September 2012. Because recruitment goals were not met in the initial period, two more clinical sites have been included to meet sample size requirements. Patient recruitment will continue until June 2016. Data collection in the qualitative substudies has been completed. CONCLUSIONS:This telemedicine trial operates in a novel setting and targets patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers during a 12-month follow-up period. The trial addresses whether integrated care using telemedicine between primary and specialist health care can be an equivalent alternative to standard outpatient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01710774; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01710774 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6im6KfFov).