Dataset Information

Effect of Standard vs Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0126 Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Optimizing radiation therapy techniques for localized prostate cancer can affect patient outcomes. Dose escalation improves biochemical control, but no prior trials were powered to detect overall survival (OS) differences. Objective:To determine whether radiation dose escalation to 79.2 Gy compared with 70.2 Gy would improve OS and other outcomes in prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants:The NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 randomized clinical trial randomized 1532 patients from 104 North American Radiation Therapy Oncology Group institutions March 2002 through August 2008. Men with stage cT1b to T2b, Gleason score 2 to 6, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 10 or greater and less than 20 or Gleason score of 7 and PSA less than 15 received 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or intensity-modulated radiation therapy to 79.2 Gy in 44 fractions or 70.2 Gy in 39 fractions. Main Outcomes and Measures:Time to OS measured from randomization to death due to any cause. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO)/Phoenix definitions were used for biochemical failure. Acute (?90 days of treatment start) and late radiation therapy toxic effects (>90 days) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 2.0, and the RTOG/European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Scheme, respectively. Results:With a median follow-up of 8.4 (range, 0.02-13.0) years in 1499 patients (median [range] age, 71 [33-87] years; 70% had PSA <10 ng/mL, 84% Gleason score of 7, 57% T1 disease), there was no difference in OS between the 751 men in the 79.2-Gy arm and the 748 men in the 70.2-Gy arm. The 8-year rates of OS were 76% with 79.2 Gy and 75% with 70.2 Gy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.20; P?=?.98). The 8-year cumulative rates of distant metastases were 4% for the 79.2-Gy arm and 6% for the 70.2-Gy arm (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.42-1.01; P?=?.05). The ASTRO and Phoenix biochemical failure rates at 5 and 8 years were 31% and 20% with 79.2 Gy and 47% and 35% with 70.2 Gy, respectively (both P?

SUBMITTER: Michalski JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5885160 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Standard vs Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0126 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Michalski Jeff M JM Moughan Jennifer J Purdy James J Bosch Walter W Bruner Deborah W DW Bahary Jean-Paul JP Lau Harold H Duclos Marie M Parliament Matthew M Morton Gerard G Hamstra Daniel D Seider Michael M Lock Michael I MI Patel Malti M Gay Hiram H Vigneault Eric E Winter Kathryn K Sandler Howard H

JAMA oncology 20180614 6

<h4>Importance</h4>Optimizing radiation therapy techniques for localized prostate cancer can affect patient outcomes. Dose escalation improves biochemical control, but no prior trials were powered to detect overall survival (OS) differences.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether radiation dose escalation to 79.2 Gy compared with 70.2 Gy would improve OS and other outcomes in prostate cancer.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>The NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 randomized clinical trial randomized ...[more]

PMID: 29543933

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE This is the first clinical outcomes report of NRG Oncology RTOG 0539, detailing the primary endpoint, 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), compared with a predefined historical control for intermediate-risk meningioma, and secondarily evaluating overall survival (OS), local failure, and prospectively scored adverse events (AEs). METHODS NRG Oncology RTOG 0539 was a Phase II clinical trial allocating meningioma patients to 1 of 3 prognostic groups and management strategies according to WHO grade, recurrence status, and resection extent. For the intermediate-risk group (Group 2), eligible patients had either newly diagnosed WHO Grade II meningioma that had been treated with gross-total resection (GTR; Simpson Grades I-III) or recurrent WHO Grade I meningioma with any resection extent. Pathology and imaging were centrally reviewed. Patients were treated with radiation therapy (RT), either intensity modulated (IMRT) or 3D conformal (3DCRT), 54 Gy in 30 fractions. The RT target volume was defined as the tumor bed and any nodular enhancement (e.g., in patients with recurrent WHO Grade I tumors) with a minimum 8-mm and maximum 15-mm margin, depending on tumor location and setup reproducibility of the RT method. The primary endpoint was 3-year PFS. Results were compared with historical controls (3-year PFS: 70% following GTR alone and 90% with GTR + RT). AEs were scored using NCI Common Toxicity Criteria. RESULTS Fifty-six patients enrolled in the intermediate-risk group, of whom 3 were ineligible and 1 did not receive RT. Of the 52 patients who received protocol therapy, 4 withdrew without a recurrence before 3 years leaving 48 patients evaluable for the primary endpoint, 3-year PFS, which was actuarially 93.8% (p = 0.0003). Within 3 years, 3 patients experienced events affecting PFS: 1 patient with a WHO Grade II tumor died of the disease, 1 patient with a WHO Grade II tumor had disease progression but remained alive, and 1 patient with recurrent WHO Grade I meningioma died of undetermined cause without tumor progression. The 3-year actuarial local failure rate was 4.1%, and the 3-year OS rate was 96%. After 3 years, progression occurred in 2 additional patients: 1 patient with recurrent WHO Grade I meningioma and 1 patient with WHO Grade II disease; both remain alive. Among 52 evaluable patients who received protocol treatment, 36 (69.2%) had WHO Grade II tumors and underwent GTR, and 16 (30.8%) had recurrent WHO Grade I tumors. There was no significant difference in PFS between these subgroups (p = 0.52, HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.09-3.35), validating their consolidation. Of the 52 evaluable patients, 44 (84.6%) received IMRT, and 50 (96.2%) were treated per protocol or with acceptable variation. AEs (definitely, probably, or possibly related to protocol treatment) were limited to Grade 1 or 2, with no reported Grade 3 events. CONCLUSIONS This is the first clinical outcomes report from NRG Oncology RTOG 0539. Patients with intermediate-risk meningioma treated with RT had excellent 3-year PFS, with a low rate of local failure and a low risk of AEs. These results support the use of postoperative RT for newly diagnosed gross-totally resected WHO Grade II or recurrent WHO Grade I meningioma irrespective of resection extent. They also document minimal toxicity and high rates of tumor control with IMRT. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00895622 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Project description:PurposeNRG/RTOG 0841 assessed the feasibility of a depression screening procedure in patients receiving radiation therapy (RT). As a secondary endpoint, availability and barriers to psychosocial care data were collected in hopes of providing recommendations for improved psychosocial care among patients receiving RT.Methods and materialsPatients starting RT were prospectively recruited and assessed with self-reported distress screening tools. Patients exceeding a validated cutoff and a sample of patients who screened negative received the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) mood disorder modules via telephone. During that SCID evaluation, patients completed a validated scale ranking interview on barriers to psychosocial care and interest in various psychosocial intervention modalities.ResultsA total of 463 patients from 35 community-based and 2 academic RT oncology sites were recruited. Of the 455 eligible, 75 (16%) exceeded screening cutoffs for depressive symptoms. From this group, 78 patients completed the SCID; most were female (76%), white (88%), and had breast cancer (55%). Overall, the most common barriers to treatment, regardless of insurance, were costs (58%), daily responsibilities (44%), and physical health symptoms (38%). Patients from RT facilities without mental health services were significantly more likely to report difficulty with physical health problems, specifically serious illness and walking, compared with those treated at RT facilities with services (P = .013 and P = .039, respectively). Overall, there was interest in obtaining psychosocial services with face-to-face counseling at the cancer center and printed educational materials as the most commonly preferred interventions. Patients with difficult barriers to psychosocial interventions were significantly less interested in support away from the cancer center (P = .016), telephone and Internet counseling (P = .0062 &P = .011), and Internet support (P = .0048).ConclusionRadiation oncology patients are interested in obtaining psychosocial services but face barriers to access to mental health services including cost, debilitating symptoms, and time constraints that prevent adequate care.

Project description:PURPOSE:NRG Oncology RTOG 9202 was a randomized trial testing long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation (LTAD) versus initial androgen deprivation only (STAD) with external beam radiation therapy (RT) in mostly high-risk and some intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. RTOG 9408 found an overall survival (OS) advantage in patients with cT1b-T2b disease and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <20 ng/mL, with benefit observed mostly among intermediate-risk patients. It was still unknown whether intermediate-risk patients would experience an additional survival benefit with LTAD; thus, we performed a secondary analysis to explore whether LTAD had any incremental benefit beyond STAD among the intermediate-risk subset of RTOG 9202. The study endpoints were OS, disease-specific survival (DSS), and PSA failure (PSAF). METHODS AND MATERIALS:An analysis was performed for all patients enrolled in RTOG 9202 defined as intermediate-risk (cT2 disease, PSA<10 ng/mL, and Gleason score = 7 or cT2 disease, PSA 10-20 ng/mL, and Gleason score <7). This review yielded 133 patients: 74 (STAD) and 59 (LTAD). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate OS; the cumulative incidence approach was used to estimate DSS and PSAF. A 2-sided test was used, with significance level defined to be .05. RESULTS:With over 11 years of median follow-up, 39 STAD patients were alive and 33 LTAD patients were alive. There was no difference in OS (10-year estimates, 61% STAD vs 65% LTAD; P=.53), DSS (10-year DSS, 96% vs 97%; P=.72), or PSAF (10-year PSAF, 53% vs 55%; P=.99) between groups. CONCLUSION:LTAD did not confer a benefit in terms of OS, DSS, or PSAF rates in the intermediate-risk subset in this study. Whereas the subset was relatively small, treatment assignment was randomly applied, and a trend in favor of LTAD would have been of interest. Given the small number of disease-specific deaths observed and lack of benefit with respect to our endpoints, this secondary analysis does not suggest that exploration of longer hormonal therapy is worth testing in the intermediate-risk prostate cancer subset.

Project description:PURPOSE:There is considerable interest in very short (ultrahypofractionated) radiation therapy regimens to treat prostate cancer based on potential radiobiological advantages, patient convenience, and resource allocation benefits. Our objective is to demonstrate that detectable changes in health-related quality of life measured by the bowel and urinary domains of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-50) were not substantially worse than baseline scores. METHODS AND MATERIALS:NRG Oncology's RTOG 0938 is a nonblinded randomized phase 2 study of National Comprehensive Cancer Network low-risk prostate cancer in which each arm is compared with a historical control. Patients were randomized to 5 fractions (7.25 Gy in 2 weeks) or 12 fractions (4.3 Gy in 2.5 weeks). The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with a change in EPIC-50 bowel score at 1 year (baseline to 1 year) >5 points and in EPIC-50 urinary score >2 points tested with a 1-sample binomial test. RESULTS:The study enrolled 127 patients to 5 fractions (121 analyzed) and 128 patients to 12 fractions (125 analyzed). Median follow-up for all patients at the time of analysis was 3.8 years. The 1-year frequency for >5 point change in bowel score were 29.8% (P < .001) and 28.4% (P < .001) for 5 and 12 fractions, respectively. The 1-year frequencies for >2 point change in urinary score were 45.7% (P < .001) and 42.2% (P < .001) for 5 and 12 fractions, respectively. For 5 fractions, 32.9% of patients had a drop in 1-year EPIC-50 sexual score of ?11 points (P = .34); for 12 fractions, 30.9% of patients had a drop in 1-year EPIC-50 sexual score of ? 11 points (P = .20). Disease-free survival at 2 years is 99.2% (95% confidence interval: 97.5-100) in the 5-fraction arm and 97.5% (95% confidence interval: 94.6-100) in the 12-fraction arm. There was no late grade 4 or 5 treatment-related urinary or bowel toxicity. CONCLUSIONS:This study confirms that, based on changes in bowel and urinary domains and toxicity (acute and late), the 5- and 12-fraction regimens are well tolerated. These ultrahypofractionated approaches need to be compared with current standard radiation therapy regimens.

Project description:PURPOSE:Only retrospective data are available for low-dose-rate (LDR) salvage prostate brachytherapy for local recurrence after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). The primary objective of this prospective phase 2 trial (NCT00450411) was to evaluate late gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse events (AEs) after salvage LDR brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Eligible patients had low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer before EBRT and biopsy-proven recurrence >30 months after EBRT, with prostate-specific antigen levels <10 ng/mL and no regional/distant disease. The primary endpoint was grade 3 or higher late treatment-related gastrointestinal or genitourinary AEs occurring 9 to 24 months after brachytherapy. These AEs were projected to be ?10%, with ?20% considered unacceptable. All events were graded with National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0. Multivariate analyses investigated associations of pretreatment or treatment variables with AEs. RESULTS:One hundred patients from 20 centers were registered from May 2007 to January 2014. The 92 analyzable patients had a median follow-up of 54 months (range, 4-97) and a median age of 70 years (interquartile range [IQR], 65-74). The initial Gleason score was 7 in 48% of patients. The median dose of EBRT was 74 Gy (IQR, 70-76) at a median interval of 85 months previously (IQR, 60-119). Only 16% had androgen deprivation at study entry. Twelve patients (14%) had late grade 3 gastrointestinal/genitourinary AEs, with no treatment-related grade 4 or 5 AEs. No pretreatment variable predicted late AEs, including prior EBRT dose and elapsed interval. Higher V100 (percentage of prostate enclosed by prescription isodose) predicted both occurrence of late AEs (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.52; P = .03) and earlier time to first occurrence (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.03-1.34; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS:This prospective multicenter trial reports outcomes of salvage LDR brachytherapy for post-EBRT recurrence. The rate of late grade 3 AEs did not exceed the unacceptable threshold. The only factor predictive of late AEs was implant dosimetry reflected by V100. Efficacy outcomes will be reported at a minimum of 5-year follow-up.

Dataset Information

Effect of Standard vs Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0126 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Effect of Standard vs Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0126 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure