Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYDRA): An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials in the MARCAP consortium.
Abstract
385 Background: Trials comparing moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHFRT) against conventionally-fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for prostate cancer have varied considerably in intent (non-inferiority vs. superiority) and MHFRT dose. Herein, we compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained from 7 phase III trials comparing MHFRT vs. CFRT: three (n=3454) with isodose and four (n=2426) with dose-escalated MHFRT. Meta-analyses were designed to compare progression-free survival (PFS), late grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) and late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) physician-scored toxicity, and clinically-significant decrements in patient-reported urinary or bowel quality of life (QOL). Results: After a median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range [IQR], 4.6-7.2) and 7.1 years (IQR 5.7-8.4) following isodose and dose-escalated MHFRT, there were no differences in PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95%CI 0.81-1.05 and HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.82-1.09, respectively). Neither isodose nor dose-escalated MHFRT were associated with increased odds of grade ≥2 GU toxicity (odds ratio [OR] 1.16 95CI% 0.86-1.57 and OR 1.20, 95%CI 0.95-1.51). The odds of grade ≥2 GI toxicity were higher with dose-escalated (OR 1.48, 95%CI 1.14-1.92) but not isodose MHFRT (OR 1.30, 95% 0.59-2.87). Isodose MHFRT did not show different odds of urinary (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.51-2.09) and bowel (OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.40-1.43) QOL decrements, while dose-escalated MHFRT was associated with greater odds of bowel (OR 1.68, 95%CI 1.07-2.61), but not urinary (OR 1.57, 95%CI 0.87-2.85), QOL decrement. Conclusions: Isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT both have similar efficacy compared with CFRT, but dose-escalated MHFRT is associated with higher physician-scored and patient-reported bowel and urinary toxicity. Isodose regimens, e.g. 60 Gy in 20 fractions, should be the standard MHFRT regimen for localized prostate cancer.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Amar Upadhyaya Kishan
Department of Radiation Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
Yilun Sun
Department of Pharmacology, Physiology, and Drug Development, University of Maryland School of Medicine
David P. Dearnaley
The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Emma Hall
The Institute of Cancer Research, Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, London, United Kingdom
Alison Tree
Uro‐Oncology Unit The Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust Sutton and London UK
Charles Catton
Radiation Oncology Department, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
Himanshu Lukka
McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
William Robert Lee
Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC
Howard M. Sandler
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
Luca Incrocci
Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
Wilma Heemsbergen
Erasmus University Medical Center, Erasmus, Netherlands
Jessica Karen Wong
Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
Eric M. Horwitz
Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
Karen E. Hoffman
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Comron Hassanzadeh
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Deborah A. Kuban
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Giuseppe Sanguineti
Radiation Oncology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Roma, Italy
Stefano Arcangeli
University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
John Nikitas
University of California, Department of Radiation Oncology, Los Angeles, CA
Daniel Eidelberg Spratt
University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH