S'abonner

Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (TROG 08.03/ANZUP RAVES): a randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial - 29/09/20

Doi : 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30456-3 
Andrew Kneebone, ProfMBBS a, b, , Carol Fraser-Browne, BA e, Gillian M Duchesne, ProfMD f, g, Richard Fisher, PhD h, Mark Frydenberg, ProfMBBS i, x, Alan Herschtal, PhD h, Scott G Williams, ProfMD f, g, Chris Brown, MBiostats ab, Warick Delprado, ProfMBBS j, k, l, Annette Haworth, ProfPhD c, David J Joseph, ProfMBBS m, n, w, aa, Jarad M Martin, ProfDMed o, p, John H L Matthews, MBChB e, Jeremy L Millar, ProfMBChB i, q, Mark Sidhom, MBBS r, y, Nigel Spry, ProfPhD n, s, w, Colin I Tang, MBBS n, s, Sandra Turner, MBBS b, t, Kirsty L Wiltshire, MBBS g, Henry H Woo, ProfDMedSc b, d, Ian D Davis, ProfPhD i, u, v, Tee S Lim, MBBS w, z, Maria Pearse, MBChB e
a Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
b Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
c School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
d Department of Urology, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Wahroonga, NSW Australia 
e Auckland Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand 
f University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
g Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
h Centre for Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
i Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
j Douglass Hanly Moir Pathology, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
k University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
l Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
m University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia 
n Edith Cowan University, Perth, WA, Australia 
o Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital, Newcastle, NSW, Australia 
p School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia 
q Alfred Health Radiation Oncology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
r Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
s Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia 
t Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead, NSW, Australia 
u ANZUP Cancer Trials Group, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
v Eastern Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
w Genesis Cancer Care, Perth, WA, Australia 
x Cabrini Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia 
y University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia 
z Curtin Medical School, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia 
aa 5D Clinics, Perth, WA, Australia 
ab National Health and Medical Research Council, Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia 

* Correspondence to: Prof Andrew Kneebone, Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia Department of Radiation Oncology Royal North Shore Hospital Sydney NSW 2065 Australia

Summary

Background

Adjuvant radiotherapy has been shown to halve the risk of biochemical progression for patients with high-risk disease after radical prostatectomy. Early salvage radiotherapy could result in similar biochemical control with lower treatment toxicity. We aimed to compare biochemical progression between patients given adjuvant radiotherapy and those given salvage radiotherapy.

Methods

We did a phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial across 32 oncology centres in Australia and New Zealand. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years and had undergone a radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate with pathological staging showing high-risk features defined as positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension, or seminal vesicle invasion; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, and had a postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration of 0·10 ng/mL or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a minimisation technique via an internet-based, independently generated allocation to either adjuvant radiotherapy within 6 months of radical prostatectomy or early salvage radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. Allocation sequence was concealed from investigators and patients, but treatment assignment for individual randomisations was not masked. Patients were stratified by radiotherapy centre, preoperative PSA, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and seminal vesicle invasion status. Radiotherapy in both groups was 64 Gy in 32 fractions to the prostate bed without androgen deprivation therapy with real-time review of plan quality on all cases before treatment. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical progression. Salvage radiotherapy would be deemed non-inferior to adjuvant radiotherapy if freedom from biochemical progression at 5 years was within 10% of that for adjuvant radiotherapy with a hazard ratio (HR) for salvage radiotherapy versus adjuvant radiotherapy of 1·48. The primary analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00860652.

Findings

Between March 27, 2009, and Dec 31, 2015, 333 patients were randomly assigned (166 to adjuvant radiotherapy; 167 to salvage radiotherapy). Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·3–7·5). An independent data monitoring committee recommended premature closure of enrolment because of unexpectedly low event rates. 84 (50%) patients in the salvage radiotherapy group had radiotherapy triggered by a PSA of 0·20 ng/mL or more. 5-year freedom from biochemical progression was 86% (95% CI 81–92) in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 87% (82–93) in the salvage radiotherapy group (stratified HR 1·12, 95% CI 0·65–1·90; pnon-inferiority=0·15). The grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity rate was lower in the salvage radiotherapy group (90 [54%] of 167) than in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (116 [70%] of 166). The grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity rate was similar between the salvage radiotherapy group (16 [10%]) and the adjuvant radiotherapy group (24 [14%]).

Interpretation

Salvage radiotherapy did not meet trial specified criteria for non-inferiority. However, these data support the use of salvage radiotherapy as it results in similar biochemical control to adjuvant radiotherapy, spares around half of men from pelvic radiation, and is associated with significantly lower genitourinary toxicity.

Funding

New Zealand Health Research Council, Australian National Health Medical Research Council, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Council NSW, Auckland Hospital Charitable Trust, Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Seed Funding, Cancer Research Trust New Zealand, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Cancer Institute NSW, Prostate Cancer Foundation Australia, and Cancer Australia.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Plan


© 2020  Elsevier Ltd. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 21 - N° 10

P. 1331-1340 - octobre 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma without intention for immediate autologous stem-cell transplantation (ENDURANCE): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial
  • Shaji K Kumar, Susanna J Jacobus, Adam D Cohen, Matthias Weiss, Natalie Callander, Avina K Singh, Terri L Parker, Alexander Menter, Xuezhong Yang, Benjamin Parsons, Pankaj Kumar, Prashant Kapoor, Aaron Rosenberg, Jeffrey A Zonder, Edward Faber, Sagar Lonial, Kenneth C Anderson, Paul G Richardson, Robert Z Orlowski, Lynne I Wagner, S Vincent Rajkumar
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy plus short-term androgen deprivation therapy in men with localised prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (GETUG-AFU 17): a randomised, phase 3 trial
  • Paul Sargos, Sylvie Chabaud, Igor Latorzeff, Nicolas Magné, Ahmed Benyoucef, Stéphane Supiot, David Pasquier, Menouar Samir Abdiche, Olivier Gilliot, Pierre Graff-Cailleaud, Marlon Silva, Philippe Bergerot, Pierre Baumann, Yazid Belkacemi, David Azria, Meryem Brihoum, Michel Soulié, Pierre Richaud

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.