Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. METHODS: RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. METHODS: RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61-69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1-10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688-1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4-82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6-83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

Safety and effectiveness of the radium-223-taxane treatment sequence in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a global observational study (REASSURE).

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 and taxane chemotherapy each improve survival of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Whether the radium-223-taxane sequence could extend survival without cumulative toxicity was explored. METHODS: The global, prospective, observational REASSURE study (NCT02141438) assessed real-world safety and effectiveness of radium-223 in patients with mCRPC. Using data from the prespecified second interim analysis (data cutoff, March 20, 2019), hematologic events and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in patients who were chemotherapy-naive at radium-223 initiation and subsequently received taxane chemotherapy starting ≤90 days ("immediate") or >90 days ("delayed") after the last radium-223 dose. RESULTS: Following radium-223 therapy, 182 patients received docetaxel (172 [95%]) and/or cabazitaxel (44 [24%]); 34 patients (19%) received both. Seventy-three patients (40%) received immediate chemotherapy and 109 patients (60%) received delayed chemotherapy. Median time from last radium-223 dose to first taxane cycle was 3.6 months (range, 0.3-28.4). Median duration of first taxane was 3.7 months (range, 0-22.0). Fourteen patients (10 in the immediate and four in the delayed subgroup) had grade 3/4 hematologic events during taxane chemotherapy, including neutropenia in two patients in the delayed subgroup and thrombocytopenia in one patient in each subgroup. Median OS was 24.3 months from radium-223 initiation and 11.8 months from start of taxane therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world clinical practice settings, a heterogeneous population of patients who received sequential radium-223-taxane therapy had a low incidence of hematologic events, with a median survival of 1 year from taxane initiation. Thus, taxane chemotherapy is a feasible option for those who progress after radium-223. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02141438. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Radium-223 and chemotherapy are treatment options for metastatic prostate cancer, which increase survival but may affect production of blood cells as a side effect. We wanted to know what would happen if patients received chemotherapy after radium-223. Among the 182 men treated with radium-223 who went on to receive chemotherapy, only two men had severe side effects affecting white blood cell production (neutropenia) during chemotherapy. On average, the 182 men lived for 2 years after starting radium-223 and 1 year after starting chemotherapy. In conclusion, patients may benefit from chemotherapy after radium-223 treatment without increasing the risk of side effects.

Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7-10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60-68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0-6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81-1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58-1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3-4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020). INTERPRETATION: These initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.

Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity that would give a therapeutic advantage to hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned analysis of the efficacy and side-effects of a randomised trial comparing conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy after 5 years follow-up. METHODS: CHHiP is a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial that recruited men with localised prostate cancer (pT1b-T3aN0M0). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to conventional (74 Gy delivered in 37 fractions over 7·4 weeks) or one of two hypofractionated schedules (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3·8 weeks) all delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. Most patients were given radiotherapy with 3-6 months of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen suppression. Randomisation was by computer-generated random permuted blocks, stratified by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group and radiotherapy treatment centre, and treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure; the critical hazard ratio (HR) for non-inferiority was 1·208. Analysis was by intention to treat. Long-term follow-up continues. The CHHiP trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN97182923. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2002, and June 17, 2011, 3216 men were enrolled from 71 centres and randomly assigned (74 Gy group, 1065 patients; 60 Gy group, 1074 patients; 57 Gy group, 1077 patients). Median follow-up was 62·4 months (IQR 53·9-77·0). The proportion of patients who were biochemical or clinical failure free at 5 years was 88·3% (95% CI 86·0-90·2) in the 74 Gy group, 90·6% (88·5-92·3) in the 60 Gy group, and 85·9% (83·4-88·0) in the 57 Gy group. 60 Gy was non-inferior to 74 Gy (HR 0·84 [90% CI 0·68-1·03], pNI=0·0018) but non-inferiority could not be claimed for 57 Gy compared with 74 Gy (HR 1·20 [0·99-1·46], pNI=0·48). Long-term side-effects were similar in the hypofractionated groups compared with the conventional group. There were no significant differences in either the proportion or cumulative incidence of side-effects 5 years after treatment using three clinician-reported as well as patient-reported outcome measures. The estimated cumulative 5 year incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse bowel and bladder adverse events was 13·7% (111 events) and 9·1% (66 events) in the 74 Gy group, 11·9% (105 events) and 11·7% (88 events) in the 60 Gy group, 11·3% (95 events) and 6·6% (57 events) in the 57 Gy group, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Hypofractionated radiotherapy using 60 Gy in 20 fractions is non-inferior to conventional fractionation using 74 Gy in 37 fractions and is recommended as a new standard of care for external-beam radiotherapy of localised prostate cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer: 2-year patient-reported outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might detect more toxic effects of radiotherapy than do clinician-reported outcomes. We did a quality of life (QoL) substudy to assess PROs up to 24 months after conventionally fractionated or hypofractionated radiotherapy in the Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP) trial. METHODS: The CHHiP trial is a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial done in 71 centres, of which 57 UK hospitals took part in the QoL substudy. Men with localised prostate cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy were eligible for trial entry if they had histologically confirmed T1b-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer, an estimated risk of seminal vesicle involvement less than 30%, prostate-specific antigen concentration less than 30 ng/mL, and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a standard fractionation schedule of 74 Gy in 37 fractions or one of two hypofractionated schedules: 60 Gy in 20 fractions or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted block sizes of six and nine, stratified by centre and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. Treatment allocation was not masked. UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and SF-12 quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline, pre-radiotherapy, 10 weeks post-radiotherapy, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial completed accrual on June 16, 2011, and the QoL substudy was closed to further recruitment on Nov 1, 2009. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint of the QoL substudy was overall bowel bother and comparisons between fractionation groups were done at 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97182923. FINDINGS: 2100 participants in the CHHiP trial consented to be included in the QoL substudy: 696 assigned to the 74 Gy schedule, 698 assigned to the 60 Gy schedule, and 706 assigned to the 57 Gy schedule. Of these individuals, 1659 (79%) provided data pre-radiotherapy and 1444 (69%) provided data at 24 months after radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 50·0 months (IQR 38·4-64·2) on April 9, 2014, which was the most recent follow-up measurement of all data collected before the QoL data were analysed in September, 2014. Comparison of 74 Gy in 37 fractions, 60 Gy in 20 fractions, and 57 Gy in 19 fractions groups at 2 years showed no overall bowel bother in 269 (66%), 266 (65%), and 282 (65%) men; very small bother in 92 (22%), 91 (22%), and 93 (21%) men; small bother in 26 (6%), 28 (7%), and 38 (9%) men; moderate bother in 19 (5%), 23 (6%), and 21 (5%) men, and severe bother in four (<1%), three (<1%) and three (<1%) men respectively (74 Gy vs 60 Gy, ptrend=0.64, 74 Gy vs 57 Gy, ptrend=0·59). We saw no differences between treatment groups in change of bowel bother score from baseline or pre-radiotherapy to 24 months. INTERPRETATION: The incidence of patient-reported bowel symptoms was low and similar between patients in the 74 Gy control group and the hypofractionated groups up to 24 months after radiotherapy. If efficacy outcomes from CHHiP show non-inferiority for hypofractionated treatments, these findings will add to the growing evidence for moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules becoming the standard treatment for localised prostate cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Intermittent androgen suppression for rising PSA level after radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent androgen deprivation for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) elevation after radiotherapy may improve quality of life and delay hormone resistance. We assessed overall survival with intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation in a noninferiority randomized trial. METHODS: We enrolled patients with a PSA level greater than 3 ng per milliliter more than 1 year after primary or salvage radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Intermittent treatment was provided in 8-month cycles, with nontreatment periods determined according to the PSA level. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included quality of life, time to castration-resistant disease, and duration of nontreatment intervals. RESULTS: Of 1386 enrolled patients, 690 were randomly assigned to intermittent therapy and 696 to continuous therapy. Median follow-up was 6.9 years. There were no significant between-group differences in adverse events. In the intermittent-therapy group, full testosterone recovery occurred in 35% of patients, and testosterone recovery to the trial-entry threshold occurred in 79%. Intermittent therapy provided potential benefits with respect to physical function, fatigue, urinary problems, hot flashes, libido, and erectile function. There were 268 deaths in the intermittent-therapy group and 256 in the continuous-therapy group. Median overall survival was 8.8 years in the intermittent-therapy group versus 9.1 years in the continuous-therapy group (hazard ratio for death, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.21). The estimated 7-year cumulative rates of disease-related death were 18% and 15% in the two groups, respectively (P=0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent androgen deprivation was noninferior to continuous therapy with respect to overall survival. Some quality-of-life factors improved with intermittent therapy. (Funded by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003653.).

Efficacy and safety of radium-223 dichloride in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, with or without previous docetaxel use: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary results from the phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial showed that radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), a targeted α-emitter, improved overall survival compared with placebo and was well tolerated in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis from ALSYMPCA to assess the effect of previous docetaxel use on the efficacy and safety of radium-223. METHODS: In the phase 3, randomised, double-blind ALSYMPCA trial, patients with symptomatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, at least two symptomatic bone metastases, no known visceral metastases, and who were receiving best standard of care were randomly assigned (2:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive six injections of radium-223 (50 kBq/kg intravenously) or matching placebo, with one injection given every 4 weeks. Patients had either received previous docetaxel treatment or were unsuitable for or declined docetaxel; previous docetaxel use (yes or no) was a trial stratification factor. We investigated the effect of previous docetaxel use on radium-223 treatment for the primary endpoint of overall survival, the main secondary efficacy endpoints, and safety. Efficacy analyses were done for the intention-to-treat population; safety analyses were done for the safety population. The trial has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00699751. FINDINGS: Randomisation took place between June 12, 2008, and Feb 1, 2011. 526 (57%) of 921 randomly assigned patients had received previous docetaxel treatment (352 in the radium-223 group and 174 in the placebo group) and 395 (43%) had not (262 in the radium-223 group and 133 in the placebo group). Radium-223 prolonged median overall survival compared with placebo, irrespective of previous docetaxel use (previous docetaxel use, hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·56-0·88; p=0·002; no previous docetaxel use, HR 0·69, 0·52-0·92; p=0·01). The benefit of radium-223 compared with placebo was seen in both docetaxel subgroups for most main secondary efficacy endpoints; risk for time to time to first symptomatic skeletal event was reduced with radium-223 versus placebo in patients with previous docetaxel use, but the difference was not significant in those with no previous docetaxel use. 322 (62%) of 518 patients previously treated with docetaxel had grade 3-4 adverse events, compared with 205 (54%) of 383 patients without docetaxel. Patients who had previously been treated with docetaxel had a higher incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia with radium-223 than with placebo (31 [9%] of 347 patients vs five [3%] of 171 patients), whereas the incidence was similar between treatment groups among patients with no previous docetaxel use (seven [3%] of 253 patients vs one [1%] of 130 patients). The incidences of grade 3-4 anaemia and neutropenia were similar between the radium-223 and placebo groups within both docetaxel subgroups. INTERPRETATION: Radium-223 is effective and well tolerated in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, irrespective of previous docetaxel use. FUNDING: Algeta ASA and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Effect of radium-223 dichloride on symptomatic skeletal events in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases: results from a phase 3, double-blind, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases frequently cause skeletal events in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) selectively targets bone metastases with high-energy, short-range α-particles. We assessed the effect of radium-223 compared with placebo in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomised ALSYMPCA trial, we enrolled patients who had symptomatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with two or more bone metastases and no known visceral metastases, who were receiving best standard of care, and had previously either received or were unsuitable for docetaxel. Patients were stratified by previous docetaxel use, baseline total alkaline phosphatase level, and current bisphosphonate use, then randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either six intravenous injections of radium-223 (50 kBq/kg) or matching placebo; one injection was given every 4 weeks. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice response system, taking into account trial stratification factors. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, which has been reported previously. Here we report on time to first symptomatic skeletal event, defined as the use of external beam radiation to relieve bone pain, or occurrence of a new symptomatic pathological fracture (vertebral or non-verterbal), or occurence of spinal cord compression, or tumour-related orthopeadic surgical intervention. All events were required to be clinically apparent and were not assessed by periodic radiological review. Statistical analyses of symptomatic skeletal events were based on the intention-to-treat population. The study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00699751. FINDINGS: Between June 12, 2008, and Feb 1, 2011, 921 patients were enrolled, of whom 614 (67%) were randomly assigned to receive radium-223 and 307 (33%) placebo. Symptomatic skeletal events occurred in 202 (33%) of 614 patients in the radium-223 group and 116 (38%) of 307 patients in the placebo group. Time to first symptomatic skeletal event was longer with radium-223 than with placebo (median 15·6 months [95% CI 13·5-18·0] vs 9·8 months [7·3-23·7]; hazard ratio [HR]=0·66, 95% CI 0·52-0·83; p=0·00037). The risks of external beam radiation therapy for bone pain (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·53-0·85) and spinal cord compression (HR=0·52, 95% CI 0·29-0·93) were reduced with radium-233 compared with placebo. Radium-223 treatment did not seem to significantly reduce the risk of symptomatic pathological bone fracture (HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·35-1·09), or the need for tumour-related orthopaedic surgical intervention (HR 0·72, 95% CI 0·28-1·82). INTERPRETATION: Radium-223 should be considered as a treatment option for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases. FUNDING: Algeta and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Five-year outcomes after iodine-125 seed brachytherapy for low-risk prostate cancer at three cancer centres in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To report the outcomes of >1000 men with low-risk prostate cancer treated with low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy at three large UK cancer centres. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1038 patients with low-risk prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤10 ng/mL, Gleason score 6, ≤T2b disease) were treated with LDR iodine 125 (I-125) brachytherapy between 2002 and 2007. Patients were treated at three UK centres. PSA and clinical follow-up was performed at each centre. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was reported for the cohort. RESULTS: The median (range) PSA follow-up for the whole group was 5 years (4 months to 9 years). A total of 79 patients had biochemical failure, defined by a rise in PSA level: 16 patients fulfilled the ASTRO definition of biochemical failure, 25 patients fulfilled the Phoenix definition and 38 patients fulfilled both definitions. The 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) rate was 94.1% by the ASTRO definition and 94.2% by the Phoenix definition. The absence of neoadjuvant hormone therapy was predictive of inferior biochemical control as defined by the Phoenix definition (P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Our prospective multicentre series showed excellent bRFS with LDR I-125 brachytherapy for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Further work is necessary to define the role of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in combination with brachytherapy.

SABRE 1 (Surgery Against Brachytherapy - a Randomised Evaluation): feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of brachytherapy vs radical prostatectomy in low-intermediate risk clinically localised prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of a phase III randomised controlled trial of brachytherapy vs radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with low-intermediate risk localised prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This parallel, two-group, multicentre, randomised controlled feasibility trial enrolled men with histologically confirmed localised, low-risk prostate cancer and good performance status from five UK hospitals. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) by remote computer allocation to receive a decision aid (DA) DVD or standard information (control group), followed by a second randomisation (1:1) to brachytherapy or RP. There was no 'blinding' of staff or patients. Primary outcome was feasibility: a recruitment rate of six patients per centre over the last 6 months of recruitment would deem a phase III trial feasible. RESULTS: Between May 2009 and May 2011, 30 patients were randomised (15 in the DA group and 15 in the control group), and four continued to the second treatment randomisation (one from the DA group and three from the control group). One patient was allocated and received brachytherapy and three RP. SABRE 1 closed early due to poor recruitment. All patients were analysed. Screening logbook analysis showed that the main reasons for declining trial entry were a wish to choose treatment or opting for active monitoring. Results from the DA questionnaire (completed by 10 men) showed that four of the men 'felt surgery and radiotherapy had been proven in a high quality trial' and seven felt 'they should make their treatment decision while knowing their doctors opinion'. CONCLUSION: Recruitment to a RP vs brachytherapy trial in localised prostate cancer was not feasible by the use of this two-step randomisation using a DA and previous trials in early prostate cancer have had similar difficulties in recruitment, with only a few achieving their accrual target. The best treatment method for treating low-risk prostate cancer is still unproven in a head-to-head trial and the increasing number of options will make choices correspondingly more difficulty without good quality comparative research. More sophisticated techniques for recruitment may be more successful in future trials in this patient population.

Salvage Radiation Therapy After Radical Prostatectomy: Analysis of Toxicity by Dose-Fractionation in the RADICALS-RT Trial.

PURPOSE: Emerging data indicate comparable disease control and toxicity of normal postoperative fractionation and moderate hypofractionation radiation therapy (RT) in prostate cancer. In RADICALS-RT, patients were planned for treatment with either 66 Gy in 33 fractions (f) over 6.5 weeks or 52.5 Gy in 20f over 4 weeks. This non-randomized, exploratory analysis explored the toxicity of these 2 schedules in patients who had adjuvant RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Information on RT dose was collected in all patients. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity score was recorded every 4 months for 2 years, every 6 months until 5 years, then annually until 15 years. Patient-reported data were collected at baseline and at 1, 5, and 10 years using standard measures, including the Vaizey fecal incontinence score (bowel) and the International Continence Society Male Short-Form questionnaire (urinary incontinence). The highest event grade was recorded within the first 2 years and beyond 2 years and compared between treatment groups using the χ² test. RESULTS: Of 634 patients, 217 (34%) were planned for 52.5 Gy/20f and 417 (66%) for 66 Gy/33f. In the first 2 years, grade 1 to 2 cystitis was reported more frequently among the 66 Gy/33f group (52.5 Gy/20f: 20% vs 66 Gy/33f: 30%; P = .04). After 2 years, grade 1 to 2 cystitis was reported in 16% in the 66-Gy group and 9% in the 52.5-Gy group (P = .08). Other toxic effects were similar in the 2 groups, and very few patients had any grade 3 to 4 toxic effects. Patients reported slightly higher urinary and fecal incontinence scores at 1 year than at baseline, but no clinically meaningful differences were reported between the 52.5 Gy/20f and 66 Gy/33f groups. Patient-reported health was similar at baseline and at 1 year and similar between the 52.5 Gy/20f and 66 Gy/33f groups. CONCLUSIONS: Severe toxic effects were rare after prostate bed radiation therapy with either 52.5 Gy/20f or 66 Gy/33f. Only modest differences were recorded in toxic effects or in patient-reported outcomes between these 2 schedules.

Imaging Modality and Frequency in Surveillance of Stage I Seminoma Testicular Cancer: Results From a Randomized, Phase III, Noninferiority Trial (TRISST).

PURPOSE: Survival in stage I seminoma is almost 100%. Computed tomography (CT) surveillance is an international standard of care, avoiding adjuvant therapy. In this young population, minimizing irradiation is vital. The Trial of Imaging and Surveillance in Seminoma Testis (TRISST) assessed whether magnetic resonance images (MRIs) or a reduced scan schedule could be used without an unacceptable increase in advanced relapses. METHODS: A phase III, noninferiority, factorial trial. Eligible participants had undergone orchiectomy for stage I seminoma with no adjuvant therapy planned. Random assignment was to seven CTs (6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months); seven MRIs (same schedule); three CTs (6, 18, and 36 months); or three MRIs. The primary outcome was 6-year incidence of Royal Marsden Hospital stage ≥ IIC relapse (> 5 cm), aiming to exclude increases ≥ 5.7% (from 5.7% to 11.4%) with MRI (v CT) or three scans (v 7); target N = 660, all contributing to both comparisons. Secondary outcomes include relapse ≥ 3 cm, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-nine patients enrolled (35 UK centers, 2008-2014); mean tumor size was 2.9 cm, and 358 (54%) were low risk (< 4 cm, no rete testis invasion). With a median follow-up of 72 months, 82 (12%) relapsed. Stage ≥ IIC relapse was rare (10 events). Although statistically noninferior, more events occurred with three scans (nine, 2.8%) versus seven scans (one, 0.3%): 2.5% absolute increase, 90% CI (1.0 to 4.1). Only 4/9 could have potentially been detected earlier with seven scans. Noninferiority of MRI versus CT was also shown; fewer events occurred with MRI (two [0.6%] v eight [2.6%]), 1.9% decrease (-3.5 to -0.3). Per-protocol analyses confirmed noninferiority. Five-year survival was 99%, with no tumor-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Surveillance is a safe management approach-advanced relapse is rare, salvage treatment successful, and outcomes excellent, regardless of imaging frequency or modality. MRI can be recommended to reduce irradiation; and no adverse impact on long-term outcomes was seen with a reduced schedule.

Early prostate cancer--which treatment do men prefer and why?

STUDY TYPE: Preference (prospective cohort). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? In general the literature suggests that there is a need for improvement in aiding men diagnosed with early prostate cancer in their decision making about treatment options and that our understanding of this process is inadequate. There is limited data analyzing the reasons why these men decide between potentially curative or observational treatments and data evaluating patients' views before and after definitive therapy are scarce. This study begins the process of understanding the reasons underlying a patient's final treatment decision. Being a prospective study, it looks at the thought processes of these men before treatment during the time the decision is made. It also documents how satisfied patients are with their choice after their treatment and whether they would choose the same treatment again. OBJECTIVE: To identify the reasons for patients with localised prostate cancer choosing between treatments and the relationship of procedure type to patient satisfaction post-treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 768 men with prostate cancer (stage T1/2, Gleason≤7, PSA<20 ug/L) chose between four treatments: radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, conformal radiotherapy and active surveillance. Prior to choosing, patients were counselled by a urological surgeon, clinical (radiation) oncologist and uro-oncology specialist nurse. Pre-treatment reasons for choice were recorded. Post-treatment satisfaction was examined via postal questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 768 patients, 305 (40%) chose surgery, 237 (31%) conformal beam radiotherapy, 165 (21%) brachytherapy and 61 (8%) active surveillance. Sixty percent of men who opted for radical prostatectomy were motivated by the need for physical removal of the cancer. Conformal radiotherapy was mainly chosen by patients who feared other treatments (n=63, 27%). Most men chose brachytherapy because it was more convenient for their lifestyle (n=64, 39%). Active surveillance was chosen by patients for more varied reasons. Post-treatment satisfaction was assessed in a subgroup who took part in the QOL aspect of this study. Of the respondents to the questionnaire, 212(87.6%) stated that they were satisfied/extremely satisfied with their choice and 171(92.9%) indicated they would choose the same treatment again. CONCLUSION: Men with early prostate cancer have clear reasons for making decisions about treatment. Overall, patients were satisfied with the treatment and indicated that despite different reasons for choosing treatment, they would make the same choice again.

Impact of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy on Patient-reported Outcomes in Prostate Cancer: Results up to 5 yr in the CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016).

BACKGROUND: Moderate hypofractionation is the recommended standard of care for localised prostate cancer following the results of trials including Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP). Evaluation of long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is important to confirm safety and enhance patient information. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 5-yr PROs from the CHHiP quality of life (QoL) substudy confirm 2-yr findings and assess patterns over follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase III randomised controlled trial recruited from 2002 to 2011. The QoL substudy completed accrual in 2009; participants were followed up to 5 yr after radiotherapy. Analyses used data snapshot taken on August 26, 2016. A total of 71 radiotherapy centres were included in the study (UK, Republic of Ireland, Switzerland, and New Zealand); all 57 UK centres participated in the QoL substudy. CHHiP recruited 3216 men with localised prostate cancer (cT1b-T3aN0M0). INTERVENTION: Conventional (74 Gy/37 fractions/7.4 wk) or hypofractionated radiotherapy (60 Gy/20 fractions/4 wk or 57 Gy/19 fractions/3.8 wk) was delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index, Short Form 36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate, or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and Short Form 12 questionnaires were administered at baseline, before radiotherapy, at 10 wk, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 mo after radiotherapy. The QoL primary endpoint was overall bowel bother. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The QoL substudy recruited 2100 patients; 1141 5-yr forms were available from 1957 patients still alive (58%). There were no statistically significant differences in 5-yr prevalence of overall "moderate or big" bowel bother: 19/349 (5.4%), 29/381 (7.6%), and 21/393 (5.3%) for 74, 60, and 57 Gy, respectively; overall urinary or sexual bother at 5 yr was similar between schedules. Bowel and urinary symptoms remained stable from 2 to 5 yr for all schedules. Some evidence of worsening overall sexual bother from baseline to 5 yr was less likely in the hypofractionated schedules compared with 74 Gy (odds ratios for increase in bother score vs 74 Gy: 0.55 [0.30-0.99], p = 0.009 for 60 Gy, and 0.52 [0.29-0.94], p = 0.004 for 57 Gy). General QoL scores were similar between schedules at 5 yr. CONCLUSIONS: Longer follow-up confirms earlier findings, with similar patient-reported bowel, urinary, and sexual problems between schedules overall. The continued low incidence of moderate or high bother confirms that moderate hypofractionation should be the standard of care for intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at patient-reported outcomes up to 5 yr after treatment in a trial of different radiotherapy schedules for prostate cancer. The findings confirmed that shorter radiotherapy schedules were as safe as standard radiotherapy in terms of bowel, urinary, and sexual problems. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms were similar between schedules up to 5 yr. The continued low incidence of moderate/high bother confirms that moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered the standard of care for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Tracer kinetic analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and CT bladder cancer data: A preliminary comparison to assess the magnitude of water exchange effects.

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of water exchange on tracer kinetic parameter estimates derived from T(1)-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI data using a direct quantitative comparison with DCE-CT. Data were acquired from 12 patients with bladder cancer who underwent DCE-CT followed by DCE-MRI within a week. A two-compartment tracer kinetic model was fitted to the CT data, and two versions of the same model with modifications to account for the fast exchange and no exchange limits of water exchange were fitted to the MR data. The two-compartment tracer kinetic model provided estimates of the fractional plasma volume (v(p)), the extravascular extracellular space fraction (v(e)), plasma perfusion (F(p)), and the microvascular permeability surface area product. Our findings suggest that DCE-CT is an appropriate reference for DCE-MRI in bladder cancers as the only significant difference found between CT and MR parameter estimates were the no exchange limit estimates of v(p) (P = 0.002). These results suggest that although water exchange between the intracellular and extravascular-extracellular space has a negligible effect on DCE-MRI, vascular-extravascular-extracellular space water exchange may be more important.

Ten-Year Outcomes of Moderately Hypofractionated Salvage Postprostatectomy Radiation Therapy and External Validation of a Contemporary Multivariable Nomogram for Biochemical Failure.

PURPOSE: Although high-level evidence supports moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for definitive prostate treatment, there is less evidence for its use in the postprostatectomy setting. We externally validated a contemporary nomogram predicting biochemical failure (BF) after salvage radiation therapy (SRT) and report long-term disease control outcomes for hypofractionated SRT to the prostate bed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective review was performed for 112 patients treated with hypofractionated SRT (52.5 Gy in 20 fractions using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy) for pT2-4R0-1N0/XM0 prostate adenocarcinoma, with postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) greater than 0.1 ng/mL or rising. Freedom from BF (FFBF), distant metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and overall survival were analyzed from commencement of radiation therapy. Cox regression was performed on FFBF to account for covariates. BF was defined as a PSA ≥0.4 ng/mL and rising after SRT. Early SRT was defined as SRT commencing at a pre-SRT PSA of ≤0.2 ng/mL. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 10.0 years (interquartile range, 9.3-10.7 years), median pre-SRT PSA was 0.4 ng/mL, and androgen deprivation therapy was used in 14% of patients. The 5/10-year FFBF, distant metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and overall survival were 68%/51%, 7%/16%, 5%/11%, and 90%/75%, respectively. FFBF for early SRT compared with late SRT was 81% versus 66% at 5 years and 68% versus 49% at 10 years. On multivariable analysis, pre-SRT PSA, International Society of Urologic Pathology grade group, seminal vesicle invasion, and androgen deprivation therapy use were associated with FFBF. The nomogram c-index was 0.67, and it overestimated FFBF by 10% and 15% at 5 and 10 years, respectively, with confidence intervals overlapping the line of unity. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionated SRT provides long-term disease control outcomes comparable to conventionally fractionated radiation therapy. Early SRT provides improved disease control, with two-thirds of patients with pre-SRT PSA of ≤0.2 ng/mL free of BF at 10 years. We performed the first external validation of the Tendulkar salvage nomogram, which showed a robust model performance.

Palliative Radiation Therapy in Bladder Cancer-Importance of Patient Selection: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effectiveness of palliative pelvic radiation therapy (PRT) in patients with bladder cancer and identify factors associated with treatment outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with bladder cancer receiving PRT were identified retrospectively from 2 cancer centers between 2014 and 2017. Patients were stratified by age, stage, performance status, comorbidities, previous chemotherapy, previous radiation therapy, and radiation therapy protocol. Patients were followed up at 6 weeks after radiation therapy (RT). Median overall survival (mOS) from the last fraction of RT was calculated. Death within 30 days of RT or noncompletion of treatment were considered as futile treatment. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-one patients were identified as receiving PRT. A variety of RT protocols were used: 8 Gy in 1 fraction (11%), 21 Gy in 3 fractions (15%), 20 Gy in 5 fractions (18%), 36 Gy in 6 fractions (36%), and 27.5 to 30 Gy in 8 to 10 fractions (18%). Thirty-eight percent of patients were of poor performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥3), and 46.5% had significant comorbidities (Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 ≥2). The mOS from the last fraction of RT was 153 days (0-1289 days). The 30-day mortality after radiation therapy was 18% (n = 44), and the rate of incomplete planned radiation therapy treatment was 14% (n = 33). First follow-up information was available in 62% (n = 150) of patients. Median time to this follow-up was 49 days (14-238 days). At first follow-up at about 6 weeks after the last fraction of radiation therapy, symptoms were reported in 150 of 200 (75%) living patients; 80 of 150 (53%) patients reported improvement in symptoms after treatment. There were significant differences in mOS with stage, performance status, and comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: One in 4 patients either did not complete the planned RT course or died within 30 days of treatment. These patients were unlikely to have received maximal benefit from treatment but may have experienced side effects, making treatment futile. Patients with good performance status and earlier stage disease survived longer. Patient selection and comprehensive assessment are crucial in selecting appropriate patients for treatment.

Late tissue effects following radiotherapy and neoadjuvant hormone therapy of the prostate measured with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To use quantitative MRI to detect changes in the vascular and MR relaxation characteristics of the prostate gland 1 year after external beam radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients underwent MRI before and after external beam radiotherapy for prostatic adenocarcinoma. Tracer kinetics analysis was applied to data from regions of interest in prostate tumour, normal prostate peripheral zone and muscle to obtain estimates of blood flow, extravascular-extracellular volume, blood volume and capillary permeability surface area product. T(1) and T(2) were also measured in these regions. RESULTS: Significant changes (p<0.05) after radiotherapy were found in all three tissues examined. Tumour blood flow was 0.34 and 0.14 ml (ml tissue)(-1) min(-1) before and after treatment, respectively, and T(1) increased from 922 to 1,070 ms. In normal peripheral zone, extravascular-extracellular volume increased from 0.21 to 0.52 ml (ml tissue)(-1), and T(2) decreased from 126 to 106 ms. In muscle, both permeability surface area product and T(2) rose, from 0.02 to 0.06 ml (ml tissue)(-1) min(-1) and from 50 to 56 ms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative MRI can be used to measure significant changes in both vascular and MR relaxation properties of the prostate and nearby muscle following treatment for prostate cancer using external beam radiotherapy.

Analysis of prostate-specific antigen bounce after I(125) permanent seed implant for localised prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To report on the incidence of benign prostate-specific antigen bounce following permanent I(125) prostate brachytherapy, to describe the associations in our population and review the relationship of bounce to subsequent biochemical failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From February 2000 to May 2005, 374 patients with localised prostate cancer were treated with I(125) permanent prostate brachytherapy at a single institution. A prospectively collected database was used to identify cases of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce, defined as a rise of 0.2 ng/ml above an initial PSA nadir with subsequent decline to or below that nadir without treatment. The patients who received neo-adjuvant or adjuvant hormone manipulation were excluded. Biochemical failure was determined using the both the ASTRO consensus definition and Phoenix (nadir +2 ng/mL) definition. RESULTS: Two hundred and five patients were identified with a median follow-up of 45 months (24-85). PSA bounce was noted in 79 (37%) men, occurring at a median of 14.8 months (1.7-40.6) following implant. The median peak PSA was 1.8 ng/ml (0.4-7.4) with a bounce magnitude of 0.91 ng/ml (0.2-5.8). When pre- and post-implant factors were assessed for association to bounce, only younger age was statistically significant (p=0.002). The threshold for biochemical failure as defined by the ASTRO consensus definition (1997) was met in 4 (5%) patients after experiencing bounce as opposed to 19 (15%) non-bounce patients (p=0.01). The threshold for Phoenix (nadir +2 ng/mL) was met in 6 (7.5%) patients following bounce versus 22 (17%) of non-bounce patients (p=0.003). Both definitions are prone to false positive calls during bounce. Median PSA velocity during the bounce was 0.08 ng/mL/month (0.02-0.98) and was statistically significantly lower than the median velocity prior to the Phoenix biochemical failure at 0.28 ng/mL/month (0.07-2.04) (p=0.0005). CONCLUSION: PSA bounce is a common finding in our population and is associated with a lower rate of subsequent biochemical failure. The noted differences in PSA velocity will require verification in a future analysis to reduce the influence of median follow-up on this finding. Patients should be advised of the potential of bounce in PSA follow-up after permanent I(125) prostate brachytherapy and physicians involved in follow-up of prostate brachytherapy patients should be aware of this phenomenon, allowing them to commit to appropriate PSA surveillance, avoiding the premature and inappropriate initiation of salvage therapy during PSA bounce.