Self-reported Conflicts of Interest and Trial Sponsorship of Clinical Trials in Prostate Cancer Involving Radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between trial sponsorship and conflicts of interest (COI) with clinical trial conclusions for prostate cancer trials related to radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched for all prostate cancer clinical trials published between 2004 and 2013 and identified 1396 studies. Two investigators independently identified trials published in the English language of ≥30 patients, and extracted relevant data. Clinical trials were classified according to trial characteristics, sponsorship source and type, COI, and study conclusion, and analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 240 eligible trials, 160 (67.5%) evaluated drugs without radiotherapy, 60 (25%) involved radiotherapy, and 18 (7.5%) involved procedures without radiotherapy. Of the 60 radiotherapy trials eligible for analysis, positive sponsorship and potential COI were present in 58.3% and 20% of trials, respectively. Study conclusions were positive, negative, or neutral in 78.3%, 5%, and 16.7% of trials, respectively. No association was found between positive conclusions and either industry support of potential COI. Positive conclusions were reported in 86.7% and 83.3% of trials with sponsorship and COI, respectively, as compared with 75.6% and 77.1% of those without sponsorship (P=0.37) and COI (P=0.64). Sponsorship was significantly associated with radiotherapy trials combined with drugs (odds ratio 5.5, P=0.01) and higher-risk disease (odds ratio 4.71, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of sponsorship was associated with radiotherapy trials involving drugs or studying higher-risk prostate cancer. However, there were no identified associations between study conclusion and sponsorship type or COI.

[Prostate cancer: what treatment techniques for which tumors? Ethical and methodological issues]. / Cancers de prostate : quelles techniques de radiothérapie pour quelles tumeurs ? Enjeux éthiques et méthodologiques.

The identification of the optimal radiation technique in prostate cancer is based on the results of dosimetric and clinical studies, although there are almost no randomized studies comparing different radiation techniques. The feasibility of the techniques depends also on the technical and human resources of the radiation department, on the cost of the treatment from the points of view of the society, the patient and the radiation oncologist, and finally on the choice of the patient. The slow evolution of prostate cancer leads to consider the biochemical failure as the main judgment criteria in the majority of the studies. A proper urinary radio-induced toxicity evaluation implies a long follow-up. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) combined with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is recommended in case of high dose (≥76Gy) to the prostate, pelvic lymph nodes irradiation and hypofractionation schedules. For low-risk tumors, the aim of the treatment is to preserve quality of life, while limiting costs. Stereotactic body radiotherapy shows promising results, although the follow-up is still limited and phase III trials are ongoing. Focal radiation techniques are in the step of feasibility. For intermediate and high-risk tumors, the objective of the treatment is to increase the locoregional control, while limiting the toxicity. IMRT combined with IGRT leads to either a well-validated dose escalation strategy for intermediate risk tumors, or to a strategy of moderate hypofractionated schedules, which cannot be yet considered as a standard treatment. These combined radiation techniques allow finally large lymph node target volume irradiation and dose escalation potentially in the dominant intraprostatic lesion. The feasibility of simultaneous integrated boost approaches is demonstrated.

[What technique for what tumor? Ethical and methodological issues: cervical cancer]. / Quelle technique pour quelle tumeur ? Enjeux éthiques et méthodologiques : le cancer du col utérin.

Cancers of the uterus are on the list of cancer sites for which the interest of the use of conformal radiotherapy with intensity modulation is being evaluated by the French Health Authority. In 2014, many consider that many challenges still lie ahead for the integration of this technique in routine management of cervical cancer on intact uterus. These challenges, are they really a barrier to diffusion of this technique for a tumor location where the radiation keeps an important role? The purpose of this review is to discuss, in terms of the risk-benefit balance, the prescription of intensity-modulated radiotherapy compared to non-modulated three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy.

[Intensity-modulated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: ethics and methodology]. / Radiothérapie conformationnelle avec modulation d'intensité des cancers des voies aérodigestives supérieures : enjeux éthiques et méthodologiques.

Numerous studies have shown that intensity-modulated radiation therapy is the standard technique for the radiation treatment of head and neck cancers. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy reduces side effects (xerostomia, dysphagia, fibrosis, etc.) and improves the results for cancer localizations with highly complex shapes such as the cavum or nasal cavity. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy is also a costly technique that necessitates a numerous staff, highly trained, with regular practice. If this technique cannot be available (understaffing, overwork, etc.) the choice between entrusting the patient to a colleague and treating the patient with a less sophisticated technique such as 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy depends on different objective and ethical criteria.