雄激素剥夺和放疗联合或不联合多西他赛治疗局部高危前列腺癌:NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 随机试验的长期随访" [Eur. Eurol.

IF 25.3 1区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY European urology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.009
{"title":"雄激素剥夺和放疗联合或不联合多西他赛治疗局部高危前列腺癌:NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 随机试验的长期随访\" [Eur. Eurol.","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, and participants</h3><p>High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (&gt;50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Outcome measurements and statistical analysis</h3><p>The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).</p></div><div><h3>Results and limitations</h3><p>After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank <em>p</em> = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided <em>p</em> = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.</p></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><p>No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12223,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436/pdfft?md5=d861e2f9cb533b3f943f830ef7d937ca&pid=1-s2.0-S0302283824024436-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Corrigendum to “Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy with or Without Docetaxel for Localized High-risk Prostat Cancer: Long-term Follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial” [Eur. Eurol. 84(2) (2023) 156–163]\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, and participants</h3><p>High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (&gt;50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Outcome measurements and statistical analysis</h3><p>The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).</p></div><div><h3>Results and limitations</h3><p>After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank <em>p</em> = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided <em>p</em> = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.</p></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><p>No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":25.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436/pdfft?md5=d861e2f9cb533b3f943f830ef7d937ca&pid=1-s2.0-S0302283824024436-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:加强治疗可改善高危局部前列腺癌患者的预后:加强治疗可改善高危局部前列腺癌患者的预后:提供III期RTOG 0521的长期随访数据,该研究比较了雄激素剥夺疗法(ADT)+体外放射治疗(EBRT)+多西他赛与ADT+EBRT的组合疗法:高危局部前列腺癌患者(超过50%的患者患有Gleason 9-10疾病)被前瞻性地随机分配到ADT + EBRT 2年或ADT + EBRT + 多西他赛6个周期的治疗中。共招募了612名患者,其中563名符合条件并纳入了修改后的意向治疗分析:主要终点是总生存期(OS)。按照方案中的预设,进行了Cox比例危险度分析;但有证据表明存在非比例危险度。因此,使用受限平均生存时间(RMST)进行了事后分析。次要终点包括生化治疗失败、常规影像学检测到的远处转移(DM)和无病生存期(DFS):幸存者中位随访 10.4 年后,OS 的危险比(HR)为 0.89(90% 置信区间 [CI] 0.70-1.14;单侧对数秩 P = 0.22)。ADT + EBRT 的 10 年生存率为 64%,ADT + EBRT + 多西他赛的 10 年生存率为 69%。12 年的 RMST 为 0.45,无统计学意义(单侧 p = 0.053)。在 DFS(HR = 0.92,95% CI 0.73-1.14)、DM(HR = 0.84,95% CI 0.73-1.14)或前列腺特异性抗原复发风险(HR = 0.97,95% CI 0.74-1.29)的发生率方面未发现差异。化疗组有两名患者出现5级毒性,对照组为零:结论:对存活患者进行中位随访10.4年后,实验组和对照组的临床结果无明显差异。这些数据表明,多西他赛不应被用于高风险的局部前列腺癌。患者总结:在一项大型前瞻性试验中,高危局部前列腺癌患者在接受雄激素剥夺疗法+前列腺放射治疗+多西他赛治疗后,经过长期随访,生存率没有发现明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Corrigendum to “Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy with or Without Docetaxel for Localized High-risk Prostat Cancer: Long-term Follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial” [Eur. Eurol. 84(2) (2023) 156–163]

Background

Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Objective

To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.

Design, setting, and participants

High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (>50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).

Results and limitations

After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank p = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided p = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.

Conclusions

After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.

Patient summary

No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European urology
European urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
43.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1753
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles and reviews on a broad spectrum of urological issues. Covering topics such as oncology, impotence, infertility, pediatrics, lithiasis and endourology, the journal also highlights recent advances in techniques, instrumentation, surgery, and pediatric urology. This comprehensive approach provides readers with an in-depth guide to international developments in urology.
期刊最新文献
First and Second-line Treatments in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Re: Maarten De Rooij, Clare Allen, Jasper J. Twilt, et al. PI-QUAL Version 2: An Update of a Standardised Scoring System for the Assessment of Image Quality of Prostate MRI. Eur Radiol. In press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10795-4 Challenges and Considerations in Modern Adjuvant Therapy Trials in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Call to Power Best Practice in Using Social Media: The European Association of Urology Position Statement What’s in a Name? Why Words Matter in Advanced Prostate Cancer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1