Summary Background Studies have reported a low α/β ratio for prostate cancer, suggesting that hypofractionation could enhance the biological tumour dose without increasing genitourinary and ...gastrointestinal toxicity. In the multicentre phase 3, HYpofractionated irradiation for PROstate cancer (HYPRO) trial, hypofractionated radiotherapy was compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for treatment of prostate cancer. We have previously reported acute and late incidence of genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity; here we report protocol-defined 5-year relapse-free survival outcomes. Methods We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at seven Dutch radiotherapy centres. We enrolled patients with intermediate-risk to high-risk T1b–T4NX–N0MX–M0 localised prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen concentration of 60 μg/L or less, and a WHO performance status of 0–2. We used a web-based application to randomly assign (1:1) patients to either hypofractionated radiotherapy of 64·6 Gy (19 fractions of 3·4 Gy, three fractions per week) or conventionally fractionated radiotherapy of 78·0 Gy (39 fractions of 2·0 Gy, five fractions per week). Based on an estimated α/β ratio for prostate cancer of 1·5 Gy, the equivalent total dose in fractions of 2·0 Gy was 90·4 Gy for hypofractionation compared with 78·0 Gy for conventional fractionation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis in all eligible patients. The HYPRO trial completed recruitment in 2010 and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN85138529. Findings Between March 19, 2007, and Dec 3, 2010, 820 patients were enrolled, of whom 804 were eligible and assessable for intention-to-treat analyses. Of these, 407 were assigned hypofractionated radiotherapy and 397 were allocated conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. 537 (67%) of 804 patients received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy for a median duration of 32 months (IQR 10–44). Median follow-up was 60 months (IQR 51–69). Treatment failure was reported in 169 (21%) of 804 patients, 80 (20%) in the hypofractionation group and 89 (22%) in the conventional fractionation group. 5-year relapse-free survival was 80·5% (95% CI 75·7–84·4) for patients assigned hypofractionation and 77·1% (71·9–81·5) for those allocated conventional fractionation (adjusted hazard radio 0·86, 95% CI 0·63–1·16; log-rank p=0·36). There were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Hypofractionated radiotherapy was not superior to conventional radiotherapy with respect to 5-year relapse-free survival. Our hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen cannot be regarded as the new standard of care for patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer. Funding Dutch Cancer Society.
Summary Background In 2007, we began the randomised phase 3 multicentre HYPRO trial to investigate the effect of hypofractionated radiotherapy compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy ...on relapse-free survival in patients with prostate cancer. Here, we examine whether patients experience differences in acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse effects. Methods In this randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial, done in seven radiotherapy centres in the Netherlands, we enrolled intermediate-risk or high-risk patients aged between 44 and 85 years with histologically confirmed stage T1b–T4 NX-0MX-0 prostate cancer, a PSA concentration of 60 ng/mL or lower, and WHO performance status of 0–2. A web-based application was used to randomly assign (1:1) patients to receive either standard fractionation with 39 fractions of 2 Gy in 8 weeks (five fractions per week) or hypofractionation with 19 fractions of 3·4 Gy in 6·5 weeks (three fractions per week). Randomisation was done with minimisation procedure, stratified by treatment centre and risk group. The primary endpoint is 5-year relapse-free survival. Here we report data for the acute toxicity outcomes: the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Non-inferiority of hypofractionation was tested separately for genitourinary and gastrointestinal acute toxic effects, with a null hypothesis that cumulative incidences of each type of adverse event were not more than 8% higher in the hypofractionation group than in the standard fractionation group. We scored acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic effects according to RTOG-EORTC criteria from both case report forms and patients' self-assessment questionnaires, at baseline, twice during radiotherapy, and 3 months after completion of radiotherapy. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Patient recruitment has been completed. This study is registered with www.controlled-trials.com , number ISRCTN85138529. Findings Between March 19, 2007, and Dec 3, 2010, 820 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with standard fractionation (n=410) or hypofractionation (n=410). 3 months after radiotherapy, 73 (22%) patients in the standard fractionation group and 75 (23%) patients in the hypofractionation group reported grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity; grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity was noted in 43 (13%) patients in the standard fractionation group and in 42 (13%) in the hypofractionation group. Grade 4 acute genitourinary toxicity was reported for two patients, one (<1%) in each group. No grade 4 acute gastrointestinal toxicities were observed. We noted no significant difference in cumulative incidence by 120 days after radiotherapy of grade 2 or worse acute genitourinary toxicity (57·8% 95% CI 52·9–62·7 in the standard fractionation group vs 60·5% (55·8–65·3) in the hypofractionation group; difference 2·7%, 90% CI −2·99 to 8·48; odds ratio OR 1·12, 95% CI 0·84–1·49; p=0·43). The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity by 120 days after radiotherapy was higher in patients given hypofractionation (31·2% 95% CI 26·6–35·8 in the standard fractionation group vs 42·0% 37·2–46·9 in the hypofractionation group; difference 10·8%, 90% CI 5·25–16·43; OR 1·6; p=0·0015; non-inferiority not confirmed). Interpretation Hypofractionated radiotherapy was not non-inferior to standard fractionated radiotherapy in terms of acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity for men with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. In fact, the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity was significantly higher in patients given hypofractionation than in those given standard fractionated radiotherapy. Patients remain in follow-up for efficacy endpoints. Funding The Dutch Cancer Society.
Technical developments in the field of external beam radiation therapy (RT) enabled the clinical introduction of image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT), which improved target ...conformity and allowed reduction of safety margins. Whether this had an impact on late toxicity levels compared to previously applied three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) is currently unknown. We analyzed late side effects after treatment with IG-IMRT or 3D-CRT, evaluating 2 prospective cohorts of men treated for localized prostate cancer to investigate the hypothesized reductions in toxicity.
Patients treated with 3D-CRT (n=189) or IG-IMRT (n=242) to 78 Gy in 39 fractions were recruited from 2 Dutch randomized trials with identical toxicity scoring protocols. Late toxicity (>90 days after treatment) was derived from self-assessment questionnaires and case report forms, according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (RTOG-EORTC) scoring criteria. Grade ≥2 endpoints included gastrointestinal (GI) rectal bleeding, increased stool frequency, discomfort, rectal incontinence, proctitis, and genitourinary (GU) obstruction, increased urinary frequency, nocturia, urinary incontinence, and dysuria. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare grade ≥2 toxicities between both techniques, adjusting for other modifying factors.
The 5-year cumulative incidence of grade ≥2 GI toxicity was 24.9% for IG-IMRT and 37.6% following 3D-CRT (adjusted hazard ratio HR: 0.59, P=.005), with significant reductions in proctitis (HR: 0.37, P=.047) and increased stool frequency (HR: 0.23, P<.001). GU grade ≥2 toxicity levels at 5 years were comparable with 46.2% and 36.4% following IG-IMRT and 3D-CRT, respectively (adjusted HR: 1.19, P=.33). Other strong predictors (P<.01) of grade ≥2 late toxicity were baseline complaints, acute toxicity, and age.
Treatment with IG-IMRT reduced the risk of late grade ≥2 complications, whereas GU toxicities remained comparable. This clinically relevant observation demonstrates that IMRT and image-guidance should therefore be the preferred treatment option, provided that margin reduction is implemented with caution.
Recently, the bladder preserving potential of radiotherapy for invasive bladder cancer (bladder RT) has been recognized, and there is a renewed interest to improve bladder RT. The pivotal problem in ...bladder RT is caused by organ motion: without image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), generous margins in the range of 2-3 cm have to be applied to account for organ motion, implying large treatment volumes and dose-limiting toxicity. IGRT has the potential to substantially reduce those margins, and thereby reduce treatment volumes. This review summarizes the literature on organ motion and IGRT for bladder cancer, and several bladder-specific problems and IGRT strategies are discussed.
Fiducial markers are a good surrogate for the prostate but provide little information on the position and orientation of the seminal vesicles (SVs). Therefore, a more advanced localization method is ...warranted if the SVs are part of the target volume. The purpose of this study was to develop a hybrid registration technique for the localization of the prostate and SVs.
Twenty prostate patients implanted with 2 or 3 elongated fiducial markers had cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans acquired at every fraction. The first step of the hybrid registration was to localize the prostate by CBCT-to-planning-CT alignment of the fiducial markers, allowing both translations and rotations. Using this marker registration as a starting point, the SVs were registered based on gray values, allowing only rotations around the lateral axis. We analyzed the differential rotation between the prostate and SVs and compared the required SV margins for 3 correction strategies.
The SV registration had a precision of 2.7° (1 standard deviation) and was successful for 96% of the scans. Mean (M), systematic (Σ), and random (σ) differences between the orientation of the prostate and SV were M = -0.4°, Σ = 7.2°, and σ = 6.4°. Daily marker-based corrections required an SV margin of 11.4 mm (translations only) and 11.6 mm (translations + rotations). Rotation corrections of the SVs reduced the required margin to 8.2 mm.
We found substantial differences between the orientation of the prostate and SVs. The hybrid registration technique can accurately detect these rotations during treatment. Rotation correction of the SVs allows for margin reduction for the SVs.
Summary Background Several studies have reported a low α to β ratio for prostate cancer, suggesting that hypofractionation could enhance the biological tumour dose without increasing genitourinary ...and gastrointestinal toxicity. We tested this theory in the phase 3 HYPRO trial for patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. We have previously reported acute incidence of genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity; here we report data for late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Methods In this randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial, done in seven radiotherapy centres in the Netherlands, we enrolled intermediate-risk or high-risk patients aged between 44 and 85 years with histologically confirmed stage T1b–T4 NX–0MX–0 prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen concentration of 60 ng/mL or lower, and WHO performance status of 0–2. A web-based application was used to randomly assign (1:1) patients to receive either standard fractionation with 39 fractions of 2 Gy in 8 weeks (five fractions per week) or hypofractionation with 19 fractions of 3·4 Gy in 6·5 weeks (three fractions per week). Randomisation was done with the minimisation procedure, stratified by treatment centre and risk group. The primary endpoint was to detect a 10% enhancement in 5-year relapse-free survival with hypofractionation. A key additional endpoint was non-inferiority of hypofractionation in cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. We planned to reject inferiority of hypofractionation for late genitourinary toxicity if the estimated hazard ratio (HR) was less than 1·11 and for gastrointestinal toxicity was less than 1·13. We scored toxicity with the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (RTOG/EORTC) criteria from both physicians' records (clinical record form) and patients' self-assessment questionnaires. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Patient recruitment for the HYPRO trial was completed in 2010. The trial was registered with www.controlled-trials.com , number ISRCTN85138529. Findings Between March 19, 2007, and Dec 3, 2010, 820 patients (410 in both groups) were randomly assigned. Analyses for late toxicity included 387 assessable patients in the standard fractionation group and 395 in the hypofractionation group. The median follow-up was 60 months (IQR 51·2–67·3). The database for all analyses (both groups and both genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities) was locked on March 26, 2015. The incidence of grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity at 3 years was 39·0% (95% CI 34·2–44·1) in the standard fractionation group and 41·3% (36·6–46·4) in the hypofractionation group. The estimated HR for the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse late genitourinary toxicity was 1·16 (90% CI 0·98–1·38), suggesting that non-inferiority could not be shown. The incidence of grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity at 3 years was 17·7% (14·1–21·9) in standard fractionation and 21·9% (18·1–26·4) hypofractionation. With an estimated HR of 1·19 (90% CI 0·93–1·52) for the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse late gastrointestinal toxicity, we could not confirm non-inferiority of hypofractionation for cumulative late gastrointestinal toxicity. Cumulative grade 3 or worse late genitourinary toxicity was significantly higher in the hypofractionation group than in the standard fractionation group (19·0% 95% CI 15·2–23·2 vs 12·9% 9·7–16·7, respectively; p=0·021), but there was no significant difference between cumulative grade 3 or worse late gastrointestinal toxicity (2·6% 95% CI 1·2–4·7) in the standard fractionation group and 3·3% 1·7–5·6 in the hypofractionation group; p=0·55). Interpretation Our data could not confirm that hypofractionation was non-inferior for cumulative late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity compared with standard fractionation. Before final conclusions can be made about the utility of hypofractionation, efficacy outcomes need to be reported. Funding The Dutch Cancer Society.
