scholarly journals Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy vs conventional fractionated radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis from Phase III randomized trials

2019 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 1259-1268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenzhen Yin ◽  
Jinqiang You ◽  
Youyou Wang ◽  
Jinlin Zhao ◽  
Shengpeng Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Fractionated Radiotherapy

scholarly journals Addition of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Brachytherapy Boost to External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (26) ◽  
pp. 3024-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Jackson ◽  
Holly E. Hartman ◽  
Robert T. Dess ◽  
Sam R. Birer ◽  
Payal D. Soni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost ◽  
Meta Analyses

PURPOSE In men with localized prostate cancer, the addition of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or a brachytherapy boost (BT) to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have been shown to improve various oncologic end points. Practice patterns indicate that those who receive BT are significantly less likely to receive ADT, and thus we sought to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the predicted outcomes of a randomized trial of EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review identified published randomized trials comparing EBRT with or without ADT, or EBRT (with or without ADT) with or without BT, that reported on overall survival (OS). Standard fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed for each comparison, and a meta-regression was conducted to adjust for use and duration of ADT. Network meta-analyses were performed to compare EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. Bayesian analyses were also performed, and a rank was assigned to each treatment after Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses to create a surface under the cumulative ranking curve. RESULTS Six trials compared EBRT with or without ADT (n = 4,663), and 3 compared EBRT with or without BT (n = 718). The addition of ADT to EBRT improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.81]), whereas the addition of BT did not significantly improve OS (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.36]). In a network meta-analysis, EBRT plus ADT had improved OS compared with EBRT plus BT (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]). Bayesian modeling demonstrated an 88% probability that EBRT plus ADT resulted in superior OS compared with EBRT plus BT. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that current practice patterns of omitting ADT with EBRT plus BT may result in inferior OS compared with EBRT plus ADT in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. ADT for these men should remain a critical component of treatment regardless of radiotherapy delivery method until randomized evidence demonstrates otherwise.

scholarly journals Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Guo ◽  
Yun-Chuan Sun ◽  
Jian-Qiang Bi ◽  
Xin-Ying He ◽  
Li Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Conventional Radiotherapy ◽  
Results Of Treatment

Abstract Background Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. The results of treatment after hypofractionated radiotherapy only have been reported from several small randomized clinical trials. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer. Methods Relevant studies were identified through searching related databases till August 2018. Hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as pooled statistics for all analyses. Results The meta-analysis results showed that overall survival (HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.93–1.35, p = 0.219) and prostate cancer-specific survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.42–3.95, p = 0.661) were similar in two groups. The pooled data showed that biochemical failure was RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76–1.07, p = 0.248. The incidence of acute adverse gastrointestinal events (grade ≥ 2) was higher in the hypofractionated radiotherapy (RR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.12–2.56, p = 0.012); conversely, for late grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal adverse events, a significant increase in the conventional radiotherapy was found (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.61–0.91, p = 0.003). Acute (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.89–1.15, p = 0.894) and late (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86–1.10, p = 0.692) genitourinary adverse events (grade ≥ 2) were similar for both treatment groups. Conclusion Results suggest that the efficacy and risk for adverse events are comparable for hypofractionated radiotherapy and conventional radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy is more effective and safe for localized prostate cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Oncotarget ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 2647-2658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Cao ◽  
Yong-Jing Yang ◽  
Zhi-Wen Li ◽  
Hong-Fen Wu ◽  
Zhu-Chun Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

scholarly journals Radiation therapy dose and androgen deprivation therapy in localized prostate cancer: a meta-regression of 5-year outcomes in phase III randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommy Jiang ◽  
Daniela Markovic ◽  
Jay Patel ◽  
Jesus E. Juarez ◽  
Ting Martin Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Treatment Intensification ◽  
Meta Regression

Abstract Background While multiple randomized trials have evaluated the benefit of radiation therapy (RT) dose escalation and the use and prolongation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the treatment of prostate cancer, few studies have evaluated the relative benefit of either form of treatment intensification with each other. Many trials have included treatment strategies that incorporate either high or low dose RT, or short-term or long-term ADT (STADT or LTADT), in one or more trial arms. We sought to compare different forms of treatment intensification of RT in the context of localized prostate cancer. Methods Using preferred reporting items for systemic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we collected over 40 phases III clinical trials comparing different forms of RT for localized prostate cancer. We performed a meta-regression of 40 individual trials with 21,429 total patients to allow a comparison of the rates and cumulative proportions of 5-year overall survival (OS), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and distant metastasis (DM) for each treatment arm of every trial. Results Dose-escalation either in the absence or presence of STADT failed to significantly improve any 5-year outcome. In contrast, adding LTADT to low dose RT significantly improved 5-year PCSM (Odds ratio [OR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22–0.54, p < 0.001) and DM (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20–0.63. p < 0.001) over low dose RT alone. Adding STADT also significantly improved 5-year PCSM over low dose RT alone (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.75, p < 0.001). Conclusion While limited by between-study heterogeneity and a lack of individual patient data, this meta-analysis suggests that adding ADT, versus increasing RT dose alone, offers a more consistent improvement in clinical endpoints.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document