Umeå University's logo

BACKGROUND: The HYPO-RT-PC trial compared conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with localised prostate cancer. Ultra-hypofractionation was non-inferior to conventional fractionation regarding 5-year failure-free survival and toxicity. We aimed to assess whether patient-reported quality of life (QOL) differs between conventional fractionation and ultra-hypofractionation up to 6 years after treatment in the HYPO-RT-PC trial.

METHODS: HYPO-RT-PC is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 12 centres (seven university hospitals and five county hospitals) in Sweden and Denmark. Inclusion criteria were histologically verified intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer (defined as T1c-T3a with one or two of the following risk factors: stage T3a; Gleason score ≥7; and prostate-specific antigen 10-20 ng/mL with no evidence of lymph node involvement or distant metastases), age up to 75 years, and WHO performance status 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to conventional fractionation (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks) or ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) via a minimisation algorithm with stratification by trial centre, T-stage, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen. QOL was measured using the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at baseline, the end of radiotherapy, months 3, 6, 12, and 24 after radiotherapy, every other year thereafter up to 10 years, and at 15 years. The primary endpoint (failure-free survival) has been reported elsewhere. Here we report QOL, a secondary endpoint analysed in the per-protocol population, up to 6 years after radiotherapy. The HYPO-RT-PC trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN45905321.

FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were enrolled and 1180 were randomly assigned (conventional fractionation n=591, ultra-hypofractionation n=589); 1165 patients (conventional fractionation n=582, ultra-hypofractionation n=583) were included in this QOL analysis. 158 (71%) of 223 patients in the conventional fractionation group and 146 (66%) of 220 in the ultra-hypofractionation group completed questionnaires at 6 years. The median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 25-72). In seven of ten bowel symptoms or problems the proportion of patients with clinically relevant deteriorations at the end of radiotherapy was significantly higher in the ultra-hypofractionation group than in the conventional fractionation group (stool frequency [p<0·0001], rush to toilet [p=0·0013], flatulence [p=0·0013], bowel cramp [p<0·0001], mucus [p=0·0014], blood in stool [p<0·0001], and limitation in daily activity [p=0·0014]). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with clinically relevant acute urinary symptoms or problems (total 14 items) and sexual functioning between the two treatment groups at end of radiotherapy. Thereafter, there were no clinically relevant differences in urinary, bowel, or sexual functioning between the groups. At the 6-year follow-up there was no difference in the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between the groups for overall urinary bother (43 [33%] of 132 for conventional fractionation vs 33 [28%] of 120 for ultra-hypofractionation; mean difference 5·1% [95% CI -4·4 to 14·6]; p=0·38), overall bowel bother (43 [33%] of 129 vs 34 [28%] of 123; 5·7% [-3·8 to 15·2]; p=0·33), overall sexual bother (75 [60%] of 126 vs 59 [50%] of 117; 9·1% [-1·4 to 19·6]; p=0·15), or global health/QOL (56 [42%] of 134 vs 46 [37%] of 125; 5·0% [-5·0 to 15·0]; p=0·41).

INTERPRETATION: Although acute toxicity was higher for ultra-hypofractionation than conventional fractionation, this long-term patient-reported QOL analysis shows that ultra-hypofractionation was as well tolerated as conventional fractionation up to 6 years after completion of treatment. These findings support the use of ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer.

FUNDING: The Nordic Cancer Union, the Swedish Cancer Society, and the Swedish Research Council.

Background: Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer has gained increased attention due to its proposed high radiation-fraction sensitivity. Recent reports from studies comparing moderately hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy support the clinical use of moderate hypofractionation. To date, there are no published randomised studies on ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy. Here, we report the outcomes of the Scandinavian HYPO-RT-PC phase 3 trial with the aim to show non-inferiority of ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation.

Methods: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 non-inferiority trial done in 12 centres in Sweden and Denmark, we recruited men up to 75 years of age with intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer and a WHO performance status between 0 and 2. Patients were randomly assigned to ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) or conventional fractionated radiotherapy (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks). No androgen deprivation therapy was allowed. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure, analysed in the per-protocol population. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4% at 5 years, corresponding to a critical hazard ratio (HR) limit of 1·338. Physician-recorded toxicity was measured according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) morbidity scale and patient-reported outcome measurements with the Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) questionnaire. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN45905321.

Findings: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were randomly assigned to conventional fractionation (n=602) or ultra-hypofractionation (n=598), of whom 1180 (591 conventional fractionation and 589 ultra-hypofractionation) constituted the per-protocol population. 1054 (89%) participants were intermediate risk and 126 (11%) were high risk. Median follow-up time was 5·0 years (IQR 3·1–7·0). The estimated failure-free survival at 5 years was 84% (95% CI 80–87) in both treatment groups, with an adjusted HR of 1·002 (95% CI 0·758–1·325; log-rank p=0·99). There was weak evidence of an increased frequency of acute physician-reported RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group at end of radiotherapy (158 [28%] of 569 patients vs 132 [23%] of 578 patients; p=0·057). There were no significant differences in grade 2 or worse urinary or bowel late toxicity between the two treatment groups at any point after radiotherapy, except for an increase in urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared to the conventional fractionation group at 1-year follow-up (32 [6%] of 528 patients vs 13 [2%] of 529 patients; (p=0·0037). We observed no differences between groups in frequencies at 5 years of RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity (11 [5%] of 243 patients for the ultra-hypofractionation group vs 12 [5%] of 249 for the conventional fractionation group; p=1·00) and bowel toxicity (three [1%] of 244 patients vs nine [4%] of 249 patients; p=0·14). Patient-reported outcomes revealed significantly higher levels of acute urinary and bowel symptoms in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared with the conventional fractionation group but no significant increases in late symptoms were found, except for increased urinary symptoms at 1-year follow-up, consistent with the physician-evaluated toxicity.

Interpretation: Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy is non-inferior to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high risk prostate cancer regarding failure-free survival. Early side-effects are more pronounced with ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation whereas late toxicity is similar in both treatment groups. The results support the use of ultra-hypofractionation for radiotherapy of prostate cancer.

Funding: The Nordic Cancer Union, the Swedish Cancer Society, and the Swedish Research Council.

Background and purpose: Health related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed in the randomised, prospective ARTSCAN study comparing conventional radiotherapy (CF) with accelerated radiotherapy (AF) for head and neck cancer.

Material and methods: 750 patients with squamous cell carcinoma (of any grade and stage) in the oral cavity, oro-, or hypopharynx or larynx (except T1-2, NO glottic carcinoma) without distant metastases were randomised to either conventional fractionation (2 Gy/day, 5 days/week in 49 days, total dose 68 Gy) or accelerated fractionation (1.1 + 2.0 Gy/day, 5 days/week in 35 days, total dose 68 Gy). HRQoL was assessed with EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-H&N35 and HADS at baseline, at end of radiotherapy (eRT) and at 3 and 6 months and 1, 2 and 5 years after start of treatment.

Results: The AF group reported HRQoL was significantly lower at eRT and at 3 months for most symptoms, scales and functions. Few significant differences were noted between the groups at 6 months and 5 years. Scores related to functional oral intake never reached baseline.

Conclusion: In comparison to CF, AF has a stronger adverse effect on HRQoL in the acute phase.

Background and purpose: This report contains the mature five-year data from the Swedish ARTSCAN trial including information on the influence of p16 positivity (p16+) for oropharyngeal cancers. Material and methods: Patients with previously untreated squamous cell carcinoma without distant metastases of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx (except T1-2, NO glottic cancers) and hypopharynx were included. Patients were randomised between accelerated fractionation (AF) (1.1 Gy + 2 Gy per day, 5 days/week for 4.5 weeks, total dose 68 Gy) and conventional fractionation (CF) (2 Gy per day, 5 days/week for 7 weeks, total dose 68 Gy). Human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated p16-expression was assessed retrospectively in tumour tissues from patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. Results: There was no significant difference in loco-regional control (LRC) between AF and CF (log-rank test p = 0.75). LRC at 5 years was 65.5% for AF and 64.9% for CF. Overall survival (OS) was similar in both arms (p = 0.99). The estimated cancer specific survival (CSS) at 5 years was 62.2% (AF) and 63.3% (CF) (p = 0.99). 206 specimens were analysed for p16 with 153 specimens (74%) identified as p16+. P16 status did not discriminate for response to AF vs. CF with regard to LRC, OS or CSS. Patients with p16+ tumours had a statistically significant better overall prognosis compared with p16 tumours. Conclusion: This update confirms the results of the 2-year report. We failed to identify a positive effect resulting from AF with regards to LRC, OS and CSS. The addition of information on the HPV-associated p16 overexpression did not explain this lack of effect.

Background Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), an alpha emitter, selectively targets bone metastases with alpha particles. We assessed the efficacy and safety of radium-223 as compared with placebo, in addition to the best standard of care, in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases. Methods In our phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we randomly assigned 921 patients who had received, were not eligible to receive, or declined docetaxel, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive six injections of radium-223 (at a dose of 50 kBq per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or matching placebo; one injection was administered every 4 weeks. In addition, all patients received the best standard of care. The primary end point was overall survival. The main secondary efficacy end points included time to the first symptomatic skeletal event and various biochemical end points. A prespecified interim analysis, conducted when 314 deaths had occurred, assessed the effect of radium-223 versus placebo on survival. An updated analysis, when 528 deaths had occurred, was performed before crossover from placebo to radium-223. Results At the interim analysis, which involved 809 patients, radium-223, as compared with placebo, significantly improved overall survival (median, 14.0 months vs. 11.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.88; two-sided P=0.002). The updated analysis involving 921 patients confirmed the radium-223 survival benefit (median, 14.9 months vs. 11.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83; P<0.001). Assessments of all main secondary efficacy end points also showed a benefit of radium-233 as compared with placebo. Radium-223 was associated with low myelosuppression rates and fewer adverse events. Conclusions In this study, which was terminated for efficacy at the prespecified interim analysis, radium-223 improved overall survival. (Funded by Algeta and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals; ALSYMPCA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699751.)

In this 24-month follow-up of a phase II study in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastases, radium-223 (4 injections of 50 kBq/kg every 4 weeks [n = 33]) improved median overall survival vs. matching placebo (n = 31) (65.3 vs. 46.4 weeks, respectively; log-rank P = .056), with no long-term safety concerns. Data suggest that treatment of bone disease with radium-223 has survival benefits. Background: This phase II randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of radium-223 in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and painful bone metastases. Twelve-and 18-month survival results were reported previously. Here we report 24-month overall survival (OS) and safety data from the period 12 to 24 months after the first injection of study medication. Methods: Patients with CRPC and bone pain were randomized 1: 1 to receive 4 injections of radium-223 (50 kBq/kg [n = 33]) or placebo (n = 31) after external-beam radiotherapy; each injection was given every 4 weeks. Endpoints for this report were 24-month OS, long-term safety, and treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurring in the 12- to 24-month period. Results: After 24 months, 10 (30%) patients were alive in the radium-223 group compared with 4 patients (13%) in the placebo group. Patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication had a median OS of 65 weeks in the radium-223 group vs. 46 weeks in the placebo group (log-rank P = .056). The hazard ratio (HR) for OS, adjusted for baseline covariates, was 0.476 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.258-0.877; Cox regression P = .017). The most frequent cause of death for both arms was disease progression. There were no reports of treatment-related AEs or long-term hematologic toxicity during the 12- to 24-month follow-up. Conclusion: Radium-223 had a highly favorable safety profile, with no evidence of second malignancies at 24-month follow-up. The significant improvement in OS observed in patients receiving radium-223 vs. placebo suggests that treatment of bone disease with radium-223 has survival benefits. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer, Vol. 11, No. 1, 20-6 (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.