Lawton Colleen A, DeSilvio Michelle, Roach Mack, Uhl Valery, Kirsch Robert, Seider Michael, Rotman Marvin, Jones Christopher, Asbell Sucha, Valicenti Richard, Hahn Stephen, Thomas Charles R
Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Nov 1;69(3):646-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.003. Epub 2007 May 24.
This trial was designed to test the hypothesis that total androgen suppression and whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) followed by a prostate boost improves progression-free survival (PFS) by > or =10% compared with total androgen suppression and prostate only RT (PORT). This trial was also designed to test the hypothesis that neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) followed by concurrent total androgen suppression and RT improves PFS compared with RT followed by adjuvant hormonal therapy (AHT) by > or =10%.
Patients eligible for the study included those with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate and an elevated prostate-specific antigen level of <100 ng/mL. Patients were stratified by T stage, prostate-specific antigen level, and Gleason score and were required to have an estimated risk of lymph node involvement of >15%.
The difference in overall survival for the four arms was statistically significant (p = 0.027). However, no statistically significant differences were found in PFS or overall survival between NHT vs. AHT and WPRT compared with PORT. A trend towards a difference was found in PFS (p = 0.065) in favor of the WPRT + NHT arm compared with the PORT + NHT and WPRT + AHT arms.
Unexpected interactions appear to exist between the timing of hormonal therapy and radiation field size for this patient population. Four Phase III trials have demonstrated better outcomes when NHT was combined with RT compared with RT alone. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413 trial results have demonstrated that when NHT is used in conjunction with RT, WPRT yields a better PFS than does PORT. It also showed that when NHT + WPRT results in better overall survival than does WPRT + short-term AHT. Additional studies are warranted to determine whether the failure to demonstrate an advantage for NHT + WPRT compared with PORT + AHT is chance or, more likely, reflects a previously unrecognized biologic phenomenon.
本试验旨在验证以下假设:与单纯雄激素全阻断及前列腺局部放疗(PORT)相比,雄激素全阻断联合全盆腔放疗(WPRT)后再行前列腺区加量放疗可使无进展生存期(PFS)提高≥10%。本试验还旨在验证另一假设:与放疗后行辅助激素治疗(AHT)相比,新辅助激素治疗(NHT)联合雄激素全阻断及放疗可使PFS提高≥10%。
符合研究条件的患者包括临床局限性前列腺腺癌且前列腺特异性抗原水平升高但<100 ng/mL者。患者按T分期、前列腺特异性抗原水平和 Gleason评分进行分层,且要求淋巴结受累估计风险>15%。
四组的总生存期差异具有统计学意义(p = 0.027)。然而,NHT与AHT以及WPRT与PORT之间在PFS或总生存期方面未发现统计学显著差异。在PFS方面发现了有利于WPRT + NHT组的差异趋势(p = 0.065),与PORT + NHT组和WPRT + AHT组相比。
对于该患者群体,激素治疗时机与放射野大小之间似乎存在意外的相互作用。四项III期试验已证明,与单纯放疗相比,NHT联合放疗效果更佳。放射肿瘤学组9413试验结果表明,当NHT与放疗联合使用时,WPRT的PFS优于PORT。该试验还表明,NHT + WPRT的总生存期优于WPRT +短期AHT。有必要进行更多研究以确定未证明NHT + WPRT比PORT + AHT更具优势是偶然因素,还是更可能反映了一种此前未被认识的生物学现象。