Suppr超能文献

CHIRP 试验的临床结果:高风险前列腺癌患者常规分割与中度超分割前列腺和盆腔淋巴结放疗的前瞻性 II 期随机试验。

Clinical Outcomes of the CHIRP Trial: A Phase II Prospective Randomized Trial of Conventionally Fractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Prostate and Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

机构信息

Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada; Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Clinical Trials Unit, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

出版信息

Pract Radiat Oncol. 2021 Sep-Oct;11(5):384-393. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.02.011. Epub 2021 Mar 9.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) may offer treatment advantages for patients with prostate cancer. However, HFRT may also increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity compared with conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT). Several large trials have found that HFRT is well tolerated in mixed risk population studies. Here, we report on a phase II, randomized controlled study conducted to evaluate these endpoints in exclusively high-risk patients with prostate cancer treated with prostate and pelvic nodal radiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After giving informed consent, patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to prostate plus pelvic nodal radiation therapy with either HFRT (68 Gy in 25 fractions) or CFRT (78 Gy in 39 fractions) and 18 months of androgen suppression therapy. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Biochemical failure was determined by the Phoenix definition. Patients were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 111 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled and 109 patients were treated. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher acute GI toxicity was not significantly different between the arms (HFRT 18.9% vs CFRT 21.8%; P = .812). Similarly, acute GU (HFRT 30.2% vs CFRT 30.9%; P = 1.00), late GI (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 10.0%; P = .554), and late GU (HFRT 16.0% vs CFRT 6.0%; P = .200) were not significantly different between the arms. Median follow-up was 38.0 months (4.8-77.8 months). The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between the 2 arms (97.3% for HFRT vs 91.0% for CFRT; P = .606). The 3-year overall survival was 94.8% in the HFRT arm and 100.0% in the CFRT arm (P = .116).

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT and CFRT using intensity modulated radiation therapy were both well tolerated for patients with high-risk prostate cancer and resulted in similar 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and overall survival.

摘要

目的

与常规分割放射治疗(CFRT)相比, 前列腺癌患者的 分割放射治疗(HFRT)可能具有治疗优势。 然而, HFRT 也可能增加胃肠道(GI)或泌尿生殖系统(GU)毒性的风险。 几项大型试验发现, HFRT 在混合风险人群研究中具有良好的耐受性。 在这里, 我们报告了一项 II 期随机对照研究, 该研究旨在评估仅患有前列腺癌的高危患者接受前列腺和盆腔淋巴结放射治疗时的这些终点。

方法和材料

在获得知情同意后, 高危前列腺癌患者被随机分配接受 HFRT(25 次分割, 68 Gy)或 CFRT(39 次分割, 78 Gy)联合 18 个月雄激素抑制治疗。 使用不良事件通用术语标准(第 4.0 版)对毒性进行评分。 生化失败通过凤凰定义确定。 患者按意向治疗进行分析。

结果

2012 年至 2018 年, 共纳入 111 例高危前列腺癌患者, 109 例患者接受治疗。 两组急性 2 级或更高级别的胃肠道毒性累积发生率无显著差异(HFRT 为 18.9%, CFRT 为 21.8%; P =.812)。 同样, 急性 GU(HFRT 为 30.2%, CFRT 为 30.9%; P = 1.00)、 晚期 GI(HFRT 为 16.0%, CFRT 为 10.0%; P =.554)和晚期 GU(HFRT 为 16.0%, CFRT 为 6.0%; P =.200)在两组之间无显著差异。 中位随访时间为 38.0 个月(4.8-77.8 个月)。 两组 3 年生化无复发生存率无显著差异(HFRT 为 97.3%, CFRT 为 91.0%; P =.606)。 HFRT 组 3 年总生存率为 94.8%, CFRT 组为 100.0%(P =.116)。

结论

高危前列腺癌患者采用调强放射治疗的 HFRT 和 CFRT 均具有良好的耐受性, 3 年生化无复发生存率和总生存率相似。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验