Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2024 Dec 1;120(5):1239-1244. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.05.033. Epub 2024 Sep 30.
Increasing data suggest that radiation therapy, particularly ablative radiation therapy, alters the natural history of metastatic disease. For patients with metastatic disease enrolled in prospective trials testing systemic therapy, the use of off-protocol radiation therapy to improve clinical symptoms or extend the duration of study systemic therapy may influence study endpoints. We sought to evaluate how often off-protocol radiation therapy was permitted among systemic therapy phase 3 trials, how often off-protocol radiation therapy is used, and whether off-protocol radiation therapy correlated with study outcomes.
Two-arm, superiority-design, phase 3 randomized trials testing systemic therapy were screened from ClinicalTrials.gov. Protocol availability was required to assess the trial approach to off-protocol radiation therapy if not described in the manuscript. Adjusted odds ratios with 95% CI were calculated by logistic regression.
A total of 112 trials enrolling 80,134 patients were included, with publication dates between 2010 and 2019. Of these, off-protocol radiation therapy was allowed, not discussed, or prohibited during study systemic therapy in 52% (N =58), 25% (N = 28), and 23% (N = 26) of trials, respectively. However, only 2% (2 of 112) of trials reported off-protocol radiation therapy utilization rates, although no data were reported on the use of ablative off-protocol radiation therapy. No trials evaluated or adjusted for the potential influence of off-protocol radiation therapy on study endpoints. Among the subset of open-label studies, trials permissive toward off-protocol radiation therapy were more likely to meet their primary endpoint (adjusted odds ratio, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.23-20.23; P = .04).
Although most trials allowed off-protocol radiation therapy during the receipt of the study systemic therapy, the influence of off-protocol radiation therapy, especially ablative radiation therapy, on study outcomes is underevaluated among phase 3 systemic therapy trials.
越来越多的数据表明,放射治疗,特别是消融性放射治疗,改变了转移性疾病的自然病程。对于入组测试系统治疗的前瞻性试验的转移性疾病患者,使用不合规的放射治疗来改善临床症状或延长研究性系统治疗的持续时间,可能会影响研究终点。我们试图评估在系统治疗 3 期试验中,不合规的放射治疗允许的频率是多少,不合规的放射治疗使用的频率是多少,以及不合规的放射治疗是否与研究结果相关。
从 ClinicalTrials.gov 筛选出两臂、优效性设计、测试系统治疗的 3 期随机试验。如果在试验方案中没有描述,需要提供方案的可用性,以评估试验对不合规放射治疗的处理方法。通过逻辑回归计算调整后的优势比及其 95%置信区间。
共纳入 112 项试验,共纳入 80134 例患者,其发表日期在 2010 年至 2019 年之间。其中,在 52%(N=58)、25%(N=28)和 23%(N=26)的试验中,在研究性系统治疗期间允许、未讨论或禁止不合规的放射治疗。然而,尽管没有报告关于消融性不合规放射治疗的使用数据,但只有 2%(112 项试验中的 2 项)的试验报告了不合规放射治疗的使用率。没有试验评估或调整不合规放射治疗对研究终点的潜在影响。在开放标签研究的子集中,允许不合规放射治疗的试验更有可能达到其主要终点(调整后的优势比,4.50;95%置信区间,1.23-20.23;P=0.04)。
尽管大多数试验在接受研究性系统治疗期间允许不合规的放射治疗,但在 3 期系统治疗试验中,对不合规放射治疗,特别是消融性放射治疗对研究结果的影响评价不足。