Two-fraction Versus Five-fraction Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: The TOFFEE Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data from Four Prospective Trials.

IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Cristian Udovicich, Patrick Cheung, William Chu, Hans Chung, Jay Detsky, Stanley Liu, Gerard Morton, Ewa Szumacher, Chia-Lin Tseng, Danny Vesprini, Wee Loon Ong, Thomas Kennedy, Melanie Davidson, Ananth Ravi, Merrylee McGuffin, Liying Zhang, Alexandre Mamedov, Andrea Deabreu, Meghan Kulasingham-Poon, Andrew Loblaw
{"title":"Two-fraction Versus Five-fraction Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: The TOFFEE Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data from Four Prospective Trials.","authors":"Cristian Udovicich, Patrick Cheung, William Chu, Hans Chung, Jay Detsky, Stanley Liu, Gerard Morton, Ewa Szumacher, Chia-Lin Tseng, Danny Vesprini, Wee Loon Ong, Thomas Kennedy, Melanie Davidson, Ananth Ravi, Merrylee McGuffin, Liying Zhang, Alexandre Mamedov, Andrea Deabreu, Meghan Kulasingham-Poon, Andrew Loblaw","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.12.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of five-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (5F-SBRT) for prostate cancer (PC), but there is no comparative evidence for fewer fractions. We compare outcomes of prostate two-fraction SBRT (2F-SBRT) and 5F-SBRT using prospective data for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) PC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This meta-analysis of individual patient data evaluated IR-PC from four prospective trials of prostate SBRT (two trials each of 2F- and 5F-SBRT). The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (BCF). Secondary endpoints included the cumulative incidence of distant metastases (DM) and patient-reported quality of life (QoL).</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Of the 199 patients meeting the eligibility criteria, 143 (72%) were in the 5F-SBRT group and 56 (28%) were in the 2F-SBRT group. Median follow-up was 9.4 years. There was no significant difference in BCF with a 5-year cumulative incidence of 3.6% (95% CI 0-8.6%) in the 2F-SBRT group and 6.0% (95% CI 1.8-10.2%) in the 5F-SBRT group (p = 0.73). There was no significant difference in DM incidence. We found no differences in acute and late urinary or bowel QoL. Limitations include the non-randomized comparison.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>We report the first prospective comparison of prostate 2F-SBRT and 5F-SBRT. We found no significant difference in efficacy, or in urinary or bowel QoL. This meta-analysis further encourages the potential of 2F-SBRT to be a standard-of-care option for IR PC.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.12.015","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: Recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of five-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (5F-SBRT) for prostate cancer (PC), but there is no comparative evidence for fewer fractions. We compare outcomes of prostate two-fraction SBRT (2F-SBRT) and 5F-SBRT using prospective data for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) PC.

Methods: This meta-analysis of individual patient data evaluated IR-PC from four prospective trials of prostate SBRT (two trials each of 2F- and 5F-SBRT). The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (BCF). Secondary endpoints included the cumulative incidence of distant metastases (DM) and patient-reported quality of life (QoL).

Key findings and limitations: Of the 199 patients meeting the eligibility criteria, 143 (72%) were in the 5F-SBRT group and 56 (28%) were in the 2F-SBRT group. Median follow-up was 9.4 years. There was no significant difference in BCF with a 5-year cumulative incidence of 3.6% (95% CI 0-8.6%) in the 2F-SBRT group and 6.0% (95% CI 1.8-10.2%) in the 5F-SBRT group (p = 0.73). There was no significant difference in DM incidence. We found no differences in acute and late urinary or bowel QoL. Limitations include the non-randomized comparison.

Conclusions and clinical implications: We report the first prospective comparison of prostate 2F-SBRT and 5F-SBRT. We found no significant difference in efficacy, or in urinary or bowel QoL. This meta-analysis further encourages the potential of 2F-SBRT to be a standard-of-care option for IR PC.

二分式立体定向放疗与五分式立体定向放疗治疗中危前列腺癌:四项前瞻性试验个体患者数据的太妃糖荟萃分析
背景和目的:最近的随机对照试验已经证明了五分量立体定向放疗(5F-SBRT)治疗前列腺癌(PC)的疗效,但没有更少分量的比较证据。我们比较了前列腺二段式SBRT (2F-SBRT)和5F-SBRT对中危(IR) PC患者的预后。方法:本荟萃分析对前列腺SBRT的四项前瞻性试验(2F- SBRT和5F-SBRT各两项试验)的个体患者数据进行了IR-PC评估。主要终点是生化失败(BCF)的累积发生率。次要终点包括远处转移的累积发生率(DM)和患者报告的生活质量(QoL)。主要发现和局限性:199例符合资格标准的患者中,143例(72%)属于5F-SBRT组,56例(28%)属于2F-SBRT组。中位随访时间为9.4年。2F-SBRT组的5年累积发病率为3.6% (95% CI 0-8.6%), 5F-SBRT组的5年累积发病率为6.0% (95% CI 1.8-10.2%),两者无显著差异(p = 0.73)。两组糖尿病发病率无显著差异。我们发现急性和晚期尿或肠生活质量没有差异。局限性包括非随机比较。结论和临床意义:我们报道了前列腺2F-SBRT和5F-SBRT的首次前瞻性比较。我们没有发现疗效、泌尿和肠道生活质量有显著差异。这项荟萃分析进一步鼓励2F-SBRT成为IR PC的标准治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
128
审稿时长
20 days
期刊介绍: Journal Name: European Urology Oncology Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology Focus: First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies Aims to deliver high-quality research Content: Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews Covers clinical, basic, and translational research Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信