Dose-Escalated Stereotactic Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases (ROBOMET): A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.

IF 42.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Carole Mercier,Charlotte Billiet,Piet Ost,Katrien Vandecasteele,Geert De Kerf,Michaël Claessens,Steven Van Laere,Peter Vermeulen,Luc Dirix,Yolande Lievens,Dirk Verellen,Piet Dirix
{"title":"Dose-Escalated Stereotactic Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases (ROBOMET): A Multicenter, Patient-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Carole Mercier,Charlotte Billiet,Piet Ost,Katrien Vandecasteele,Geert De Kerf,Michaël Claessens,Steven Van Laere,Peter Vermeulen,Luc Dirix,Yolande Lievens,Dirk Verellen,Piet Dirix","doi":"10.1200/jco-24-01447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\r\nTo test whether dose-escalated single fraction (SF) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of 20 Gy to painful bone metastases is superior to conventional SF three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy (RT) to a standard dose of 8 Gy in achieving complete pain response (CR).\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA single-blind, randomized, controlled, phase III trial (ROBOMET) included 126 patients with up to three painful bone metastases, randomly assigned between April 2019 and October 2022 at multiple centers in Belgium. Inclusion criteria were uncomplicated painful bone metastases (worst pain score ≥2 on a 0-10 pain scale) arising from a solid tumor. Treatment consisted of either a single SBRT fraction of 20 Gy or a single conventional RT fraction of 8 Gy. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a CR 1 month after RT scored according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints analyzed as per an intention-to-treat principle.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nAfter 1 month, 16 of 63 (25% [95% CI, 15 to 38]) patients treated with conventional RT achieved CR versus 23 of 63 (37% [95% CI, 25 to 50]) treated with SBRT (P = .25). After 3 months, 15 of 63 (24% [95% CI, 14 to 36]) patients achieved CR after conventional RT versus 21 of 63 (33% [95% CI, 22 to 46]) after SBRT (P = .32). Among patients evaluable after 3 months and treated per protocol, the SBRT group had more complete responders (21/39, 54% [95% CI, 37 to 70]) than the conventional RT group (15/48, 31% [95% CI, 19 to 46]; P = .048).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nSBRT failed to demonstrate improved CR rates after 1 month.","PeriodicalId":15384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":"1 1","pages":"JCO2401447"},"PeriodicalIF":42.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/jco-24-01447","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

PURPOSE To test whether dose-escalated single fraction (SF) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of 20 Gy to painful bone metastases is superior to conventional SF three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy (RT) to a standard dose of 8 Gy in achieving complete pain response (CR). METHODS A single-blind, randomized, controlled, phase III trial (ROBOMET) included 126 patients with up to three painful bone metastases, randomly assigned between April 2019 and October 2022 at multiple centers in Belgium. Inclusion criteria were uncomplicated painful bone metastases (worst pain score ≥2 on a 0-10 pain scale) arising from a solid tumor. Treatment consisted of either a single SBRT fraction of 20 Gy or a single conventional RT fraction of 8 Gy. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a CR 1 month after RT scored according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints analyzed as per an intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS After 1 month, 16 of 63 (25% [95% CI, 15 to 38]) patients treated with conventional RT achieved CR versus 23 of 63 (37% [95% CI, 25 to 50]) treated with SBRT (P = .25). After 3 months, 15 of 63 (24% [95% CI, 14 to 36]) patients achieved CR after conventional RT versus 21 of 63 (33% [95% CI, 22 to 46]) after SBRT (P = .32). Among patients evaluable after 3 months and treated per protocol, the SBRT group had more complete responders (21/39, 54% [95% CI, 37 to 70]) than the conventional RT group (15/48, 31% [95% CI, 19 to 46]; P = .048). CONCLUSION SBRT failed to demonstrate improved CR rates after 1 month.
剂量递增的立体定向放疗与常规放疗治疗疼痛性骨转移(ROBOMET):一项多中心、患者盲法随机临床试验。
目的探讨20 Gy剂量递增的单部分立体定向放射治疗(SBRT)治疗疼痛性骨转移瘤是否优于标准剂量为8 Gy的常规SF三维适形放射治疗(RT)实现完全疼痛缓解(CR)。方法:一项单盲、随机、对照的III期试验(ROBOMET)包括126例患者,患者最多有3例疼痛性骨转移,随机分配于2019年4月至2022年10月在比利时的多个中心进行。纳入标准是由实体瘤引起的无并发症的疼痛骨转移(在0-10疼痛评分中最严重疼痛评分≥2)。治疗包括单个20 Gy的SBRT部分或单个8 Gy的常规RT部分。主要终点是根据国际姑息性放疗终点共识按照意向治疗原则进行分析,在放疗后1个月出现CR的患者比例。结果1个月后,63例接受常规RT治疗的患者中有16例(25% [95% CI, 15至38])达到CR,而63例接受SBRT治疗的患者中有23例(37% [95% CI, 25至50])达到CR (P = .25)。3个月后,63例患者中有15例(24% [95% CI, 14至36])在常规RT后达到CR,而63例患者中有21例(33% [95% CI, 22至46])在SBRT后达到CR (P = .32)。在3个月后可评估并按方案治疗的患者中,SBRT组的完全缓解率(21/ 39,54% [95% CI, 37至70])高于常规RT组(15/ 48,31% [95% CI, 19至46];P = .048)。结论sbrt治疗1个月后未能改善CR率。
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
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Journal of Clinical Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
41.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
8215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Oncology serves its readers as the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research. In print and in electronic format, JCO strives to publish the highest quality articles dedicated to clinical research. Original Reports remain the focus of JCO, but this scientific communication is enhanced by appropriately selected Editorials, Commentaries, Reviews, and other work that relate to the care of patients with cancer.
×
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