{"title":"雄激素剥夺和放疗联合或不联合多西他赛治疗局部高危前列腺癌:NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 随机试验的长期随访\" [Eur. Eurol.","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, and participants</h3><p>High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (>50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Outcome measurements and statistical analysis</h3><p>The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).</p></div><div><h3>Results and limitations</h3><p>After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank <em>p</em> = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided <em>p</em> = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.</p></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><p>No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12223,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436/pdfft?md5=d861e2f9cb533b3f943f830ef7d937ca&pid=1-s2.0-S0302283824024436-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Corrigendum to “Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy with or Without Docetaxel for Localized High-risk Prostat Cancer: Long-term Follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial” [Eur. Eurol. 84(2) (2023) 156–163]\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.</p></div><div><h3>Design, setting, and participants</h3><p>High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (>50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Outcome measurements and statistical analysis</h3><p>The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).</p></div><div><h3>Results and limitations</h3><p>After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank <em>p</em> = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided <em>p</em> = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.</p></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><p>No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":25.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436/pdfft?md5=d861e2f9cb533b3f943f830ef7d937ca&pid=1-s2.0-S0302283824024436-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824024436","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Corrigendum to “Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy with or Without Docetaxel for Localized High-risk Prostat Cancer: Long-term Follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial” [Eur. Eurol. 84(2) (2023) 156–163]
Background
Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.
Objective
To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT.
Design, setting, and participants
High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (>50% of patients had Gleason 9–10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis
The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS).
Results and limitations
After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70–1.14; one-sided log-rank p = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided p = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73–1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74–1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm.
Conclusions
After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers.
Patient summary
No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.
期刊介绍:
European Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles and reviews on a broad spectrum of urological issues. Covering topics such as oncology, impotence, infertility, pediatrics, lithiasis and endourology, the journal also highlights recent advances in techniques, instrumentation, surgery, and pediatric urology. This comprehensive approach provides readers with an in-depth guide to international developments in urology.