Prostate cancer radiation dose response: results of the M. D. Anderson phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE A randomized radiotherapy dose escalation trial was undertaken between 1993 and 1998 to compare the efficacy of 70 vs. 78 Gy in controlling prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 305 Stage T1-T3 patients were entered into the trial and, of these, 301 with a median follow-up of 60 months, were assessable. Of the 301 patients, 150 were in the 70 Gy arm and 151 were in the 78 Gy arm. The primary end point was freedom from failure (FFF), including biochemical failure, which was defined as 3 rises in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were calculated from the completion of radiotherapy. The log-rank test was used to compare the groups. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to examine the independence of study randomization in multivariate analysis. RESULTS There was an even distribution of patients by randomization arm and stage, Gleason score, and pretreatment PSA level. The FFF rates for the 70- and 78 Gy arms at 6 years were 64% and 70%, respectively (p = 0.03). Dose escalation to 78 Gy preferentially benefited those with a pretreatment PSA >10 ng/mL; the FFF rate was 62% for the 78 Gy arm vs. 43% for those who received 70 Gy (p = 0.01). For patients with a pretreatment PSA <or=10 ng/mL, no significant dose response was found, with an average 6-year FFF rate of about 75%. Although no difference occurred in overall survival, the freedom from distant metastasis rate was higher for those with PSA levels >10 ng/mL who were treated to 78 Gy (98% vs. 88% at 6 years, p = 0.056). Rectal side effects were also significantly greater in the 78 Gy group. Grade 2 or higher toxicity rates at 6 years were 12% and 26% for the 70 Gy and 78 Gy arms, respectively (p = 0.001). Grade 2 or higher bladder complications were similar at 10%. For patients in the 78 Gy arm, Grade 2 or higher rectal toxicity correlated highly with the proportion of the rectum treated to >70 Gy. CONCLUSION An increase of 8 Gy resulted in a highly significant improvement in FFF for patients at intermediate-to-high risk, although the rectal reactions were also increased. Dose escalation techniques that limit the rectal volume that receives >or=70 Gy to <25% should be used.

[1]  E. Feuer,et al.  Cancer surveillance series: interpreting trends in prostate cancer--part I: Evidence of the effects of screening in recent prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[2]  P. Walsh,et al.  Cancer surveillance series: interpreting trends in prostate cancer--part I: evidence of the effects of screening in recent prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates. , 2000, The Journal of urology.

[3]  D. Dearnaley,et al.  Comparison of radiation side-effects of conformal and conventional radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a randomised trial , 1999, The Lancet.

[4]  T. Pajak,et al.  Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  C. Perez,et al.  Irradiation of carcinoma of the prostate localized to the pelvis: analysis of tumor response and prognosis. , 1980, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  A. V. von Eschenbach,et al.  External beam radiotherapy dose response characteristics of 1127 men with prostate cancer treated in the PSA era. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  D. Bostwick,et al.  Influence of prostate-specific antigen testing on the spectrum of patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy at a large referral practice. , 1998, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[8]  G Starkschall,et al.  Preliminary results of a randomized radiotherapy dose-escalation study comparing 70 Gy with 78 Gy for prostate cancer. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  Americansocietyfortherapeuticr Consensus statement: Guidelines for PSA following radiation therapy1 , 1997 .

[10]  T E Schultheiss,et al.  Survival advantage for prostate cancer patients treated with high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. , 1999, The cancer journal from Scientific American.

[11]  P. Maingon,et al.  Dose escalation with 3D-CRT in prostate cancer: French study of dose escalation with conformal 3D radiotherapy in prostate cancer-preliminary results. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  M M Urie,et al.  Conformal irradiation of the prostate: estimating long-term rectal bleeding risk using dose-volume histograms. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  E. K. Harris,et al.  Survivorship Analysis for Clinical Studies , 1990 .

[14]  T E Schultheiss,et al.  Dose escalation with 3D conformal treatment: five year outcomes, treatment optimization, and future directions. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[15]  A Pollack,et al.  Complications from radiotherapy dose escalation in prostate cancer: preliminary results of a randomized trial. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  G E Hanks,et al.  Patterns of care studies: dose-response observations for local control of adenocarcinoma of the prostate. , 1985, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  E. Crawford,et al.  Advanced prostate cancer , 1999, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.

[18]  H. Levin,et al.  Declining rates of extracapsular extension after radical prostatectomy: evidence for continued stage migration. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  A. Hanlon,et al.  Chronic rectal bleeding after high-dose conformal treatment of prostate cancer warrants modification of existing morbidity scales. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  A. Pollack,et al.  External beam radiotherapy for stage T1/T2 prostate cancer: how does it stack up? , 1998, Urology.

[21]  C. Reddy,et al.  Importance of high radiation doses (72 Gy or greater) in the treatment of stage T1-T3 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. , 2000, Urology.

[22]  G E Hanks,et al.  The effect of dose on local control of prostate cancer. , 1988, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[23]  C. Perez,et al.  Definitive radiation therapy in carcinoma of the prostate localized to the pelvis: experience at the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology. , 1988, NCI monographs : a publication of the National Cancer Institute.

[24]  A. Hanlon,et al.  Defining the appropriate radiation dose for pretreatment PSA < or = 10 ng/mL prostate cancer. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[25]  A. Pollack,et al.  Late effects after radiotherapy for prostate cancer in a randomized dose-response study: results of a self-assessment questionnaire. , 1998, Urology.

[26]  A. Pollack,et al.  External beam radiotherapy dose response of prostate cancer. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[27]  J. Forman Does pelvic irradiation play a role in the management of prostate cancer , 1998 .

[28]  C. Reddy,et al.  Radiation dose response in patients with favorable localized prostate cancer (Stage T1-T2, biopsy Gleason < or = 6, and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen < or = 10). , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  Christopher U. Jones,et al.  A phase III trial comparing whole-pelvic (WP) to prostate only (PO) radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression (TAS): preliminary analysis of RTOG 9413 , 2001 .

[30]  H. Bartelink,et al.  LATE EFFECTS TOXICITY SCORING : THE SOMA SCALE , 1995 .

[31]  A. Markoe,et al.  Preliminary report of toxicity following 3D radiation therapy for prostate cancer on 3DOG/RTOG 9406. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[32]  S L George,et al.  Sample size requirements and length of study for testing interaction in a 2 x k factorial design when time-to-failure is the outcome [corrected]. , 1993, Controlled clinical trials.

[33]  C C Ling,et al.  High dose radiation delivered by intensity modulated conformal radiotherapy improves the outcome of localized prostate cancer. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[34]  T E Schultheiss,et al.  Lateral rectal shielding reduces late rectal morbidity following high dose three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: further evidence for a significant dose effect. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[35]  D. Cox,et al.  Analysis of Survival Data. , 1986 .

[36]  M. Roach,et al.  Improved freedom from PSA failure with whole pelvic irradiation for high-risk prostate cancer. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[37]  L. Verhey,et al.  Advanced prostate cancer: the results of a randomized comparative trial of high dose irradiation boosting with conformal protons compared with conventional dose irradiation using photons alone. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[38]  A. Zietman,et al.  Late normal tissue sequelae in the second decade after high dose radiation therapy with combined photons and conformal protons for locally advanced prostate cancer. , 2002, The Journal of urology.