Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYDRA): An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials in the MARCAP consortium.

385 Background: Trials comparing moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHFRT) against conventionally-fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for prostate cancer have varied considerably in intent (non-inferiority vs. superiority) and MHFRT dose. Herein, we compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained from 7 phase III trials comparing MHFRT vs. CFRT: three (n=3454) with isodose and four (n=2426) with dose-escalated MHFRT. Meta-analyses were designed to compare progression-free survival (PFS), late grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) and late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) physician-scored toxicity, and clinically-significant decrements in patient-reported urinary or bowel quality of life (QOL). Results: After a median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range [IQR], 4.6-7.2) and 7.1 years (IQR 5.7-8.4) following isodose and dose-escalated MHFRT, there were no differences in PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95%CI 0.81-1.05 and HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.82-1.09, respectively). Neither isodose nor dose-escalated MHFRT were associated with increased odds of grade ≥2 GU toxicity (odds ratio [OR] 1.16 95CI% 0.86-1.57 and OR 1.20, 95%CI 0.95-1.51). The odds of grade ≥2 GI toxicity were higher with dose-escalated (OR 1.48, 95%CI 1.14-1.92) but not isodose MHFRT (OR 1.30, 95% 0.59-2.87). Isodose MHFRT did not show different odds of urinary (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.51-2.09) and bowel (OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.40-1.43) QOL decrements, while dose-escalated MHFRT was associated with greater odds of bowel (OR 1.68, 95%CI 1.07-2.61), but not urinary (OR 1.57, 95%CI 0.87-2.85), QOL decrement. Conclusions: Isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT both have similar efficacy compared with CFRT, but dose-escalated MHFRT is associated with higher physician-scored and patient-reported bowel and urinary toxicity. Isodose regimens, e.g. 60 Gy in 20 fractions, should be the standard MHFRT regimen for localized prostate cancer.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.385
Primary Topic
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYDRA): An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials in the MARCAP consortium.

Charles Catton, Giuseppe Sanguineti, Yilun Sun, John Nikitas et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYDRA): An individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials in the MARCAP consortium.

Charles Catton, Giuseppe Sanguineti, Yilun Sun, John Nikitas, Wilma D. Heemsbergen, Comron Hassanzadeh, Alison Tree, W. Robert Lee, Howard M. Sandler, Eric M. Horwitz, Emma Hall, Luca Incrocci, Deborah A. Kuban, Himanshu Lukka, Daniel Eidelberg Spratt, Amar U. Kishan, Stefano Arcangeli, J.K. Wong, Karen E. Hoffman, D.P. Dearnaley
article en

Abstract

385 Background: Trials comparing moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHFRT) against conventionally-fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for prostate cancer have varied considerably in intent (non-inferiority vs. superiority) and MHFRT dose. Herein, we compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained from 7 phase III trials comparing MHFRT vs. CFRT: three (n=3454) with isodose and four (n=2426) with dose-escalated MHFRT. Meta-analyses were designed to compare progression-free survival (PFS), late grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) and late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) physician-scored toxicity, and clinically-significant decrements in patient-reported urinary or bowel quality of life (QOL). Results: After a median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range [IQR], 4.6-7.2) and 7.1 years (IQR 5.7-8.4) following isodose and dose-escalated MHFRT, there were no differences in PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95%CI 0.81-1.05 and HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.82-1.09, respectively). Neither isodose nor dose-escalated MHFRT were associated with increased odds of grade ≥2 GU toxicity (odds ratio [OR] 1.16 95CI% 0.86-1.57 and OR 1.20, 95%CI 0.95-1.51). The odds of grade ≥2 GI toxicity were higher with dose-escalated (OR 1.48, 95%CI 1.14-1.92) but not isodose MHFRT (OR 1.30, 95% 0.59-2.87). Isodose MHFRT did not show different odds of urinary (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.51-2.09) and bowel (OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.40-1.43) QOL decrements, while dose-escalated MHFRT was associated with greater odds of bowel (OR 1.68, 95%CI 1.07-2.61), but not urinary (OR 1.57, 95%CI 0.87-2.85), QOL decrement. Conclusions: Isodose MHFRT and dose-escalated MHFRT both have similar efficacy compared with CFRT, but dose-escalated MHFRT is associated with higher physician-scored and patient-reported bowel and urinary toxicity. Isodose regimens, e.g. 60 Gy in 20 fractions, should be the standard MHFRT regimen for localized prostate cancer.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(5_suppl)
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US), Fox Chase Cancer Center (US), Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (GB), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), Institute of Cancer Research (GB), University of California, Los Angeles (US), Duke University (US), Erasmus MC (NL), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA), University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center (US), Royal Marsden Hospital (GB), Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri (IT), Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (NL), Case Western Reserve University (US), University of Milano-Bicocca (IT), McMaster University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.