Kathryn Winter

Phase III radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) trial 86-10 of androgen deprivation adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate

PURPOSE To test the hypothesis that androgen ablation before and during radiotherapy for locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate may, by reducing tumor bulk and enhancing tumor cell kill, improve locoregional control and ultimately survival. METHODS AND MATERIALS The study was conducted from 1987 to 1991. Eligible patients were those with bulky tumors (T2--T4) with or without pelvic lymph node involvement and without evidence of distant metastases. They were randomized to receive goserelin, 3.6 mg every 4 weeks; and flutamide, 250 mg t.i.d. for 2 months before radiation therapy and during radiation therapy (Arm I), or radiation therapy alone (Arm II). Of 471 randomized patients, 456 were evaluable: 226 on Arm I and 230 on Arm II. RESULTS As of November 1999, the median follow-up has reached 6.7 years for all patients and 8.6 years for alive patients. At 8 years, androgen ablation has been associated with an improvement in local control (42% vs. 30%, p = 0.016), reduction in the incidence of distant metastases (34% vs. 45%, p = 0.04), disease-free survival (33% vs. 21%, p = 0.004), biochemical disease-free survival = PSA <1.5 (24% vs. 10%, p < 0.0001), and cause-specific mortality (23% vs. 31%, p = 0.05). However, subset analysis indicates that the beneficial effect of short-term androgen ablation appears preferentially in patients with Gleason score 2--6. In that population, there is a highly significant improvement in all endpoints, including survival (70% vs. 52%, p = 0.015). In patients with Gleason 7--10 tumors, the regimen has not resulted in a significant enhancement in either locoregional control or survival. CONCLUSION In patients with Gleason score 2--6 carcinoma of the prostate, a short course of androgen ablation administered before and during radiotherapy has been associated with a highly significant improvement in local control, reduction in disease progression, and overall survival.

Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: An update of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial (RTOG) 90-01

PURPOSE To report mature results of a randomized trial that compared extended-field radiotherapy (EFRT) versus pelvic radiotherapy with concomitant fluorouracil and cisplatin (CTRT) in women with locoregionally advanced carcinomas of the uterine cervix. PATIENTS AND METHODS Four hundred three women with cervical cancer were randomly assigned to receive either EFRT or CTRT. Patients were eligible if they had stage IIB to IVA disease, stage IB to IIA disease with a tumor diameter > or = 5 cm, or positive pelvic lymph nodes. Patients were stratified by stage and by method of lymph node evaluation. RESULTS The median follow-up time for 228 surviving patients was 6.6 years. The overall survival rate for patients treated with CTRT was significantly greater than that for patients treated with EFRT (67% v 41% at 8 years; P <.0001). There was an overall reduction in the risk of disease recurrence of 51% (95% CI, 36% to 66%) for patients who received CTRT. Patients with stage IB to IIB disease who received CTRT had better overall and disease-free survival than those treated with EFRT (P <.0001); 116 patients with stage III to IVA disease had better disease-free survival (P =.05) and a trend toward better overall survival (P =.07) if they were randomly assigned to CTRT. The rate of serious late complications of treatment was similar for the two treatment arms. CONCLUSION Mature analysis confirms that the addition of fluorouracil and cisplatin to radiotherapy significantly improved the survival rate of women with locally advanced cervical cancer without increasing the rate of late treatment-related side effects.

Fluorouracil vs Gemcitabine Chemotherapy Before and After Fluorouracil-Based Chemoradiation Following Resection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Among patients with locally advanced metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, gemcitabine has been shown to improve outcomes compared with fluorouracil. OBJECTIVE To determine if the addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil chemoradiation (chemotherapy plus radiation) improves survival for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized controlled phase 3 trial of patients with complete gross total resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and no prior radiation or chemotherapy enrolled between July 1998 and July 2002 with follow-up through August 18, 2006, at 164 US and Canadian institutions. INTERVENTION Chemotherapy with either fluorouracil (continuous infusion of 250 mg/m2 per day; n = 230) or gemcitabine (30-minute infusion of 1000 mg/m2 once per week; n = 221) for 3 weeks prior to chemoradiation therapy and for 12 weeks after chemoradiation therapy. Chemoradiation with a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (250 mg/m2 per day) was the same for all patients (50.4 Gy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Survival for all patients and survival for patients with pancreatic head tumors were the primary end points. Secondary end points included toxicity. RESULTS A total of 451 patients were randomized, eligible, and analyzable. Patients with pancreatic head tumors (n = 388) had a median survival of 20.5 months and a 3-year survival of 31% in the gemcitabine group vs a median survival of 16.9 months and a 3-year survival of 22% in the fluorouracil group (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.03]; P = .09). The treatment effect was strengthened on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.00]; P = .05). Grade 4 hematologic toxicity was 1% in the fluorouracil group and 14% in the gemcitabine group (P < .001) without a difference in febrile neutropenia or infection. There were no differences in the ability to complete chemotherapy or radiation therapy (>85%). CONCLUSIONS The addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemoradiation was associated with a survival benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer, although this improvement was not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003216.

Fluorouracil, Mitomycin, and Radiotherapy vs Fluorouracil, Cisplatin, and Radiotherapy for Carcinoma of the Anal Canal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Chemoradiation as definitive therapy is the preferred primary therapy for patients with anal canal carcinoma; however, the 5-year disease-free survival rate from concurrent fluorouracil/mitomycin and radiation is only approximately 65%. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of cisplatin-based (experimental) therapy vs mitomycin-based (standard) therapy in treatment of anal canal carcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS US Gastrointestinal Intergroup trial RTOG 98-11, a multicenter, phase 3, randomized controlled trial comparing treatment with fluorouracil plus mitomycin and radiotherapy vs treatment with fluorouracil plus cisplatin and radiotherapy in 682 patients with anal canal carcinoma enrolled between October 31, 1998, and June 27, 2005. Stratifications included sex, clinical nodal status, and tumor diameter. INTERVENTION Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 intervention groups: (1) the mitomycin-based group (n = 341), who received fluorouracil (1000 mg/m2 on days 1-4 and 29-32) plus mitomycin (10 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29) and radiotherapy (45-59 Gy) or (2) the cisplatin-based group (n = 341), who received fluorouracil (1000 mg/m2 on days 1-4, 29-32, 57-60, and 85-88) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m2 on days 1, 29, 57, and 85) and radiotherapy (45-59 Gy; start day = day 57). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival; secondary end points were overall survival and time to relapse. RESULTS A total of 644 patients were assessable. The median follow-up for all patients was 2.51 years. Median age was 55 years, 69% were women, 27% had a tumor diameter greater than 5 cm, and 26% had clinically positive nodes. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53%-67%) in the mitomycin-based group and 54% (95% CI, 46%-60%) in the cisplatin-based group (P = .17). The 5-year overall survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 67%-81%) in the mitomycin-based group and 70% (95% CI, 63%-76%) in the cisplatin-based group (P = .10). The 5-year local-regional recurrence and distant metastasis rates were 25% (95% CI, 20%-30%) and 15% (95% CI, 10%-20%), respectively, for mitomycin-based treatment and 33% (95% CI, 27%-40%) and 19% (95% CI, 14%-24%), respectively, for cisplatin-based treatment. The cumulative rate of colostomy was significantly better for mitomycin-based than cisplatin-based treatment (10% vs 19%; P = .02). Severe hematologic toxicity was worse with mitomycin-based treatment (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS In this population of patients with anal canal carcinoma, cisplatin-based therapy failed to improve disease-free-survival compared with mitomycin-based therapy, but cisplatin-based therapy resulted in a significantly worse colostomy rate. These findings do not support the use of cisplatin in place of mitomycin in combination with fluorouracil and radiotherapy in the treatment of anal canal carcinoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003596.

Updated results of the phase III Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trial 85-31 evaluating the potential benefit of androgen suppression following standard radiation therapy for unfavorable prognosis carcinoma of the prostate

PURPOSE To determine the potential advantage of androgen ablation following standard external-beam radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced (clinical or pathologic T3; clinical or pathologic node positive) carcinoma of the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS In 1987 the RTOG initiated a Phase III trial of long-term adjuvant goserelin in definitively irradiated patients with carcinoma of the prostate. A total of 977 patients were accrued to the study of which 945 remain analyzable: 477 on the adjuvant hormone arm (Arm I); and 468 on the radiation only arm (Arm II) with hormones initiated at relapse. The initial results were reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in 1997. RESULTS With a median follow up of 5.6 years for all patients and 6.0 years for living patients local failure at 8 years was 23% for Arm I and 37% for Arm II (p < 0.0001). Distant metastasis was likewise favorably impacted with the immediate use of hormonal manipulation with a distant metastasis rate in Arm I of 27% and 37% in Arm II (p < 0.0001). Disease-free survival (NED survival) and NED survival with PSA of 1.5 ng/mL (bNED) or less were both statistically significant in favor of the immediate hormone arm (both p < 0.0001). Cause-specific failure was not statistically different with a cause-specific failure of 16% for Arm I and 21% in Arm II (p = 0.23). Overall survival was likewise not statistically different between two arms, with a 49% overall survival at 8 years in Arm I and 47% in Arm II (p = 0.36). Subset analysis of centrally reviewed Gleason 8-10 patients who did not undergo prostatectomy showed that for patients receiving radiation therapy plus adjuvant hormones there was a statistically significant improvement in both absolute (p = 0.036) and cause-specific survival (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS Use of long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation in addition to definitive radiation therapy results in a highly significant improvement in regards to local control, freedom from distant metastasis, and biochemical free survival in unfavorable prognosis patients with carcinoma of the prostate.

Preliminary report of toxicity following 3D radiation therapy for prostate cancer on 3DOG/RTOG 9406

PURPOSE A prospective Phase I dose escalation study was conducted to determine the maximally-tolerated radiation dose in men treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) for localized prostate cancer. This is a preliminary report of toxicity encountered on the 3DOG/RTOG 9406 study. METHODS AND MATERIALS Each participating institution was required to implement data exchange with the RTOG 3D quality assurance (QA) center at Washington University in St. Louis. 3D CRT capabilities were strictly defined within the study protocol. Patients were registered according to three stratification groups: Group 1 patients had clinically organ-confined disease (T1,2) with a calculated risk of seminal vesicle invasion of < 15%. Group 2 patients had clinical T1,2 disease with risk of SV invasion > or = 15%. Group 3 (G3) patients had clinical local extension of tumor beyond the prostate capsule (T3). All patients were treated with 3D techniques with minimum doses prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV). The PTV margins were 5-10 mm around the prostate for patients in Group 1 and 5-10 mm around the prostate and SV for Group 2. After 55.8 Gy, the PTV was reduced in Group 2 patients to 5-10 mm around the prostate only. Minimum prescription dose began at 68.4 Gy (level I) and was escalated to 73.8 Gy (level II) and subsequently to 79.2 Gy (level III). This report describes the acute and late toxicity encountered in Group 1 and 2 patients treated to the first two study dose levels. Data from RTOG 7506 and 7706 allowed calculation of the expected probability of observing a > or = grade 3 late effect more than 120 days after the start of treatment. RTOG toxicity scores were used. RESULTS Between August 23, 1994 and July 2, 1997, 304 Group 1 and 2 cases were registered; 288 cases were analyzable for toxicity. Acute toxicity was low, with 53-54% of Group 1 patients having either no or grade 1 toxicity at dose levels I and II, respectively. Sixty-two percent of Group 2 patients had either none or grade 1 toxicity at either dose level. Few patients (0-3%) experienced a grade 3 acute bowel or bladder toxicity, and there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Late toxicity was very low in all patient groups. The majority (81-85%) had either no or mild grade 1 late toxicity at dose level I and II, respectively. A single late grade 3 bladder toxicity in a Group 2 patient treated to dose level II was recorded. There were no grade 4 or 5 late effects in any patient. Compared to historical RTOG controls (studies 7506, 7706) at dose level I, no grade 3 or greater late effects were observed in Group 1 and Group 2 patients when 9.1 and 4.8 events were expected (p = 0.003 and p = 0.028), respectively. At dose level II, there were no grade 3 or greater toxicities in Group 1 patients and a single grade 3 toxicity in a Group 2 patient when 12.1 and 13.0 were expected (p = 0.0005 and p = 0.0003), respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the relative risk of developing acute bladder toxicity was 2.13 if the percentage of the bladder receiving > or = 65 Gy was more than 30% (p = 0.013) and 2.01 if patients received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (p = 0.018). The relative risk of developing late bladder complications also increased as the percentage of the bladder receiving > or = 65 Gy increased (p = 0.026). Unexpectedly, there was a lower risk of late bladder complications as the mean dose to the bladder and prescription dose level increased. This probably reflects improvement in conformal techniques as the study matured. There was a 2.1 relative risk of developing a late bowel complication if the total rectal volume on the planning CT scan exceeded 100 cc (p = 0.019). CONCLUSION Tolerance to high-dose 3D CRT has been better than expected in this dose escalation trial for Stage T1,2 prostate cancer compared to low-dose RTOG historical experience. With strict quality assurance standards and review, 3D CRT can be safely studied in a co

RTOG 0529: A Phase 2 Evaluation of Dose-Painted Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Combination With 5-Fluorouracil and Mitomycin-C for the Reduction of Acute Morbidity in Carcinoma of the Anal Canal

PURPOSE A multi-institutional phase 2 trial assessed the utility of dose-painted intensity modulated radiation therapy (DP-IMRT) in reducing grade 2+ combined acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse events (AEs) of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and mitomycin-C (MMC) chemoradiation for anal cancer by at least 15% compared with the conventional radiation/5FU/MMC arm from RTOG 9811. METHODS AND MATERIALS T2-4N0-3M0 anal cancer patients received 5FU and MMC on days 1 and 29 of DP-IMRT, prescribed per stage: T2N0, 42 Gy elective nodal and 50.4 Gy anal tumor planning target volumes (PTVs) in 28 fractions; T3-4N0-3, 45 Gy elective nodal, 50.4 Gy ≤ 3 cm or 54 Gy >3 cm metastatic nodal and 54 Gy anal tumor PTVs in 30 fractions. The primary endpoint is described above. Planned secondary endpoints assessed all AEs and the investigators ability to perform DP-IMRT. RESULTS Of 63 accrued patients, 52 were evaluable. Tumor stage included 54% II, 25% IIIA, and 21% IIIB. In primary endpoint analysis, 77% experienced grade 2+ gastrointestinal/genitourinary acute AEs (9811 77%). There was, however, a significant reduction in acute grade 2+ hematologic, 73% (9811 85%, P=.032), grade 3+ gastrointestinal, 21% (9811 36%, P=.0082), and grade 3+ dermatologic AEs 23% (9811 49%, P<.0001) with DP-IMRT. On initial pretreatment review, 81% required DP-IMRT replanning, and final review revealed only 3 cases with normal tissue major deviations. CONCLUSIONS Although the primary endpoint was not met, DP-IMRT was associated with significant sparing of acute grade 2+ hematologic and grade 3+ dermatologic and gastrointestinal toxicity. Although DP-IMRT proved feasible, the high pretreatment planning revision rate emphasizes the importance of real-time radiation quality assurance for IMRT trials.

Phase II Trial of Preoperative Chemoradiation in Patients With Localized Gastric Adenocarcinoma (RTOG 9904): Quality of Combined Modality Therapy and Pathologic Response

PURPOSE Preoperative therapy for localized gastric cancer has considerable appeal. We hypothesized that, in a cooperative group setting, preoperative chemoradiotherapy would induce a 20% pathologic complete response (pathCR) rate. Combined-modality therapy quality, survival, and safety were secondary end points. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with localized gastric adenocarcinoma were eligible. A negative laparoscopic evaluation was required. Patients received two cycles of induction fluorouracil, leucovorin, and cisplatin followed by concurrent radiation and chemotherapy (infusional fluorouracil and weekly paclitaxel). Resection was attempted 5 to 6 weeks after chemoradiotherapy was completed. Quality of therapy was assessed with other end points. RESULTS Twenty institutions participated. Forty-nine patients were entered and 43 were assessable (12% stage IB; 37% stage II; and 52% stage III). The pathCR and R0 resection rates were 26% and 77%, respectively. At 1 year, more patients with pathCR (82%) are living than those with less than pathCR (69%). Grade 4 toxicity occurred in 21% of patients. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery per protocol (including acceptable variations) occurred in 98%, 44%, and 63% of patients, respectively. A D2 dissection was performed in 50% of patients. Of 18 major radiotherapy variations, 17 were due to the lack of inclusion of the L3-4 vertebral interphase as prespecified. CONCLUSION For localized gastric cancer, preoperative chemoradiotherapy strategy achieved a pathCR rate of more than 20% in a cooperative group setting. The quality of surgery improved (50% with D2 dissection) possibly because surgery was part of this trial. With some refinements, this preoperative chemoradiotherapy strategy is poised for a randomized comparison with postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with gastric cancer.

Randomized Phase II Study of Neoadjuvant Combined-Modality Chemoradiation for Distal Rectal Cancer: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 0012

PURPOSE To evaluate the rate of pathologic complete response and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemoradiation for advanced T3/T4 distal rectal cancers in a randomized phase II study PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with clinical T3/T4 distal rectal cancers were randomly assigned in a phase II study to receive combined neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous venous infusion (CVI) fluorouracil (FU) 225 mg/m2 per day, 7 days per week, plus pelvic hyperfractionated radiation 55.2 to 60 Gy at 1.2 Gy bid (arm 1) or CVI FU 225 mg/m2 per day Monday to Friday, 120 hours per week plus irinotecan 50 mg/m2 once weekly for 4 weeks plus pelvic radiation therapy 50.4 to 54 Gy at 1.8 Gy per day (arm 2). Surgery was performed 4 to 10 weeks after completion of neoadjuvant therapy. The primary end point of this study was pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary end points included acute and late normal tissue morbidity. RESULTS A total of 106 patients were entered onto the study, with 103 assessable for response. The overall resectability rate was 93%. The median time to surgery was 7 weeks. Tumor downstaging was observed in 78% of patients in both arms. The pCR rate for all assessable patients was 26% in each arm. For patients who had surgery, the pCR rate was also the same (28%) in both arms. Acute and late toxicity was also similar. Grade 3 and 4 acute hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity occurred in 13% and 38% in arm 1 and 12% and 45% in arm 2, respectively. CONCLUSION Although the overall complete response rate and toxicity seems similar in both arms, this is the first multi-institutional study to establish a relatively high (28%) pCR rate after neoadjuvant therapy.

Long-Term Update of US GI Intergroup RTOG 98-11 Phase III Trial for Anal Carcinoma: Survival, Relapse, and Colostomy Failure With Concurrent Chemoradiation Involving Fluorouracil/Mitomycin Versus Fluorouracil/Cisplatin

PURPOSE On initial publication of GI Intergroup Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 98-11 [A Phase III Randomized Study of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), Mitomycin, and Radiotherapy Versus 5-Fluorouracil, Cisplatin and Radiotherapy in Carcinoma of the Anal Canal], concurrent chemoradiation (CCR) with fluorouracil (FU) plus mitomycin (MMC) decreased colostomy failure (CF) when compared with induction plus concurrent FU plus cisplatin (CDDP), but did not significantly impact disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS) for anal canal carcinoma. The intent of the updated analysis was to determine the long-term impact of treatment on survival (DFS, OS, colostomy-free survival [CFS]), CF, and relapse (locoregional failure [LRF], distant metastasis) in this patient group. PATIENTS AND METHODS Stratification factors included sex, clinical node status, and primary size. DFS and OS were estimated univariately by the Kaplan-Meier method, and treatment arms were compared by log-rank test. Time to relapse and CF were estimated by the cumulative incidence method and treatment arms were compared by using Grays test. Multivariate analyses used Cox proportional hazard models to test for treatment differences after adjusting for stratification factors. RESULTS Of 682 patients accrued, 649 were analyzable for outcomes. DFS and OS were statistically better for RT + FU/MMC versus RT + FU/CDDP (5-year DFS, 67.8% v 57.8%; P = .006; 5-year OS, 78.3% v 70.7%; P = .026). There was a trend toward statistical significance for CFS (P = .05), LRF (P = .087), and CF (P = .074). Multivariate analysis was statistically significant for treatment and clinical node status for both DFS and OS, for tumor diameter for DFS, and for sex for OS. CONCLUSION CCR with FU/MMC has a statistically significant, clinically meaningful impact on DFS and OS versus induction plus concurrent FU/CDDP, and it has borderline significance for CFS, CF, and LRF. Therefore, RT + FU/MMC remains the preferred standard of care.