Search

Purpose: The molecular classification of endometrial cancer (EC) has proven to have prognostic value and is predictive of response to adjuvant chemotherapy. Here, we investigate its predictive value for response to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) in early-stage endometrioid EC (EEC)., Methods: Data of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial (n = 714) comparing pelvic EBRT with no adjuvant therapy in early-stage intermediate-risk EC and the PORTEC-2 trial (n = 427) comparing VBT with EBRT in early-stage high-intermediate-risk EC were used. Locoregional (including vaginal and pelvic) recurrence-free survival was compared between treatment groups across the four molecular classes using Kaplan-Meier's methodology and log-rank tests., Results: A total of 880 molecularly classified ECs, 484 from PORTEC-1 and 396 from PORTEC-2, were included. The majority were FIGO-2009 stage I EEC (97.2%). The median follow-up was 11.3 years. No locoregional recurrences were observed in EC with a pathogenic mutation of DNA polymerase-ε ( POLE mut EC). In mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd) EC, locoregional recurrence-free survival was similar after EBRT (94.2%), VBT (94.2%), and no adjuvant therapy (90.3%; P = .74). In EC with a p53 abnormality (p53abn EC), EBRT (96.9%) had a substantial benefit over VBT (64.3%) and no adjuvant therapy (72.2%; P = .048). In EC with no specific molecular profile (NSMP EC), both EBRT (98.3%) and VBT (96.2%) yielded better locoregional control than no adjuvant therapy (87.7%; P < .0001)., Conclusion: The molecular classification of EC predicts response to radiotherapy in stage I EEC and may guide adjuvant treatment decisions. Omitting radiotherapy seems to be safe in POLE mut EC. The benefit of radiotherapy seems to be limited in MMRd EC. EBRT yields a significantly better locoregional recurrence-free survival than VBT or no adjuvant therapy in p53abn EC. VBT is the treatment of choice for NSMP EC as it is as effective as EBRT and significantly better than no adjuvant therapy for locoregional tumor control.

Purpose: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22991 (NCT00021450) showed that 6 months of concomitant and adjuvant androgen suppression (AS) improves event- (EFS, Phoenix) and clinical disease-free survival (DFS) of intermediate- and high-risk localized prostatic carcinoma, treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) at 70-78 Gy. We report the long-term results in intermediate-risk patients treated with 74 or 78 Gy EBRT, as per current guidelines., Patient and Methods: Of 819 patients randomly assigned between EBRT or EBRT plus AS started on day 1 of EBRT, 481 entered with intermediate risk (International Union Against Cancer TNM 1997 cT1b-c or T2a with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥ 10 ng/mL or Gleason ≤ 7 and PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, N0M0) and had EBRT planned at 74 (342 patients, 71.1%) or 78 Gy (139 patients, 28.9%). We report the trial primary end point EFS, DFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) by intention-to-treat stratified by EBRT dose at two-sided α = 5%., Results: At a median follow-up of 12.2 years, 92 of 245 patients and 132 of 236 had EFS events in the EBRT plus AS and EBRT arm, respectively, mostly PSA relapse (48.7%) or death (45.1%). EBRT plus AS improved EFS and DFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53; CI, 0.41 to 0.70; P < .001 and HR = 0.67; CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P = .008). At 10 years, DMFS was 79.3% (CI, 73.4 to 84.0) with EBRT plus AS and 72.7% (CI, 66.2 to 78.2) with EBRT (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.02; P = .065). With 140 deaths (EBRT plus AS: 64; EBRT: 76), 10-year OS was 80.0% (CI, 74.1 to 84.7) with EBRT plus AS and 74.3% (CI, 67.8 to 79.7) with EBRT, but not statistically significantly different (HR = 0.74; CI, 0.53 to 1.04; P = .082)., Conclusion: Six months of concomitant and adjuvant AS statistically significantly improves EFS and DFS in intermediate-risk prostatic carcinoma, treated by irradiation at 74 or 78 Gy. The effects on OS and DMFS did not reach statistical significance., Competing Interests: Philippe MaingonHonoraria: IpsenConsulting or Advisory Role: BMS France, AstraZenecaSpeakers' Bureau: Varian Medical Systems Christian CarrieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca Santhanam SundarHonoraria: Bayer UK, Clovis OncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: RocheSpeakers' Bureau: PfizerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb John ArmstrongEmployment: HealthbeaconStock and Other Ownership Interests: HealthbeaconTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ipsen Fernanda G. HerreraConsulting or Advisory Role: BioProtect LtdSpeakers' Bureau: Johnson & JohnsonResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb Bradley R. PietersResearch Funding: Elekta Amit BahlHonoraria: Pfizer, Sanofi/Aventis, BMS, Roche, Merck, BayerResearch Funding: Janssen, SanofiTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bayer, Roche David AzriaStock and Other Ownership Interests: NovaGrayPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent of individual radiosensitivity in breast and prostate cancers Jan JansaHonoraria: Janssen Oncology, BayerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bayer Joe M. O'SullivanConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, Janssen, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Bayer, Janssen, NovartisResearch Funding: Bayer Laurence ColletteEmployment: IDDINo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Up to 30% of patients who undergo radiation for intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer relapse biochemically within 5 years. We assessed if biochemical disease-free survival (DFS) is improved by adding 6 months of androgen suppression (AS; two injections of every-3-months depot of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist) to primary radiotherapy (RT) for intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: A total of 819 patients staged: (1) cT1b-c, with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥ 10 ng/mL or Gleason ≥ 7, or (2) cT2a (International Union Against Cancer TNM 1997), with no involvement of pelvic lymph nodes and no clinical evidence of metastatic spread, with PSA ≤ 50 ng/mL, were centrally randomized 1:1 to either RT or RT plus AS started on day 1 of RT. Centers opted for one dose (70, 74, or 78 Gy). Biochemical DFS, the primary end point, was defined from entry until PSA relapse (Phoenix criteria) and clinical relapse by imaging or death of any cause. The trial had 80% power to detect hazard ratio (HR), 0.714 by intent-to-treat analysis stratified by dose of RT at the two-sided α = 5%., Results: The median patient age was 70 years. Among patients, 74.8% were intermediate risk and 24.8% were high risk. In the RT arm, 407 of 409 patients received RT; in the RT plus AS arm, 403 patients received RT plus AS and three patients received RT only. At 7.2 years median follow-up, RT plus AS significantly improved biochemical DFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.66; P < .001, with 319 events), as well as clinical progression-free survival (205 events, HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.84; P = .001). In exploratory analysis, no statistically significant interaction between treatment effect and dose of RT could be evidenced (heterogeneity P = .79 and P = .66, for biochemical DFS and progression-free survival, respectively). Overall survival data are not mature yet., Conclusion: Six months of concomitant and adjuvant AS improves biochemical and clinical DFS of intermediate- and high-risk cT1b-c to cT2a (with no involvement of pelvic lymph nodes and no clinical evidence of metastatic spread) prostatic carcinoma, treated by radiation., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

PURPOSE Studies on quality of life (QOL) among women with endometrial cancer have shown that patients who undergo pelvic radiotherapy report lower role functioning and more diarrhea and fatigue. In the Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Cancer (PORTEC) trial, patients with endometrial carcinoma were randomly assigned to receive external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or vaginal brachytherapy (VBT). QOL was evaluated by using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and subscales from the prostate cancer module, PR-25, and the ovarian cancer module, OV-28. PATIENTS AND METHODS PORTEC-2 accrued 427 patients between 2002 and 2006, of whom 214 were randomly assigned to EBRT, and 213 were randomly assigned to VBT. Three-hundred forty-eight patients (81%) were evaluable for QOL. QOL outcomes were analyzed at a median follow-up of 2 years. Results At baseline after surgery, patient functioning was at the lowest level, and it increased during and after radiotherapy to reach a plateau after 12 months. Patients in the VBT group reported better social functioning (P < .002) and lower symptom scores for diarrhea, fecal leakage, the need to stay close to the toilet, and limitation in daily activities because of bowel symptoms (P < .001). At baseline, 15% of patients were sexually active; this increased significantly to 39% during the first year (P < .001). Sexual functioning and symptoms did not differ between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION Patients who received EBRT reported significantly higher levels of diarrhea and bowel symptoms. This resulted in a higher need to remain close to a toilet and, as a consequence, more limitation of daily activities because of bowel symptoms and decreased social functioning. Vaginal brachytherapy provides a better QOL, and should be the preferred treatment from a QOL perspective.

Purpose: To determine whether a dose of 78 Gy improves outcome compared with a conventional dose of 68 Gy for prostate cancer patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy., Patients and Methods: Between June 1997 and February 2003, stage T1b-4 prostate cancer patients were enrolled onto a multicenter randomized trial comparing 68 Gy with 78 Gy. Patients were stratified by institution, age, (neo)adjuvant hormonal therapy (HT), and treatment group. Four treatment groups (with specific radiation volumes) were defined based on the probability of seminal vesicle involvement. The primary end point was freedom from failure (FFF). Failure was defined as clinical failure or biochemical failure, according to the American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology definition. Other end points were freedom from clinical failure (FFCF), overall survival (OS), and toxicity., Results: Median follow-up time was 51 months. Of the 669 enrolled patients, 664 were included in the analysis. HT was prescribed for 143 patients. FFF was significantly better in the 78-Gy arm compared with the 68-Gy arm (5-year FFF rate, 64% v 54%, respectively), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.74 (P = .02). No significant differences in FFCF or OS were seen between the treatment arms. There was no difference in late genitourinary toxicity of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer grade 2 or more and a slightly higher nonsignificant incidence of late gastrointestinal toxicity of grade 2 or more., Conclusion: This multicenter randomized trial shows a significantly improved FFF in prostate cancer patients treated with a higher dose of radiotherapy.

Purpose: Stage IC, grade 3 endometrial cancer is regarded as a high-risk category. Stage IC, grade 3 patients were not eligible for the randomized Postoperative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC) trial, but were registered and received postoperative radiotherapy., Patients and Methods: The PORTEC trial included 715 patients with stage IC, grade 1 or 2, and stage IB, grade 2 or 3 endometrial cancer. Patients were randomly assigned after surgery to receive pelvic radiotherapy (RT) or no further treatment. A total of 104 patients with stage IC, grade 3 endometrial cancer were registered, of whom 99 could be evaluated. Patterns of relapse and survival were compared with PORTEC patients receiving RT. Median follow-up was 83 months., Results: The actuarial 5-year rates of locoregional relapse were 1% to 3% for PORTEC patients who received RT, compared with 14% for stage IC, grade 3 patients. Five-year distant metastases rates were 3% to 8% for grade 1 and 2 tumors; 20% for stage IB, grade 3 tumors; and 31% for stage IC, grade 3 tumors. Overall survival rates were 83% to 85% for grades 1 and 2; 74% for stage IB, grade 3; and 58% for stage IC, grade 3 patients (P <.001). In multivariate analysis grade 3 was the most important adverse prognostic factor for relapse and death as a result of endometrial cancer (hazard ratios, 5.4 and 5.5; P <.0001)., Conclusion: Patients with stage IC, grade 3 endometrial carcinoma are at high risk of early distant spread and endometrial carcinoma-related death. Novel strategies for adjuvant therapy should be explored to improve survival for this patient group.