Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Dec 31;10(12):e041005.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041005.

Protocol for tumour-focused dose-escalated adaptive radiotherapy for the radical treatment of bladder cancer in a multicentre phase II randomised controlled trial (RAIDER): radiotherapy planning and delivery guidance

Affiliations

Protocol for tumour-focused dose-escalated adaptive radiotherapy for the radical treatment of bladder cancer in a multicentre phase II randomised controlled trial (RAIDER): radiotherapy planning and delivery guidance

Shaista Hafeez et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Daily radiotherapy delivered with radiosensitisation offers patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) comparable outcomes to cystectomy with functional organ preservation. Most recurrences following radiotherapy occur within the bladder. Increasing the delivered radiotherapy dose to the tumour may further improve local control. Developments in image-guided radiotherapy have allowed bladder tumour-focused 'plan of the day' radiotherapy delivery. We aim to test within a randomised multicentre phase II trial whether this technique will enable dose escalation with acceptable rates of toxicity.

Methods and analysis: Patients with T2-T4aN0M0 unifocal MIBC will be randomised (1:1:2) between standard/control whole bladder single plan radiotherapy, standard dose adaptive tumour-focused radiotherapy or dose-escalated adaptive tumour-focused radiotherapy (DART). Adaptive tumour-focused radiotherapy will use a library of three plans (small, medium and large) for treatment. A cone beam CT taken prior to each treatment will be used to visualise the anatomy and inform selection of the most appropriate plan for treatment.Two radiotherapy fractionation schedules (32f and 20f) are permitted. A minimum of 120 participants will be randomised in each fractionation cohort (to ensure 57 evaluable DART patients per cohort).A comprehensive radiotherapy quality assurance programme including pretrial and on-trial components is instituted to ensure standardisation of radiotherapy planning and delivery.The trial has a two-stage non-comparative design. The primary end point of stage I is the proportion of patients meeting predefined normal tissue constraints in the DART group. The primary end point of stage II is late Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or worse toxicity aiming to exclude a rate of >20% (80% power and 5% alpha, one sided) in each DART fractionation cohort. Secondary end points include locoregional MIBC control, progression-free survival overall survival and patient-reported outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination: This clinical trial is approved by the London-Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee (15/LO/0539). The results when available will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals, conference presentations and submission to regulatory authorities.

Trial registration number: NCT02447549; Pre-results.

Keywords: clinical trials; oncology; radiotherapy; urological tumours.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: SH reports non-financial support from Elekta (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden), non-financial support from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), personal fees and non-financial support from Roche outside the submitted work; AC reports grants from National Institute of Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, grants from Cancer Research, UK, grants from Medical Research Council, UK, grants from Prostate Cancer, UK, grants from Bayer, UK, personal fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical, non-financial support from ASCO, grants and non-financial support from Elekta AB, outside the submitted work; AH reports grants from CRUK, grants from MRC, grants from NIHR, outside the submitted work; TK reports reports grants from Cancer Australia, during the conduct of the study; and his group has a research collaborative agreement with Varian Medical System not related to this project; EH reports grants from Cancer Research UK during the conduct of the study; grants from Accuray Inc., grants from Varian Medical Systems Inc., outside the submitted work; RH reports non-financial support from Janssen, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, grants from Cancer Research UK, other from Nektar Therapeutics, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche outside the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial schema. f, fraction; PRO, patient-reported outcome; RTOG, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

References

    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidance Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management, 2015. Available: http://wwwniceorguk/guidance/ng2/evidence/full-guideline-3744109 - PubMed
    1. James ND, Hussain SA, Hall E, et al. . Radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1477–88. 10.1056/NEJMoa1106106 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hoskin PJ, Rojas AM, Bentzen SM, et al. . Radiotherapy with concurrent carbogen and nicotinamide in bladder carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4912–8. 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.4950 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bellmunt J, Orsola A, Leow JJ, et al. . Bladder cancer: ESMO practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2014;25 Suppl 3:iii40–8. 10.1093/annonc/mdu223 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Compérat EM, et al. . Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2017;71:462–75. 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.020 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources