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
Clinical Trial
. 2021 Apr 10;39(11):1234-1242.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.03282. Epub 2021 Jan 26.

Prostate-Only Versus Whole-Pelvic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer (POP-RT): Outcomes From Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Prostate-Only Versus Whole-Pelvic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer (POP-RT): Outcomes From Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

Vedang Murthy et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: We report the clinical outcomes of a randomized trial comparing prophylactic whole-pelvic nodal radiotherapy to prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in high-risk prostate cancer.

Methods: This phase III, single center, randomized controlled trial enrolled eligible patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for node-negative prostate adenocarcinoma, with estimated nodal risk ≥ 20%. Randomization was 1:1 to PORT (68 Gy/25# to prostate) or whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 68 Gy/25# to prostate, 50 Gy/25# to pelvic nodes, including common iliac) using computerized stratified block randomization, stratified by Gleason score, type of androgen deprivation, prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, and prior transurethral resection of the prostate. All patients received image-guided, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and minimum 2 years of androgen deprivation therapy. The primary end point was 5-year biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), and secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: From November 2011 to August 2017, a total of 224 patients were randomly assigned (PORT = 114, WPRT = 110). At a median follow-up of 68 months, 36 biochemical failures (PORT = 25, WPRT = 7) and 24 deaths (PORT = 13, WPRT = 11) were recorded. Five-year BFFS was 95.0% (95% CI, 88.4 to 97.9) with WPRT versus 81.2% (95% CI, 71.6 to 87.8) with PORT, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.52; P < .0001). WPRT also showed higher 5-year DFS (89.5% v 77.2%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.73; P = .002), but 5-year OS did not appear to differ (92.5% v 90.8%; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.05; P = .83). Distant metastasis-free survival was also higher with WPRT (95.9% v 89.2%; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.82; P = .01). Benefit in BFFS and DFS was maintained across prognostic subgroups.

Conclusion: Prophylactic pelvic irradiation for high-risk, locally advanced prostate cancer improved BFFS and DFS as compared with PORT, but OS did not appear to differ.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Vanita NoronhaResearch Funding: Amgen, Sanofi/Aventis, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Intas, AstraZeneca Kumar PrabhashResearch Funding: Biocon, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Fresenius Kabi, Alkem Laboratories, Natco Pharma, BDR Pharmaceutics, Roche Umesh MahantshettyResearch Funding: Varian Medical SystemsNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Comment in

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources