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
. 2024 May 1;10(5):584-591.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.7291.

Noninferiority of Hypofractionated vs Conventional Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy for Genitourinary and Gastrointestinal Symptoms: The NRG-GU003 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Noninferiority of Hypofractionated vs Conventional Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy for Genitourinary and Gastrointestinal Symptoms: The NRG-GU003 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Mark K Buyyounouski et al. JAMA Oncol. .

Erratum in

  • Error in Figure.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] JAMA Oncol. 2024 Jun 1;10(6):833. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1062. JAMA Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38635236 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Abstract

Importance: No prior trial has compared hypofractionated postprostatectomy radiotherapy (HYPORT) to conventionally fractionated postprostatectomy (COPORT) in patients primarily treated with prostatectomy.

Objective: To determine if HYPORT is noninferior to COPORT for patient-reported genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms at 2 years.

Design, setting, and participants: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, patients with a detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA; ≥0.1 ng/mL) postprostatectomy with pT2/3pNX/0 disease or an undetectable PSA (<0.1 ng/mL) with either pT3 disease or pT2 disease with a positive surgical margin were recruited from 93 academic, community-based, and tertiary medical sites in the US and Canada. Between June 2017 and July 2018, a total of 296 patients were randomized. Data were analyzed in December 2020, with additional analyses occurring after as needed.

Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive 62.5 Gy in 25 fractions (HYPORT) or 66.6 Gy in 37 fractions (COPORT).

Main outcomes and measures: The coprimary end points were the 2-year change in score from baseline for the bowel and urinary domains of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite Index questionnaire. Secondary objectives were to compare between arms freedom from biochemical failure, time to progression, local failure, regional failure, salvage therapy, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific survival, overall survival, and adverse events.

Results: Of the 296 patients randomized (median [range] age, 65 [44-81] years; 100% male), 144 received HYPORT and 152 received COPORT. At the end of RT, the mean GU change scores among those in the HYPORT and COPORT arms were neither clinically significant nor different in statistical significance and remained so at 6 and 12 months. The mean (SD) GI change scores for HYPORT and COPORT were both clinically significant and different in statistical significance at the end of RT (-15.52 [18.43] and -7.06 [12.78], respectively; P < .001). However, the clinically and statistically significant differences in HYPORT and COPORT mean GI change scores were resolved at 6 and 12 months. The 24-month differences in mean GU and GI change scores for HYPORT were noninferior to COPORT using noninferiority margins of -5 and -6, respectively, rejecting the null hypothesis of inferiority (mean [SD] GU score: HYPORT, -5.01 [15.10] and COPORT, -4.07 [14.67]; P = .005; mean [SD] GI score: HYPORT, -4.17 [10.97] and COPORT, -1.41 [8.32]; P = .02). With a median follow-up for censored patients of 2.1 years, there was no difference between HYPORT vs COPORT for biochemical failure, defined as a PSA of 0.4 ng/mL or higher and rising (2-year rate, 12% vs 8%; P = .28).

Conclusions and relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, HYPORT was associated with greater patient-reported GI toxic effects compared with COPORT at the completion of RT, but both groups recovered to baseline levels within 6 months. At 2 years, HYPORT was noninferior to COPORT in terms of patient-reported GU or GI toxic effects. HYPORT is a new acceptable practice standard for patients receiving postprostatectomy radiotherapy.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03274687.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Chen reports personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, and Seagen outside the submitted work. Dr Vigneault reports personal fees from AbbVie, TerSera, Janssen, Tolmar, Knight Therapeutics, and Astellas outside the submitted work. Dr Barkati reports personal fees from AbbVie, Knight Therapeutics, TerSera, and Tolmar outside the submitted work. Dr Schroeder reports grants from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of the study. Dr Hannan reports grants from NRG Oncology during the conduct of the study. Dr Feng reports personal fees from Janssen, Myovant, Roivant, Bayer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas, and Sanofi, as well as work on the scientific advisory boards for Serimmune, Artera, and ClearNote Genomics outside the submitted work. Dr Sandler reports grants from the American College of Radiology/NRG Oncology during the conduct of the study, personal fees from Janssen outside the submitted work, and work on the ASTRO board of directors. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. CONSORT Diagram
ADT indicates androgen deprivation therapy; COPORT, conventionally fractionated postprostatectomy; HYPORT, hypofractionated postprostatectomy radiotherapy; RT, radiotherapy.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Time to First Occurrence of Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events
COPORT indicates conventionally fractionated postprostatectomy; HYPORT, hypofractionated postprostatectomy radiotherapy.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Domain Scores Across Time
Error bars indicate SD. COPORT indicates conventionally fractionated postprostatectomy; HYPORT, hypofractionated postprostatectomy radiotherapy; RT, radiotherapy.

Comment in

References

    1. Thompson IM Jr, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, et al. . Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296(19):2329-2335. doi:10.1001/jama.296.19.2329 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Tombal B, et al. ; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Radiation Oncology and Genito-Urinary Groups . Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet. 2012;380(9858):2018-2027. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61253-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wiegel T, Bartkowiak D, Bottke D, et al. . Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see after radical prostatectomy: 10-year follow-up of the ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 trial. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):243-250. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.011 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, et al. . Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10260):1413-1421. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31553-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kneebone A, Fraser-Browne C, Duchesne GM, et al. . Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (TROG 08.03/ANZUP RAVES): a randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(10):1331-1340. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30456-3 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data