Cargando…

Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients

OBJECTIVE: Failure rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is > 50%, includes safety-problems, underpowered statistics, lack of efficacy, lack of funding or insufficient patient recruitment and is even more pronounced in oncology trials. We present results of a structured concept-development...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spohn, S. K. B., Adebahr, S., Huber, M., Jenkner, C., Wiehle, R., Nagavci, B., Schmucker, C., Carl, E. G., Chen, R. C., Weber, W. A., Mix, M., Rühle, A., Sprave, T., Nicolay, N. H., Gratzke, C., Benndorf, M., Wiegel, T., Weis, J., Baltas, D., Grosu, A. L., Zamboglou, C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8960686/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35351058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2
_version_ 1784677431319199744
author Spohn, S. K. B.
Adebahr, S.
Huber, M.
Jenkner, C.
Wiehle, R.
Nagavci, B.
Schmucker, C.
Carl, E. G.
Chen, R. C.
Weber, W. A.
Mix, M.
Rühle, A.
Sprave, T.
Nicolay, N. H.
Gratzke, C.
Benndorf, M.
Wiegel, T.
Weis, J.
Baltas, D.
Grosu, A. L.
Zamboglou, C.
author_facet Spohn, S. K. B.
Adebahr, S.
Huber, M.
Jenkner, C.
Wiehle, R.
Nagavci, B.
Schmucker, C.
Carl, E. G.
Chen, R. C.
Weber, W. A.
Mix, M.
Rühle, A.
Sprave, T.
Nicolay, N. H.
Gratzke, C.
Benndorf, M.
Wiegel, T.
Weis, J.
Baltas, D.
Grosu, A. L.
Zamboglou, C.
author_sort Spohn, S. K. B.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Failure rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is > 50%, includes safety-problems, underpowered statistics, lack of efficacy, lack of funding or insufficient patient recruitment and is even more pronounced in oncology trials. We present results of a structured concept-development phase (CDP) for a phase III RCT on personalized radiotherapy (RT) in primary prostate cancer (PCa) patients implementing prostate specific membrane antigen targeting positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 1 yr process of the CDP contained five main working packages: (i) literature search and scoping review, (ii) involvement of individual patients, patients’ representatives and patients’ self-help groups addressing the patients’ willingness to participate in the preparation process and the conduct of RCTs as well as the patient informed consent (PIC), (iii) involvement of national and international experts and expert panels (iv) a phase II pilot study investigating the safety of implementation of PSMA-PET for focal dose escalation RT and (v) in-silico RT planning studies assessing feasibility of envisaged dose regimens and effects of urethral sparing in focal dose escalation. RESULTS: (i) Systematic literature searches confirmed the high clinical relevance for more evidence on advanced RT approaches, in particular stereotactic body RT, in high-risk PCa patients. (ii) Involvement of patients, patient representatives and randomly selected males relevantly changed the PIC and initiated a patient empowerment project for training of bladder preparation. (iii) Discussion with national and international experts led to adaptions of inclusion and exclusion criteria. (iv) Fifty patients were treated in the pilot trial and in- and exclusion criteria as well as enrollment calculations were adapted accordingly. Parallel conduction of the pilot trial revealed pitfalls on practicability and broadened the horizon for translational projects. (v) In-silico planning studies confirmed feasibility of envisaged dose prescription. Despite large prostate- and boost-volumes of up to 66% of the prostate, adherence to stringent anorectal dose constraints was feasible. Urethral sparing increased the therapeutic ratio. CONCLUSION: The dynamic framework of interdisciplinary working programs in CDPs enhances robustness of RCT protocols and may be associated with decreased failure rates. Structured recommendations are warranted to further define the process of such CDPs in radiation oncology trials. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8960686
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89606862022-03-29 Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients Spohn, S. K. B. Adebahr, S. Huber, M. Jenkner, C. Wiehle, R. Nagavci, B. Schmucker, C. Carl, E. G. Chen, R. C. Weber, W. A. Mix, M. Rühle, A. Sprave, T. Nicolay, N. H. Gratzke, C. Benndorf, M. Wiegel, T. Weis, J. Baltas, D. Grosu, A. L. Zamboglou, C. BMC Cancer Research OBJECTIVE: Failure rate in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is > 50%, includes safety-problems, underpowered statistics, lack of efficacy, lack of funding or insufficient patient recruitment and is even more pronounced in oncology trials. We present results of a structured concept-development phase (CDP) for a phase III RCT on personalized radiotherapy (RT) in primary prostate cancer (PCa) patients implementing prostate specific membrane antigen targeting positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 1 yr process of the CDP contained five main working packages: (i) literature search and scoping review, (ii) involvement of individual patients, patients’ representatives and patients’ self-help groups addressing the patients’ willingness to participate in the preparation process and the conduct of RCTs as well as the patient informed consent (PIC), (iii) involvement of national and international experts and expert panels (iv) a phase II pilot study investigating the safety of implementation of PSMA-PET for focal dose escalation RT and (v) in-silico RT planning studies assessing feasibility of envisaged dose regimens and effects of urethral sparing in focal dose escalation. RESULTS: (i) Systematic literature searches confirmed the high clinical relevance for more evidence on advanced RT approaches, in particular stereotactic body RT, in high-risk PCa patients. (ii) Involvement of patients, patient representatives and randomly selected males relevantly changed the PIC and initiated a patient empowerment project for training of bladder preparation. (iii) Discussion with national and international experts led to adaptions of inclusion and exclusion criteria. (iv) Fifty patients were treated in the pilot trial and in- and exclusion criteria as well as enrollment calculations were adapted accordingly. Parallel conduction of the pilot trial revealed pitfalls on practicability and broadened the horizon for translational projects. (v) In-silico planning studies confirmed feasibility of envisaged dose prescription. Despite large prostate- and boost-volumes of up to 66% of the prostate, adherence to stringent anorectal dose constraints was feasible. Urethral sparing increased the therapeutic ratio. CONCLUSION: The dynamic framework of interdisciplinary working programs in CDPs enhances robustness of RCT protocols and may be associated with decreased failure rates. Structured recommendations are warranted to further define the process of such CDPs in radiation oncology trials. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2. BioMed Central 2022-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8960686/ /pubmed/35351058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Spohn, S. K. B.
Adebahr, S.
Huber, M.
Jenkner, C.
Wiehle, R.
Nagavci, B.
Schmucker, C.
Carl, E. G.
Chen, R. C.
Weber, W. A.
Mix, M.
Rühle, A.
Sprave, T.
Nicolay, N. H.
Gratzke, C.
Benndorf, M.
Wiegel, T.
Weis, J.
Baltas, D.
Grosu, A. L.
Zamboglou, C.
Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title_full Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title_fullStr Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title_short Feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase III trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
title_sort feasibility, pitfalls and results of a structured concept-development phase for a randomized controlled phase iii trial on radiotherapy in primary prostate cancer patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8960686/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35351058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09434-2
work_keys_str_mv AT spohnskb feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT adebahrs feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT huberm feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT jenknerc feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT wiehler feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT nagavcib feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT schmuckerc feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT carleg feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT chenrc feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT weberwa feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT mixm feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT ruhlea feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT spravet feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT nicolaynh feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT gratzkec feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT benndorfm feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT wiegelt feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT weisj feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT baltasd feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT grosual feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients
AT zamboglouc feasibilitypitfallsandresultsofastructuredconceptdevelopmentphaseforarandomizedcontrolledphaseiiitrialonradiotherapyinprimaryprostatecancerpatients