ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: For men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with definitive therapy, the addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) reduces the risk of distant metastasis and cancer-related mortality. However, the absolute benefit of ADT varies by baseline cancer risk. Estimates of prognosis have improved over time, and little is known about ADT decision making in the modern era. We sought to characterize variability and identify factors associated with intended ADT use within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consoritum (MROQC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing definitive radiation therapy were enrolled from June 9, 2020, to June 26, 2023 (n = 815). Prospective data were collected using standardized patient, physician, and physicist forms. Intended ADT use was prospectively defined and was the primary outcome. Associations with patient, tumor, and practice-related factors were tested with multivariable analyses. Random intercept modeling was used to estimate facility-level variability. RESULTS: Five hundred seventy patients across 26 facilities were enrolled with intermediate-risk disease. ADT was intended for 46% of men (n = 262/570), which differed by National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable intermediate-risk (23.5%, n = 38/172) versus unfavorable intermediate-risk disease (56.3%, n = 224/398; P < .001). After adjusting for the statewide case mix, the predicted probability of intended ADT use varied significantly across facilities, ranging from 15.4% (95% CI, 5.4%-37.0%) to 71.7% (95% CI, 57.0%-82.9%), with P < .01. Multivariable analyses showed that grade group 3 (OR, 4.60 [3.20-6.67]), ≥50% positive cores (OR, 2.15 [1.43-3.25]), and prostate-specific antigen 10 to 20 (OR, 1.87 [1.24-2.84]) were associated with ADT use. Area under the curve was improved when incorporating MRI adverse features (0.76) or radiation treatment variables (0.76), but there remained significant facility-level heterogeneity in all models evaluated (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Within a state-wide consortium, there is substantial facility-level heterogeneity in intended ADT use for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Future efforts are necessary to identify patients who will benefit most from ADT and to develop strategies to standardize appropriate use.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: National guidelines on limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) treatment give preference to a hyperfractionated regimen of 45 Gy in 30 fractions delivered twice daily; however, use of this regimen is uncommon compared with once-daily regimens. The purpose of this study was to characterize the LS-SCLC fractionation regimens used throughout a statewide collaborative, analyze patient and treatment factors associated with these regimens, and describe real-world acute toxicity profiles of once- and twice-daily radiation therapy (RT) regimens. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Demographic, clinical, and treatment data along with physician-assessed toxicity and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected by 29 institutions within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium between 2012 and 2021 for patients with LS-SCLC. We modeled the influence of RT fractionation and other patient-level variables clustered by treatment site on the odds of a treatment break specifically due to toxicity with multilevel logistic regression. National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, incident grade 2 or worse toxicity was longitudinally compared between regimens. RESULTS: There were 78 patients (15.6% overall) treated with twice-daily RT and 421 patients treated with once-daily RT. Patients receiving twice-daily RT were more likely to be married or living with someone (65% vs 51%; P = .019) and to have no major comorbidities (24% vs 10%; P = .017). Once-daily RT fractionation toxicity peaked during RT, and twice-daily toxicity peaked within 1 month after RT. After stratifying by treatment site and adjusting for patient-level variables, once-daily treated patients had 4.11 (95% confidence interval, 1.31-12.87) higher odds of treatment break specifically due to toxicity than twice-daily treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperfractionation for LS-SCLC remains infrequently prescribed despite the lack of evidence demonstrating superior efficacy or lower toxicity of once-daily RT. With peak acute toxicity after RT and lower likelihood of a treatment break with twice-daily fractionation in real-word practice, providers may start using hyperfractionated RT more frequently.
