This study is a large, prospective, pragmatic, controlled comparison of patient-centric outcomes \[quality of life (QOL), toxicity, and disease control\] between parallel cohorts of men with prostate cancer treated simultaneously at proton therapy facilities and at geographically similar conventional (photon-based) radiation facilities using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques.
This study is a large, prospective, pragmatic, controlled comparison of patient-centric outcomes \[quality of life (QOL), toxicity, and disease control\] between parallel cohorts of men with prostate cancer treated simultaneously at proton therapy facilities and at geographically similar conventional (photon-based) radiation facilities using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques. This study includes a pre-specified randomized comparison of standard fractionation and moderate hypofractionation dose schemes within the proton therapy cohort. In addition, subgroup analyses will include a comparison of outcomes by race (Black vs. White), comorbidity score (0 vs. 1+), age (\<65 vs. ≥65), fractionation schedule (standard, moderate, ultra-hypofractionation), and prostate cancer aggressiveness (very low and low, intermediate, and high risk) for all objectives. All interventions will be standard of care (SOC) radiation strategies using either IMRT or proton therapy. All patient-reported QOL, patient-scored and patient-reported toxicity, and disease control assessments will be SOC. Participants will also complete pretreatment surveys regarding demographic data, personal treatment goals, factors affecting treatment decision-making, and sources of information used in treatment selection.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
3,000
As this trial is pragmatic, all treatment will be standard of care.
As this trial is pragmatic, all treatment will be standard of care.
78.0 Gy (RBE) in 39 fractions
Bowel urgency and bowel frequency Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) item scores
EPIC assesses the disease-specific aspects of prostate cancer and its therapies and comprises four summary domains (Urinary, Bowel, Sexual and Hormonal). Factor analysis supports dividing the Urinary Domain Summary Score into two distinct Incontinence and Irritative/Obstructive subscales. In addition, each Domain Summary Score has measurable Function Subscale and Bother Subscale components. Response options for each EPIC item form a Likert scale, and multi-item scale scores are components. Response options for each EPIC item form a Likert scale, and multi-item scale scores are transformed linearly to a 0-100 scale, with higher scores representing better HRQOL
Time frame: 2-years after the end of radiation therapy
Grade 2 or higher toxicity for each adverse event assessed by CTCAE
The NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 is a descriptive terminology which can be utilized for Adverse Event (AE) reporting. A grading (severity) scale is provided for each AE term.
Time frame: 2-years after the end of radiation therapy
Grade 2 or higher toxicity for each adverse event assessed by PRO-CTCAE.
PRO-CTCAE responses are scored from 0 to 4, and there are as yet no standardized scoring rules for how to combine attributes into a single score or how best to analyse PRO-CTCAE data longitudinally. PRO-CTCAE scores for each attribute (frequency, severity and/or interference) should be presented descriptively (e.g. summary statistics or graphical presentations). CTCAE grades for the corresponding time period should be presented in conjunction with PRO-CTCAE scores.
Time frame: 2-years after the end of radiation therapy
Freedom from biochemical progression using PSA results.
Biochemical failure is defined as a sustained rise in PSA of 2 ng/mL or more above the nadir (the lowest PSA level after radiotherapy).
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
60.0 Gy (RBE) in 20 fractions
University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB)
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
University of California San Diego
La Jolla, California, United States
Proton Therapy Treatment Center - Loma Linda University
Loma Linda, California, United States
Sutter Health
Roseville, California, United States
California Protons Cancer Therapy Center
San Diego, California, United States
Department of Radiation Oncology Davis Cancer Pavilion
Gainesville, Florida, United States
University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Ackerman Cancer Center
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Mayo Clinic
Jacksonville, Florida, United States
University of Miami School of Medicine
Miami, Florida, United States
...and 43 more locations
Time frame: 3-years after the end of radiation therapy