Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29722660›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2018

The Efficacy and Safety of Conventional and Hypofractionated High-Dose Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer in an Elderly Population: A Subgroup Analysis of the CHHiP Trial.

James M Wilson, David P Dearnaley, Isabel Syndikus, Vincent Khoo, Alison Birtle, David Bloomfield, Ananya Choudhury, John Graham, Catherine Ferguson, Zafar Malik and 12 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Hypofractionation for clinically localized prostate cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Personalised treatment for older adults with cancer: The role of frailty assessment.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Influence of the technique and comorbidities in hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Overall survival prediction in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with radium-223.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Article
  19. The contemporary management of prostate cancer.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 15 institutions in 1 country.

James M WilsonGuy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust/Kings College, London, UK.
David P DearnaleyThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Electronic address: david.dearnaley@icr.ac.uk.
Isabel SyndikusClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK.
Vincent KhooThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alison BirtleRosemere Cancer Centre, Royal Preston Hospital/University of Manchester, Preston, UK.
David BloomfieldBrighton and Sussex University Hospitals, Brighton, UK.
Ananya ChoudhuryChristie Hospital, Manchester, UK.
John GrahamBeacon Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK.
Catherine FergusonSheffield Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Zafar MalikClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK.
Julian Money-KyrleRoyal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK.
Joe M O'SullivanQueen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Miguel PanadesLincoln County Hospital, Lincoln, UK.
Chris ParkerThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Yvonne RimmerCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Christopher ScraseIpswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK.
John StaffurthCardiff University/Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK.
Andrew StockdaleUniversity Hospital Coventry, Coventry, UK.
Clare CruickshankThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Clare GriffinThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Emma HallThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
CHHiP Investigators
Institute of Cancer Research · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBClatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBIpswich Hospital · GBKing's College London · GBLincoln County Hospital · GBMusgrove Park Hospital · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBRoyal Preston Hospital · GBRoyal Surrey County Hospital · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe Christie Hospital · GBUniversity Hospital Coventry · GBVelindre Cancer Centre · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 10588Cancer Research UK 12518Cancer Research UK 19727Cancer Research UK 7253Cancer Research UK C1491/A15955Cancer Research UK C1491/A9895Cancer Research UK SP2312/021Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOutcome data on radiation therapy for prostate cancer in an elderly population are sparse. The CHHiP (Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer) trial provides a large, prospectively collected, contemporary dataset in which to explore outcomes by age. METHODS AND MATERIALS: CHHiP participants received 3 to 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy and were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 74 Gy in 37 fractions (conventional fractionation), 60 Gy in 20 fractions, or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Toxicity was assessed using clinician-reported outcome (CRO) and patient-reported outcome questionnaires. Participants were categorized as aged < 75 years or ≥ 75 years. Outcomes were compared by age group.

resultsOf 3216 patients, 491 (15%) were aged ≥ 75 years. There was no difference in biochemical or clinical failure rates between the groups aged < 75 years and ≥ 75 years for any of the fractionation schedules. In the group aged ≥ 75 years, biochemical or clinical failure-free rates favored hypofractionation, and at 5 years, they were 84.7% for 74 Gy, 91% for 60 Gy, and 87.7% for 57 Gy. The incidence of CRO (grade 3) acute bowel toxicity was 2% in both age groups. The incidence of grade 3 acute bladder toxicity was 8% in patients aged < 75 years and 7% in those aged ≥ 75 years. The 5-year cumulative incidence of CRO grade ≥ 2 late bowel side effects was similar in both age groups. However, in the group aged ≥ 75 years, there was a suggestion of a higher cumulative incidence of bowel bother (small or greater) with 60 Gy compared with 74 Gy and 57 Gy. Patient-reported bladder bother was slightly higher in the group aged ≥ 75 years than the group aged < 75 years, and there was a suggestion of a lower cumulative incidence of bladder bother with 57 Gy compared with 74 Gy and 60 Gy in patients aged ≥ 75 years, which was not evident in those aged < 75 years.

conclusionsHypofractionated radiation therapy appears to be well tolerated and effective in men aged ≥ 75 years. The 57-Gy schedule has potential advantages in that it may moderate long-term side effects without compromising treatment efficacy in this group.

Indexed as

Radiation Dose HypofractionationAgedAge FactorsAndrogen AntagonistsHumansIncidenceIntestinesMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesProstatic NeoplasmsRadiation InjuriesRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedUrinary BladderAndrogen Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID29722660
PMCPMC6314452
OpenAlexW2783796657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.