Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34489210›Full record

Trial reportEuropean urology oncology2021

Impact of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy on Patient-reported Outcomes in Prostate Cancer: Results up to 5 yr in the CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016).

John N Staffurth, Joanne S Haviland, Anna Wilkins, Isabel Syndikus, Vincent Khoo, David Bloomfield, Chris Parker, John Logue, Christopher Scrase, Alison Birtle and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European urology oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

21 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.

John N StaffurthCardiff University/Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK.
Joanne S HavilandThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. Electronic address: jo.haviland@icr.ac.uk.
Anna WilkinsThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Isabel SyndikusClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK.
Vincent KhooThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
David BloomfieldBrighton and Sussex University Hospitals, Brighton, UK.
Chris ParkerThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
John LogueChristie Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Christopher ScraseIpswich Hospital, Ipswich, UK.
Alison BirtleRosemere Cancer Centre, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK.
Zafar MalikClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK.
Miguel PanadesLincoln County Hospital, Lincoln, UK.
Chinnamani EswarClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Wirral, UK.
John GrahamBeacon Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK.
Martin RussellBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK.
Catherine FergusonSheffield Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Joe M O'SullivanQueen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Clare A CruickshankThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
David DearnaleyThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Emma HallThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
CHHiP Trial Management Group
Institute of Cancer Research · GBClatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBBeatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre · GBIpswich Hospital · GBLincoln County Hospital · GBMusgrove Park Hospital · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBRoyal Preston Hospital · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe Christie Hospital · GBVelindre Cancer Centre · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 12518Cancer Research UK 19727Cancer Research UK 28284Cancer Research UK C1491/A15955Cancer Research UK C1491/A25351Cancer Research UK C1491/A9895Cancer Research UK C8262/A7253Cancer Research UK SP2312/021Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundModerate hypofractionation is the recommended standard of care for localised prostate cancer following the results of trials including Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP). Evaluation of long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is important to confirm safety and enhance patient information.

objectiveTo determine whether 5-yr PROs from the CHHiP quality of life (QoL) substudy confirm 2-yr findings and assess patterns over follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA phase III randomised controlled trial recruited from 2002 to 2011. The QoL substudy completed accrual in 2009; participants were followed up to 5 yr after radiotherapy. Analyses used data snapshot taken on August 26, 2016. A total of 71 radiotherapy centres were included in the study (UK, Republic of Ireland, Switzerland, and New Zealand); all 57 UK centres participated in the QoL substudy. CHHiP recruited 3216 men with localised prostate cancer (cT1b-T3aN0M0).

interventionConventional (74 Gy/37 fractions/7.4 wk) or hypofractionated radiotherapy (60 Gy/20 fractions/4 wk or 57 Gy/19 fractions/3.8 wk) was delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index, Short Form 36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate, or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and Short Form 12 questionnaires were administered at baseline, before radiotherapy, at 10 wk, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 mo after radiotherapy. The QoL primary endpoint was overall bowel bother. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The QoL substudy recruited 2100 patients; 1141 5-yr forms were available from 1957 patients still alive (58%). There were no statistically significant differences in 5-yr prevalence of overall "moderate or big" bowel bother: 19/349 (5.4%), 29/381 (7.6%), and 21/393 (5.3%) for 74, 60, and 57 Gy, respectively; overall urinary or sexual bother at 5 yr was similar between schedules. Bowel and urinary symptoms remained stable from 2 to 5 yr for all schedules. Some evidence of worsening overall sexual bother from baseline to 5 yr was less likely in the hypofractionated schedules compared with 74 Gy (odds ratios for increase in bother score vs 74 Gy: 0.55 [0.30-0.99], p = 0.009 for 60 Gy, and 0.52 [0.29-0.94], p = 0.004 for 57 Gy). General QoL scores were similar between schedules at 5 yr.

conclusionsLonger follow-up confirms earlier findings, with similar patient-reported bowel, urinary, and sexual problems between schedules overall. The continued low incidence of moderate or high bother confirms that moderate hypofractionation should be the standard of care for intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at patient-reported outcomes up to 5 yr after treatment in a trial of different radiotherapy schedules for prostate cancer. The findings confirmed that shorter radiotherapy schedules were as safe as standard radiotherapy in terms of bowel, urinary, and sexual problems. TAKE  HOME MESSAGE: Bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms were similar between schedules up to 5 yr. The continued low incidence of moderate/high bother confirms that moderate hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered the standard of care for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsQuality of LifeHumansMalePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRadiation Dose HypofractionationTreatment OutcomeHypofractionationPatient-reported outcomesProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID34489210
PMCPMC8674146
OpenAlexW3197896855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.