Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Oligoprogressive Cancers: Results of the Randomized Phase II STOP Trial
Devin Schellenberg,Zsolt Gabos,Adele Duimering,Brock Debenham,Alysa Fairchild,Fleur Huang,Lindsay S. Rowe,Diane Severin,Meredith E. Giuliani,Andrea Bezjak,Benjamin H. Lok,Srinivas Raman,Peter Chung,Yizhou Zhao,Clement K. Ho,Michael Lock,Alexander V. Louie,Shilo Lefresne,Hannah Carolan,Mitchell Liu,Vivian Yau,Allison Ye,Robert A. Olson,Benjamin Mou,Islam G. Mohamed,David W. Petrik,Maryam Dosani,Howard Pai,Boris Valev,Stewart Gaede,Andrew Warner,David A. Palma
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.08.031
IF: 8.013
2024-08-23
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Abstract:Purpose This trial examined if patients with ≤5 sites of oligoprogression benefit from the addition of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy. Methods We enrolled patients with 1-5 metastases progressing on systemic therapy, and after stratifying by type of systemic therapy (cytotoxic vs. non-cytotoxic), randomized 1:2 between continued SOC treatment vs. SABR to all progressing lesions plus SOC. The trial was initially limited to non-small cell lung cancer but was expanded to include all non-hematologic malignancies to meet accrual goals. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), lesional control, quality of life, adverse events (AEs), and duration of systemic therapy post-randomization. Results Ninety patients with 127 oligoprogressive metastases were enrolled across 8 Canadian institutions, with 59 randomized to SABR and 31 to SOC. Median age was 67 years and 39 (43%) were female. The most common primary sites were lung (44%), genitourinary (23%) and breast (13%). Protocol adherence in the SOC arm was suboptimal, with 11 patients (35%) either receiving high-dose/ablative therapies (conflicting with trial protocol) or withdrawing from the study. Median follow-up was 31 months. There was no difference in PFS between arms (median PFS 8.4 months in the SABR arm vs. 4.3 months in the SOC arm but curves cross and 2-year PFS was 9% vs. 24% respectively, p=0.91). Median OS was 31.2 months vs. 27.4 months, respectively (p=0.22). Lesional control was superior with SABR (70% vs. 38% respectively, p=0.0015). There were 2 (3.4%) grade 3 and no grade 4/5 AEs attributable to SABR. Conclusion SABR was well-tolerated with superior lesional control but did not improve PFS or OS. Accrual to this study was difficult, and the results may have been impacted by an unwillingness to forgo ablative treatments on the SOC arm. (NCT02756793)
oncology,radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging