Evidence Hub

The interplay between acute and late toxicity among patients receiving prostate radiotherapy: an individual patient data meta-analysis of six randomised trials

J. Nikitas, P. Jamshidian, A. Tree, Emma Hall, D. Dearnaley, J. Michalski, W. R. Lee, P. Nguyen et al.

The Lancet Oncology, 2025

6,593 participants · 30 citations

Abstract

Summary Background The association between acute and late toxicity following prostate radiotherapy has not been well studied using data from multiple randomised clinical trials and fractionation schedules. We aimed to characterise the relationship between acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity among patients receiving conventionally fractionated or moderately hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy. Methods This was an individual patient data meta-analysis that identified randomised phase 3 trials of conventionally fractionated or moderately hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy in the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium that had individual-level acute and late toxicity data available and were available before Dec 1, 2023. Trials without individual patient data were excluded. Data were provided to MARCAP by study investigators. The associations between acute (≤3 months after radiotherapy) and late (>3 months after radiotherapy) grade 2 or greater genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were assessed using adjusted generalised linear mixed models (adjusted for age, androgen deprivation therapy status, type of radiotherapy, radiation dose, and radiation schedule). In the subset of trials that collected Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite quality of life (QOL) evaluations, the association between acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity and decrements at least twice the minimal clinically…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,593 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free