Evidence Hub

Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium: Impact of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use and Duration With Definitive Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

A. Kishan, Y. Sun, T. Pisansky, M. Bolla, A. Steigler, J. Denham, W. Shipley, H. Sandler et al.

International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2021

10,131 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

To conduct the first global individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomized trials to assess the impact of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) use and duration with definitive radiotherapy (RT) in localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

The MARCAP Consortium was formed from international trial groups (NRG/RTOG, EORTC, TROG, DART/GICOR, and ICORG). IPD for 10,131 patients enrolled across 11 RT trials were available for three pre-specified meta-analyses: addition of ADT to RT (5 trials; n = 4736), addition of long-term adjuvant ADT (12-30 months) to short-term ADT (4 trials; n = 3674), and addition of longer neoadjuvant ADT (3-7 months) to short-term ADT (3 trials; n = 2213). The primary endpoint of all meta-analyses was overall survival (OS), with metastasis-free survival (MFS) as a secondary endpoint. Interaction tests between treatment and receipt of dose-escalated RT (≥74 Gy in 2 Gy fractions) were performed.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 12.0 years, the addition of ADT to RT improved 12-year OS (absolute 7.2%, HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.8-0.95) and 12-year MFS (absolute 8.3%, HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92). After a median follow-up of 10.9 years, prolongation of adjuvant ADT improved 12-year OS (absolute 6.3%, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.94) and 12-year MFS (absolute 6.3%, HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.90). After a median follow-up of 10.3 years, prolongation of neoadjuvant ADT was not associated with a significant benefit in any endpoint (MFS HR 0.95, 95%…

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: 10,131 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