Evidence Hub

Ultra-hypofractionated stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for primary renal cell carcinoma: 5-year outcomes from a pooled analysis of the FASTRACK trials

Siva S, Ali M, Hardcastle N, Kron T, Higgs B, Foroudi F, Ruben J, Appu S et al.

The Lancet. Oncology, 2026

108 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive therapy for inoperable primary renal cell carcinoma. However, long-term prospective clinical trial data are scarce. We aimed to use pooled data from two clinical trials (FASTRACK and FASTRACK II) to evaluate activity and safety of SABR in the long term.

Methods: In this pooled analysis, we used data from FASTRACK, a single-institutional, phase 1, prospective clinical trial conducted at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (Melbourne, VIC, Australia), and FASTRACK II, an international, non-randomised, phase 2 clinical trial conducted in seven academic hospitals in Australia and one in the Netherlands. The treatment protocol, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and dose constraints were the same in both trials. Patients had primary renal cell carcinoma and were deemed medically inoperable or high-risk for surgery, were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, tumours of 10 cm or less in maximal dimension, and N0-N1 disease. Tumours 4 cm or smaller in FASTRACK II and smaller than 5 cm in FASTRACK received a single fraction of 26 Gy and larger tumours received 42 Gy in three fractions 48 h apart. Local control (freedom from local progression) was the primary endpoint, assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) criteria. The analyses were conducted only in patients who commenced protocol treatment. Safety was evaluated…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 108 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