SummaryBackgroundBased on previous findings, we hypothesised that radiotherapy to the prostate would improve overall survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer, and that the benefit would be greatest in patients with a low metastatic burden. We aimed to compare standard of care for metastatic prostate cancer, with and without radiotherapy.MethodsWe did a randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 117 hospitals in Switzerland and the UK. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. We randomly allocated patients open-label in a 1:1 ratio to standard of care (control group) or standard of care and radiotherapy (radiotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by hospital, age at randomisation, nodal involvement, WHO performance status, planned androgen deprivation therapy, planned docetaxel use (from December, 2015), and regular aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Standard of care was lifelong androgen deprivation therapy, with up-front docetaxel permitted from December, 2015. Men allocated radiotherapy received either a daily (55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks) or weekly (36 Gy in six fractions over 6 weeks) schedule that was nominated before randomisation. The primary outcome was overall survival, measured as the number of deaths; this analysis had 90% power with a one-sided α of 2·5% for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·75. Secondary outcomes were failure-free survival, progression-free survival, metastatic progression-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and symptomatic local event-free survival. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. The primary outcome analysis was by intention to treat. Two prespecified subgroup analyses tested the effects of prostate radiotherapy by baseline metastatic burden and radiotherapy schedule. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476.FindingsBetween Jan 22, 2013, and Sept 2, 2016, 2061 men underwent randomisation, 1029 were allocated the control and 1032 radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced, with a median age of 68 years (IQR 63–73) and median amount of prostate-specific antigen of 97 ng/mL (33–315). 367 (18%) patients received early docetaxel. 1082 (52%) participants nominated the daily radiotherapy schedule before randomisation and 979 (48%) the weekly schedule. 819 (40%) men had a low metastatic burden, 1120 (54%) had a high metastatic burden, and the metastatic burden was unknown for 122 (6%). Radiotherapy improved failure-free survival (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·68–0·84; p<0·0001) but not overall survival (0·92, 0·80–1·06; p=0·266). Radiotherapy was well tolerated, with 48 (5%) adverse events (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3–4) reported during radiotherapy and 37 (4%) after radiotherapy. The proportion reporting at least one severe adverse event (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or worse) was similar by treatment group in the safety population (398 [38%] with control and 380 [39%] with radiotherapy).Interp...

Dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (DCE-CT) assesses the vascular support of tumours through analysis of temporal changes in attenuation in blood vessels and tissues during a rapid series of images acquired with intravenous administration of iodinated contrast material. Commercial software for DCE-CT analysis allows pixel-by-pixel calculation of a range of validated physiological parameters and depiction as parametric maps. Clinical studies support the use of DCE-CT parameters as surrogates for physiological and molecular processes underlying tumour angiogenesis. DCE-CT has been used to provide biomarkers of drug action in early phase trials for the treatment of a range of cancers. DCE-CT can be appended to current imaging assessments of tumour response with the benefits of wide availability and low cost. This paper sets out guidelines for the use of DCE-CT in assessing tumour vascular support that were developed using a Delphi process. Recommendations encompass CT system requirements and quality assurance, radiation dosimetry, patient preparation, administration of contrast material, CT acquisition parameters, terminology and units, data processing and reporting. DCE-CT has reached technical maturity for use in therapeutic trials in oncology. The development of these consensus guidelines may promote broader application of DCE-CT for the evaluation of tumour vascularity. Key Points • DCE-CT can robustly assess tumour vascular support • DCE-CT has reached technical maturity for use in therapeutic trials in oncology • This paper presents consensus guidelines for using DCE-CT in assessing tumour vascularity.

BackgroundFocal therapy as a treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa) is an increasingly popular and rapidly evolving field.ObjectiveTo gather expert opinion on patient selection, interventions, and meaningful outcome measures for focal therapy in clinical practice and trial design.Design, setting, and participantsFifteen experts in focal therapy followed a modified two-stage RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology process. All participants independently scored 246 statements prior to rescoring at a face-to-face meeting. The meeting occurred in June 2013 at the Royal Society of Medicine, London, supported by the Wellcome Trust and the UK Department of Health.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisAgreement, disagreement, or uncertainty were calculated as the median panel score. Consensus was derived from the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry level.Results and limitationsOf 246 statements, 154 (63%) reached consensus. Items of agreement included the following: patients with intermediate risk and patients with unifocal and multifocal PCa are eligible for focal treatment; magnetic resonance imaging–targeted or template-mapping biopsy should be used to plan treatment; planned treatment margins should be 5 mm from the known tumor; prostate volume or age should not be a primary determinant of eligibility; foci of indolent cancer can be left untreated when treating the dominant index lesion; histologic outcomes should be defined by targeted biopsy at 1 yr; residual disease in the treated area of ≤3 mm of Gleason 3 + 3 did not need further treatment; and focal retreatment rates of ≤20% should be considered clinically acceptable but subsequent whole-gland therapy deemed a failure of focal therapy. All statements are expert opinion and therefore constitute level 5 evidence and may not reflect wider clinical consensus.ConclusionsThe landscape of PCa treatment is rapidly evolving with new treatment technologies. This consensus meeting provides guidance to clinicians on current expert thinking in the field of focal therapy.Patient summaryIn this report we present expert opinion on patient selection, interventions, and meaningful outcomes for clinicians working in focal therapy for prostate cancer.

No abstract