ReachRxResearch
Home
Research
Sign Up
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy vs Moderately Hypofractionated IMRT for Localized Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer
Back to Research Hub
  1. Home
  2. Research Hub
  3. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy vs Modera…

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy vs Moderately Hypofractionated IMRT for Localized Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

JAMA·August 13Open Access
Medicine, General & InternalPractice changingProstate CancerRandomized Controlled TrialIntensity-Modulated Radiation TherapyStereotactic Body RadiotherapyOlder AdultSBRTIntensity-Modulated Radiation TherapyStereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Summary

View source

What was studied

Phase 3 RCT (NRG-GU005) comparing SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions, n=353) vs moderately hypofractionated IMRT (70 Gy in 28 fractions or 60 Gy in 20 fractions, n=345) in 698 patients with localized intermediate-risk prostate cancer (clinical stage T1-T2b), with co-primary endpoints of patient-reported quality-of-life (EPIC-26 urinary irritative/obstructive and bowel domains) at 2 years and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 years.

Key findings

SBRT did not improve urinary irritative/obstructive quality of life vs MH-IMRT (MCID: 35.4% vs 33.7%, P=.68), but significantly reduced bowel MCID (34.9% vs 43.8%, P=.03) and grade 3-4 GU adverse events (0.6% vs 2.5%, P=.04); DFS at 3 years favored MH-IMRT (92.1% vs 88.6%), with SBRT failing to demonstrate superiority.

Study limitations

Median follow-up of only 3.2 years is short for a disease with long natural history; the SBRT dose prescription (36.25 Gy) was modest and may not represent optimal SBRT dosing; open-label design introduces potential reporting bias in patient-reported outcomes.

Clinical implications

SBRT (5 fractions) offers fewer bowel quality-of-life declines and fewer severe GU toxicities than MH-IMRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer, but did not match MH-IMRT's 3-year DFS; clinicians should weigh convenience and toxicity profile against the observed DFS difference, which may narrow with longer follow-up.

Caveats

  • 3-year DFS data favor MH-IMRT, but the follow-up of 3.2 years median is short for prostate cancer; this difference may attenuate or shift with longer observation
  • DFS inferiority of SBRT was assessed with a non-inferiority or superiority design; the 1-sided log-rank P<.001 favoring MH-IMRT on DFS should be interpreted in the context that the primary DFS hypothesis was SBRT superiority, not non-inferiority
  • The SBRT dose of 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions is at the lower end of doses used in practice; results may not generalize to higher SBRT dose regimens
Show all 4
  • The study population was 80% White; generalizability to more diverse populations is uncertain

Related Questions

Explore related topics

What SBRT dose fractionation achieves the best disease-free survival in intermediate-risk prostate cancer?How does SBRT compare to conventional fractionation for prostate cancer quality of life outcomes long-term?Does androgen deprivation therapy combined with SBRT improve disease-free survival in intermediate-risk prostate cancer?

Publication Details

Year
2026
Journal
JAMA
Sample Size
n=698
Source
View article
Keep scrolling
More content below.
Up Next