1
|
Löffeler S, Bertilsson H, Müller C, Aas K, Haugnes HS, Aksnessæther B, Pesonen M, Thon K, Tandstad T, Murtola T, Poulsen MH, Nordstrøm T, Vigmostad MN, Ottosson F, Holmsten K, Christiansen O, Slaaen M, Haug ES, Storås AH, Asphaug L, Rannikko A, Brasso K. Protocol of a randomised, controlled trial comparing immediate curative therapy with conservative treatment in men aged ≥75 years with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer (SPCG 19/GRand-P). BJU Int 2024; 133:680-689. [PMID: 38469686 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16314] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/13/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Older men (aged ≥75 years) with high risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) are increasingly treated with curative therapy (surgery or radiotherapy). However, it is unclear if curative therapy prolongs life and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in this age group compared to conservative therapy, which has evolved considerably during the last decade. STUDY DESIGN The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG) 19/Norwegian Get-Randomized Research Group-Prostate (GRand-P) is a randomised, two-armed, controlled, multicentre, phase III trial carried out at study centres in Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. ENDPOINTS The primary endpoints are overall survival and HRQoL (burden of disease scale, European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] Elderly Cancer patients). Secondary endpoints are PCa-specific survival, metastasis-free survival, role-functioning scale (EORTC quality of life questionnaire 30-item core), urinary irritative/obstructive scale (26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC-26]), bowel scale (EPIC-26), intervention-free survival, PCa morbidity, use of secondary and tertiary systemic therapies, mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and mean total healthcare costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 980 men (aged ≥75 years) with non-metastatic, high-risk PCa will initially be screened with Geriatric 8 (G8) health status screening tool and Mini-COG© brief cognitive test. Participants identified by G8 as 'fit' or 'frail' will be randomised (ratio 1:1) to either immediate curative therapy (radiotherapy or prostatectomy) or conservative therapy (endocrine therapy or observation). Participants who are unable or unwilling to participate in randomisation will be enrolled in a separate observation group. Randomised patients will be followed for 10 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION Ethics approval has been granted in Norway (457593), Denmark (H-22051998), Finland (R23043) and Sweden (Dnr 2023-05296-01). The trial is registered on Clinicaltrials.org (NCT05448547).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sven Löffeler
- Department of Urology, Vestfold Hospital Trust, Tønsberg, Norway
| | - Helena Bertilsson
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Urology, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Christoph Müller
- Department of Oncology, Sørlandet Hospital Trust, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - Kirsti Aas
- Department of Urology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Hege Sagstuen Haugnes
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
- Department of Clinical Medicine, The Arctic University of Norway (UIT), Tromsø, Norway
| | | | - Maiju Pesonen
- Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kristian Thon
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Torgrim Tandstad
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Oncology, The Cancer Clinic, St Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Teemu Murtola
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
- Department of Urology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - Mads Hvid Poulsen
- Department of Urology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Tobias Nordstrøm
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Sciences at Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | | | - Karin Holmsten
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Capio St. Göran Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Marit Slaaen
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Research Centre for Age-Related Functional Decline and Disease, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Ottestad, Norway
| | | | | | - Lars Asphaug
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Clinical Trials Unit, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Antti Rannikko
- Department of Urology and Research Program in Systems Oncology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Klaus Brasso
- Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Heggebø LC, Borgen IMH, Rylander H, Kiserud C, Nordenmark TH, Hellebust TP, Evensen ME, Gustavsson M, Ramberg C, Sprauten M, Magelssen H, Blakstad H, Moorthy J, Andersson K, Raunert I, Henry T, Moe C, Granlund C, Goplen D, Brekke J, Johannessen TCA, Solheim TS, Marienhagen K, Humberset Ø, Bergström P, Agrup M, Dahl L, Gubanski M, Gojon H, Brahme CJ, Rydén I, Jakola AS, Vik-Mo EO, Lie HC, Asphaug L, Hervani M, Kristensen I, Rueegg CS, Olsen IC, Ledal RJ, Degsell E, Werlenius K, Blomstrand M, Brandal P. Investigating survival, quality of life and cognition in PROton versus photon therapy for IDH-mutated diffuse grade 2 and 3 GLIOmas (PRO-GLIO): a randomised controlled trial in Norway and Sweden. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e070071. [PMID: 36940951 PMCID: PMC10030923 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/22/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The use of proton therapy increases globally despite a lack of randomised controlled trials demonstrating its efficacy and safety. Proton therapy enables sparing of non-neoplastic tissue from radiation. This is principally beneficial and holds promise of reduced long-term side effects. However, the sparing of seemingly non-cancerous tissue is not necessarily positive for isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutated diffuse gliomas grade 2-3, which have a diffuse growth pattern. With their relatively good prognosis, yet incurable nature, therapy needs to be delicately balanced to achieve a maximal survival benefit combined with an optimised quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS PRO-GLIO (PROton versus photon therapy in IDH-mutated diffuse grade 2 and 3 GLIOmas) is an open-label, multicentre, randomised phase III non-inferiority study. 224 patients aged 18-65 years with IDH-mutated diffuse gliomas grade 2-3 from Norway and Sweden will be randomised 1:1 to radiotherapy delivered with protons (experimental arm) or photons (standard arm). First intervention-free survival at 2 years is the primary endpoint. Key secondary endpoints are fatigue and cognitive impairment, both at 2 years. Additional secondary outcomes include several survival measures, health-related quality of life parameters and health economy endpoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION To implement proton therapy as part of standard of care for patients with IDH-mutated diffuse gliomas grade 2-3, it should be deemed safe. With its randomised controlled design testing proton versus photon therapy, PRO-GLIO will provide important information for this patient population concerning safety, cognition, fatigue and other quality of life parameters. As proton therapy is considerably more costly than its photon counterpart, cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated. PRO-GLIO is approved by ethical committees in Norway (Regional Committee for Medical & Health Research Ethics) and Sweden (The Swedish Ethical Review Authority) and patient inclusion has commenced. Trial results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals, relevant conferences, national and international meetings and expert forums. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05190172).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liv Cathrine Heggebø
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Institute for Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ida Maria Henriksen Borgen
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Cecilie Kiserud
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Tonje Haug Nordenmark
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Taran Paulsen Hellebust
- Department of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Morten Egeberg Evensen
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Section of Oncology, Drammen Hospital, Drammen, Norway
| | - Magnus Gustavsson
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Medical Radiation Science, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Christina Ramberg
- Department of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mette Sprauten
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Hanne Blakstad
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Institute for Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Janani Moorthy
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Ingela Raunert
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Thomas Henry
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Medical Radiation Science, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Cecilie Moe
- Department of Research Support for Clinical Trials, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Carin Granlund
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Dorota Goplen
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Jorunn Brekke
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | | | - Tora Skeidsvoll Solheim
- Cancer Clinic, St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | | | - Øyvind Humberset
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromso, Norway
| | - Per Bergström
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital of Umeå, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Måns Agrup
- Department of Oncology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Ludvig Dahl
- Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Michael Gubanski
- Department of Radiotherapy, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Helene Gojon
- Department of Radiotherapy, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Isabelle Rydén
- Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Asgeir S Jakola
- Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Neurosurgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Einar O Vik-Mo
- Department of Neurosurgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Hanne C Lie
- Department of Behavioural Medicine, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lars Asphaug
- Department of Research Support for Clinical Trials, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Maziar Hervani
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ingrid Kristensen
- Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Corina Silvia Rueegg
- Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Inge C Olsen
- Department of Research Support for Clinical Trials, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | | - Katja Werlenius
- Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Malin Blomstrand
- Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Petter Brandal
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Asphaug L, Thiele M, Krag A, Melberg HO. Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Screening for Alcohol-Related Liver Fibrosis. Hepatology 2020; 71:2093-2104. [PMID: 31595545 DOI: 10.1002/hep.30979] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 10/01/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Alcohol-related liver disease is often undetected until irreversible late-stage decompensated disease manifests. Consequently, there is an unmet need for effective and economically reasonable pathways to screen for advanced alcohol-related fibrosis. APPROACH AND RESULTS We used real-world data from a large biopsy-controlled study of excessive drinkers recruited from primary and secondary care, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four primary care initiated strategies: (1) routine liver function tests with follow-up ultrasonography for test-positives, (2) the enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test with hospital liver stiffness measurement (LSM) for positives, (3) a three-tier strategy using the Forns Index to control before strategy 2, and (4) direct referral of all to LSM. We used linked decision trees and Markov models to evaluate outcomes short term (cost-per-accurate diagnosis) and long term (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]). For low-prevalence populations, ELF with LSM follow-up was most cost-effective, both short term (accuracy 96%, $196 per patient) and long term (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] $5,387-$8,430/QALY), depending on whether diagnostic testing had lasting or temporary effects on abstinence rates. Adding Forns Index decreased costs to $72 per patient and accuracy to 95%. The strategy resulted in fewer QALYs due to more false negatives but an ICER of $3,012, making this strategy suited for areas with restricted access to ELF and transient elastography or lower willingness-to-pay. For high-prevalence populations, direct referral to LSM was highly cost-effective (accuracy 93%, $297 per patient), with ICERs between $490 and $1,037/QALY. CONCLUSIONS Noninvasive screening for advanced alcohol-related fibrosis is a cost-effective intervention when different referral pathways are used according to the prevalence of advanced fibrosis. Patients in the primary health care sector should be tested with the ELF test followed by LSM if the test was positive, whereas direct referral to LSM is highly cost-effective in high-prevalence cohorts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lars Asphaug
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Maja Thiele
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology and Odense Patient Data Exploratory Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.,Institute for Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Aleksander Krag
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology and Odense Patient Data Exploratory Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.,Institute for Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Hans Olav Melberg
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|