Dataset Information

Phase II randomised control feasibility trial of a nutrition and physical activity intervention after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Dietary factors and physical activity may alter prostate cancer progression. We explored the feasibility of lifestyle interventions following radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer.

Design

Patients were recruited into a presurgical observational cohort; following radical prostatectomy, they were offered randomisation into a 2×3 factorial randomised controlled trial (RCT).

Setting

A single National Health Service trust in the South West of England, UK.

Participants

Those with localised prostate cancer and listed for radical prostatectomy were invited to participate.

Randomisation

Random allocation was performed by the Bristol Randomised Trial Collaboration via an online system.

Interventions

Men were randomised into both a modified nutrition group (either increased vegetable and fruit, and reduced dairy milk; or lycopene supplementation; or control) and a physical activity group (brisk walking or control) for 6 months.

Blinding

Only the trial statistician was blind to allocations.

Primary outcome measures

Primary outcomes were measures of feasibility: randomisation rates and intervention adherence at 6 months. Collected at trial baseline, three and six months, with daily adherence reported throughout. Our intended adherence rate was 75% or above, the threshold for acceptable adherence was 90%.

Results

108 men entered the presurgical cohort, and 81 were randomised into the postsurgical RCT (randomisation rate: 93.1%) and 75 completed the trial. Of 25 men in the nutrition intervention, 10 (40.0%; 95% CI 23.4% to 59.3%) adhered to the fruit and vegetable recommendations and 18 (72.0%; 95% CI 52.4% to 85.7%) to reduced dairy intake. Adherence to lycopene (n=28), was 78.6% (95% CI 60.5% to 89.8%), while 21/39 adhered to the walking intervention (53.8%; 95% CI 38.6% to 68.4%). Most men were followed up at 6 months (75/81; 92.6%). Three 'possibly related' adverse events were indigestion, abdominal bloating and knee pain.

Conclusions

Interventions were deemed feasible, with high randomisation rates and generally good adherence. A definitive RCT is proposed.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN 99048944.

SUBMITTER: Hackshaw-McGeagh LE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6858112 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Phase II randomised control feasibility trial of a nutrition and physical activity intervention after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Hackshaw-McGeagh Lucy E LE Penfold Chris C Shingler Ellie E Robles Luke A LA Perks Claire M CM Holly Jeff M P JMP Rowe Edward E Koupparis Anthony A Bahl Amit A Persad Raj R Shiridzinomwa Constance C Johnson Lyndsey L Biernacka Kalina M KM Frankow Aleksandra A Woodside Jayne V JV Gilchrist Sarah S Oxley Jon J Abrams Paul P Lane J Athene JA Martin Richard M RM

BMJ open 20191106 11

<h4>Objective</h4>Dietary factors and physical activity may alter prostate cancer progression. We explored the feasibility of lifestyle interventions following radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer.<h4>Design</h4>Patients were recruited into a presurgical observational cohort; following radical prostatectomy, they were offered randomisation into a 2×3 factorial randomised controlled trial (RCT).<h4>Setting</h4>A single National Health Service trust in the South West of England, UK. ...[more]

PMID: 31699723

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and acceptability of a community pharmacy lifestyle intervention to improve physical activity and cardiovascular health of men with prostate cancer. To refine the intervention.DesignPhase II feasibility study of a complex intervention.SettingNine community pharmacies in the UK.InterventionCommunity pharmacy teams were trained to deliver a health assessment including fitness, strength and anthropometric measures. A computer algorithm generated a personalised lifestyle prescription for a home-based programme accompanied by supporting resources. The health assessment was repeated 12 weeks later and support phone calls were provided at weeks 1 and 6.Participants116 men who completed treatment for prostate cancer.Outcome measuresThe feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and the delivery model were assessed by evaluating study processes (rate of participant recruitment, consent, retention and adverse events), by analysing delivery data and semi-structured interviews with participants and by focus groups with pharmacy teams. Physical activity (measured with accelerometry at baseline, 3 and 6 months) and patient reported outcomes (activation, dietary intake and quality of life) were evaluated. Change in physical activity was used to inform the sample size calculations for a future trial.ResultsOut of 403 invited men, 172 (43%) responded and 116 (29%) participated. Of these, 99 (85%) completed the intervention and 88 (76%) completed the 6-month follow-up (attrition 24%). Certain components of the intervention were feasible and acceptable (eg, community pharmacy delivery), while others were more challenging (eg, fitness assessment) and will be refined for future studies. By 3 months, moderate to vigorous physical activity increased on average by 34 min (95% CI 6 to 62, p=0.018), but this was not sustained over 6 months.ConclusionsThe community pharmacy intervention was feasible and acceptable. Results are encouraging and warrant a definitive trial to assess the effectiveness of the refined intervention.

Project description:BackgroundUntreated heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) causes high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Despite pharmacological treatment, many treated individuals remain at higher CVD risk than non-affected individuals. This may be due to LDL-C targets not being met and presence of other CVD risk factors. Adhering to dietary and physical activity (PA) recommendations developed for individuals with FH may further reduce CVD risk. However, there is insufficient research to support the efficacy of adhering to these guidelines on LDL-C and other CVD risk factors. The need for studies to investigate the effectiveness of nutrition and PA interventions in the FH population has been widely recognised and recommended. This paper describes the protocol of a pilot, randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a specifically developed nutrition and PA intervention aimed at improving the dietary intakes and PA levels of families with FH.MethodsA two-arm randomised waitlist-controlled pilot trial will be conducted across three National Health Service (NHS) sites in England, UK. Twenty-four young people with FH, aged 10-18 years, and their affected parent, will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or waitlist and usual care control. The primary aim is to provide evidence for the feasibility and acceptability of delivering the intervention, explored quantitatively (rates of recruitment, retention and outcome measure completeness) and qualitatively (qualitative interviews). The secondary aim is to provide evidence for the potential efficacy of the intervention on dietary intake, PA, sedentary time, body composition, CVD risk factors and quality of life determined at baseline and endpoint assessments. The intervention will involve an hour-long consultation with a dietitian at baseline and four follow-up contacts across the 12-week intervention. It has been specifically developed for use with individuals with FH and incorporates behavioural change techniques to target identified enablers and barriers to adherence in this population.DiscussionThis trial will estimate the feasibility and acceptability of the nutrition and PA intervention delivered to young people and parents with FH. If appropriate, this study can be used to inform the design of an adequately powered definitive trial.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN24880714. Registered 07/06/2018, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN24880714.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression.MethodsWe did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7-10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047.FindingsBetween Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60-68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0-6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81-1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58-1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3-4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020).InterpretationThese initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy.FundingCancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.

Project description:ObjectiveTreatment efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy with radical prostatectomy for intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer is less well-studied. The NEAR trial is a single-arm, phase II investigation of neoadjuvant apalutamide monotherapy and radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of D'Amico intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (NCT03124433).Materials and methodsPatients with histologically-proven, D'Amico intermediate- to high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma received apalutamide 240 mg once-daily for 12 weeks followed by RP + /-lymphadenectomy. Primary outcome was pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary outcomes included rate of biochemical response (defined by PSA < 0.03 ng/mL at week 24 from starting apalutamide without subsequent PSA relapse), treatment-related adverse events, and RP complication rates. Correlative biomarker analyses were performed to examine for molecular predictors of treatment responses.ResultsFrom 2017 to 2019, 30 patients were recruited, of which 20 and 10 were high and intermediate risk, respectively; 25 completed treatment as per-protocol. We did not observe any pCR on trial; median reduction of cancer burden was 41.7% (IQR: 33.3%-60.0%). 18 out of 25 patients were classified as having a biochemical response (4 did not achieve PSA of <0.03 ng/mL at week 24 and 3 developed PSA relapse subsequently). Dry skin (N = 16; 53.3%), fatigue (N = 10; 33.3%) and skin rash (N = 9; 30.0%) were the most common adverse events, and there was no major peri-operative complication. We observed an association between tumours of low androgen receptor activity and PAM50 basal status with biochemical non-responders, albeit these molecular phenotypes were not associated with pathological response.ConclusionsA 12-week course of neoadjuvant apalutamide prior to RP did not meet the primary endpoint of pCR in this trial. Tumours with low androgen receptor activity or of the PAM50 basal subtype may have a reduced response to apalutamide.

Project description:PurposeThere are limited data regarding using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the postprostatectomy setting. Here, we present a preliminary analysis of a prospective phase II trial that aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of postprostatectomy SBRT for adjuvant or early salvage therapy.Materials and methodsBetween May 2018 and May 2020, 41 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria and were stratified into 3 groups: group I (adjuvant), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 0.2 ng/mL with high-risk features including positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, or extracapsular extension; group II (salvage), with PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL but < 2 ng/mL; or group III (oligometastatic), with PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL but < 2 ng/mL and up to 3 sites of nodal or bone metastases. Androgen deprivation therapy was not offered to group I. Androgen deprivation therapy was offered for 6 months for group II and 18 months for group III patients. SBRT dose to the prostate bed was 30 to 32 Gy in 5 fractions. Baseline-adjusted physician reported toxicities (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events), patient reported quality-of-life (Expanded Prostate Index Composite, Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System), and American Urologic Association scores were evaluated for all patients.ResultsThe median follow-up was 23 months (range, 10-37). SBRT was adjuvant in 8 (20%) patients, salvage in 28 (68%), and salvage with the presence of oligometastases in 5 (12%) patients. Urinary, bowel, and sexual quality of life domains remained high after SBRT. Patients tolerated SBRT with no grade 3 or higher (3+) gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities. The baseline adjusted acute and late toxicity grade 2 genitourinary (urinary incontinence) rate was 2.4% (1/41) and 12.2% (5/41). At 2 years, clinical disease control was 95%, and biochemical control was 73%. Among the 2 clinical failures, 1 was a regional node and the other a bone metastasis. Oligometastatic sites were salvaged successfully with SBRT. There were no in-target failures.ConclusionsPostprostatectomy SBRT was very well tolerated in this prospective cohort, with no significant effect on quality of life metrics postirradiation, while providing excellent clinical disease control.

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer (PC) is the most commonly diagnosed noncutaneous malignancy in American men. PC, which exhibits a slow growth rate and multiple potential target epitopes, is an ideal candidate for immunotherapy. GVAX for prostate cancer is a cellular immunotherapy, composed of PC-3 cells (CG1940) and LNCaP cells (CG8711). Each of the components is a prostate adenocarcinoma cell line that has been genetically modified to secrete granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. Hypothesizing that GVAX for prostate cancer could be effective in a neoadjuvant setting in patients with locally advanced disease, we initiated a phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel and GVAX. For the trial, the clinical effects of GVAX were assessed in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).MethodsPatients received docetaxel administered at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles. GVAX was administered 2-3 days after chemotherapy preoperatively for four courses of immunotherapy. The first dose of GVAX was a prime immunotherapy of 5×10(8) cells. The subsequent boost immunotherapies consisted of 3×10(8) cells. After RP, patients received an additional six courses of immunotherapy. Pathologic complete response, toxicity, and clinical response were assessed. The primary endpoint of the trial was a pathologic state of pT0, which is defined as no evidence of cancer in the prostate.ResultsSix patients completed neoadjuvant docetaxel and GVAX therapy. No serious drug-related adverse events were observed. Median change in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) following neoadjuvant therapy was 1.47 ng/ml. One patient did not undergo RP due to the discovery of positive lymph nodes during exploration. Of the five patients completing RP, four had a downstaging of their Gleason score. Undetectable PSA was achieved in three patients at 2 months after RP and in two patients at 3 years after RP.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant docetaxel/GVAX is safe and well tolerated in patients with high-risk locally advanced PC. No evidence of increased intraoperative hemorrhage or increased length of hospital stay postoperatively was noted. These results justify further study of neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness of surgery versus observation for men with localized prostate cancer detected by means of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is not known.MethodsFrom November 1994 through January 2002, we randomly assigned 731 men with localized prostate cancer (mean age, 67 years; median PSA value, 7.8 ng per milliliter) to radical prostatectomy or observation and followed them through January 2010. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; the secondary outcome was prostate-cancer mortality.ResultsDuring the median follow-up of 10.0 years, 171 of 364 men (47.0%) assigned to radical prostatectomy died, as compared with 183 of 367 (49.9%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.08; P=0.22; absolute risk reduction, 2.9 percentage points). Among men assigned to radical prostatectomy, 21 (5.8%) died from prostate cancer or treatment, as compared with 31 men (8.4%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.09; P=0.09; absolute risk reduction, 2.6 percentage points). The effect of treatment on all-cause and prostate-cancer mortality did not differ according to age, race, coexisting conditions, self-reported performance status, or histologic features of the tumor. Radical prostatectomy was associated with reduced all-cause mortality among men with a PSA value greater than 10 ng per milliliter (P=0.04 for interaction) and possibly among those with intermediate-risk or high-risk tumors (P=0.07 for interaction). Adverse events within 30 days after surgery occurred in 21.4% of men, including one death.ConclusionsAmong men with localized prostate cancer detected during the early era of PSA testing, radical prostatectomy did not significantly reduce all-cause or prostate-cancer mortality, as compared with observation, through at least 12 years of follow-up. Absolute differences were less than 3 percentage points. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program and others; PIVOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007644.).

Dataset Information

Phase II randomised control feasibility trial of a nutrition and physical activity intervention after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Randomisation

Interventions

Blinding

Primary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Phase II randomised control feasibility trial of a nutrition and physical activity intervention after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets