onc brain

About ยท curated by Nick Boehling, MD ยท @nb2276

2026-06-04

digest generated 2026-06-05

PrTK03: DFS HR 0.70 (p=0.016) โ€” aglatimagene + EBRT hits primary endpoint in intermediate/high-risk M0 prostate.
Two phase III RCTs today, both showing locoregional benefit without confirmed OS gains yet. Prostate leads with the first phase 3 signal for intratumoral gene therapy + EBRT (PrTK03, HR 0.70); head-neck adds adj RT evidence in intermediate-risk pN0 OSCC (AREST, LRFS HR 0.52). Both need longer follow-up for survival endpoints.

Prostate

First phase 3 RCT data for intratumoral adenoviral gene therapy combined with EBRT; OS unreported and 50-month f/u likely underpowers late events.

PrTK03 (aglatimagene besadenovec + EBRT) NCT01436968

ForIntermediate/high-risk localized prostate cancer, ECOG 0โ€“2, planning definitive

TL;DRDFS HR 0.70 (0.52โ€“0.94), p=0.016 favoring aglatimagene + valacyclovir + EBRT vs placebo in intermediate/high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Combined Curative Phase 3 RCT Practice-changing

10 details
  • ๐Ÿ” Phase 3 double-blind placebo-controlled, N=745, 2:1 allocation, 51 US/Puerto Rico centers
  • ๐Ÿ” Intermediate or high-risk M0 localized prostate cancer; ECOG 0โ€“2; EBRT 78 Gy/2 Gy or hypofractionated; ADT optional
  • ๐Ÿ’Š Intraprostatic aglatimagene (CAN-2409, replication-defective adenoviral HSV-TK vector) ร— 3 courses + valacyclovir prodrug; immune bystander cytotoxicity mechanism
CONSORT flow
Randomized 745
โ†“
Aglatimagene + valacyclovir + EBRT
allocated 496
analyzed 479
Placebo + valacyclovir + EBRT
allocated 249
analyzed 232
  • ๐Ÿ“Š 1ยฐ EP: DFS HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.52โ€“0.94), p=0.016
  • ๐Ÿ“Š Median DFS not reached (aglatimagene) vs 86.1 months (IQR 29.7โ€“143.0) in placebo
  • ๐Ÿ“ Median follow-up 50.3 months (IQR 35.2โ€“63.3)
  • โš ๏ธ G3+ TEAEs similar between arms
    • Aglatimagene: 8% (40/479); placebo: 7% (17/232)
    • Most common G3+: AKI โ€” 2% both arms
    • SAEs: 6% aglatimagene vs 7% placebo; treatment-related SAEs 2% both arms
    • No treatment-related deaths
  • โš ๏ธ 1ยฐ EP is DFS (composite: recurrence or death), not OS; OS data not reported in source
  • โš ๏ธ 50-month median f/u likely underpowers late events; prostate cancer recurrences extend 10+ years post-RT
  • โš ๏ธ Sponsor-funded (Candel Therapeutics + NIH); 79% White cohort โ€” generalizability to diverse populations limited
  • OS benefit not yet established; long-term follow-up ongoing
  • Differential effect by risk category (intermediate vs high-risk)?
  • Sequencing with ARPI intensification for STAMPEDE-eligible pts

Sourced from Dykstra, Michael P. et al.

๐Ÿ“š Sources ยท ๐Ÿ“„ 1 paper
๐Ÿ“„ PAPER Dykstra, Michael P.; Regan, Samuel N.; Yin, Huiying (Maggie) et al. ยท JCO Oncology Practice (2025-09)
Androgen Deprivation Therapy Practice Patterns in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Definitive Radiotherapy: Prospective Results From a Statewide Quality Consortium
Abstract
PURPOSE The 2022 AUA/ASTRO guidelines recommend 18-36 months of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with definitive radiotherapy for localized, high-risk prostate cancer. The STAMPEDE M0 trial supports intensification with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) for patients with โ‰ฅ2 cT3/T4, Grade Group [GG] 4-5, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) โ‰ฅ40 ng/mL, or cN1. Given advances in imaging, risk stratification, and treatment delivery, we characterized contemporary practice patterns using prospective data from the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium (MROQC). METHODS Patients enrolled in MROQC with intact, high-risk M0/N0-1 prostate cancer were included. Clinical information, including intended ADT duration and ARPI use, was prospectively collected. The primary outcome was intended guideline-concordant ADT (GC-ADT, โ‰ฅ18 months). Multivariable analyses (MVA) assessed associations between clinical factors and GC-ADT recommendations. We compared the adoption of ARPI with standard therapies before and after the publication of STAMPEDE M0. Facility-level variability was evaluated using a mixed-effects model, with the treatment site as a random intercept. RESULTS Between June 2020 and November 2024, 553 patients across 26 centers were included: cT3/4 (13.3%), cN1 (19.9%), GG 4-5 (75.0%), and PSA โ‰ฅ20 ng/mL (40.0%). Overall, 91.3% were recommended ADT, with 67.0% being guideline-concordant. On MVA, GC-ADT was significantly associated with cN1 (odds ratio [OR], 2.94 [95% CI, 1.44 to 5.99]), GG (GG4 OR, 6.23 [95% CI, 2.85 to 13.62]; GG5 OR, 9.45 [95% CI, 4.46 to 20.06]), and PSA โ‰ฅ40 (OR, 3.64 [95% CI, 1.22โ€“10.87]). Facility-level variability persisted in the MVA ( P < .0001). Among the 27.9% who met meeting STAMPEDE criteria, ARPI recommendations increased from 0% prepublication to 23.2% afterward. CONCLUSION Within a statewide quality consortium, guideline-concordant ADT recommendations occurred in two thirds of patients, with ARPI intensification in under 25% among STAMPEDE-eligible patients. These findings highlight the need for individualized ADT strategies and collaborative efforts to standardize high-quality care.

Head & Neck

AREST is the first randomised evidence for adj RT in intermediate-risk pT1-2 pN0 OSCC; LRFS benefit does not yet translate to DFS or OS at 47 months.

AREST

ForpT1-2 pN0 OSCC, intermediate-risk (DOI/PNI/LVE/poor diff), post-curative surgery

TL;DR3-yr LRFS 89.2% vs 80.9%, HR 0.52 (p=0.02) favoring adj RT in pT1-2 pN0 OSCC with intermediate-risk features; DFS/OS NS.

Radiation Curative Phase 3 RCT Practice-changing

8 details
  • ๐Ÿ” Phase III open-label RCT, N=392; 1:1 stratified by subsite, PNI/LVE, differentiation
  • ๐Ÿ” Eligibility: pT1-2 pN0 OSCC, โ‰ฅ1 intermediate-risk factor (DOI 5-10mm, PNI, LVE, poor diff); margins โ‰ฅ5mm, โ‰ฅ16 nodes dissected
  • ๐Ÿ’Š Adj RT: 60Gy/30fr to tumor-bed + at-risk neck nodes; median f/u 47.2mo (IQR 30-59)
CONSORT flow
Randomized 392
โ†“
Adjuvant RT
allocated 191
Observation
allocated 201
  • ๐Ÿ“Š 1ยฐ EP LRFS ITT: 3-yr 89.2% RT vs 80.9% obs, HR 0.52 (95%CI 0.30-0.91), p=0.02
  • ๐Ÿ“Š Competing-risk cumulative LR failure: 10.6% RT vs 18.9% obs, HR 0.52, p=0.021
  • ๐Ÿ“ PP analysis: HR 0.43 (0.23-0.80), p=0.01
  • ๐Ÿ“Š Subgroup: oral tongue derives greater LRFS benefit than buccal mucosa
  • โš ๏ธ DFS and OS not significantly different; LRC benefit does not translate to survival gain at 47mo
  • Does LRC benefit translate to OS with longer follow-up?
  • Should adj RT selection favor oral tongue over buccal mucosa?
  • Does benefit differ by number of risk factors (1 vs โ‰ฅ2)?

Sourced from Nair, Sudhir Vasudevan et al.

๐Ÿ“š Sources ยท ๐Ÿ“„ 1 paper
๐Ÿ“„ PAPER Nair, Sudhir Vasudevan; Gupta, Tejpal; Rane, Swapnil Ulhas et al. ยท Journal of Clinical Oncology (2026-06)
Adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation following curative surgery for early-stage oral squamous cell carcinoma (AREST; CTRI/2017/07/009114).
Abstract
6000 Background: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in early-stage, node-negative oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) with one or more intermediate risk factors - such as depth of invasion (DOI) โ‰ฅ5 to โ‰ค10mm, perineural invasion (PNI), lymphovascular emboli (LVE), or poor differentiation - remains debatable and is largely based on retrospective data. This multicenter, open-label, phase III randomized controlled trial was designed to assess the impact of post-operative adjuvant RT in this setting. Methods: Patients with early-stage (pT1-T2), node-negative (pN0) OSCC undergoing adequate surgery (defined as clear margins โ‰ฅ5mm and at least ipsilateral level I-III neck dissection with โ‰ฅ16 nodes) with presence of one or more intermediate risk factors were screened. Eligible patients underwent stratified randomization (oral cavity subsite, PNI/LVE, and differentiation) in 1:1 ratio to either observation or adjuvant RT (60Gy in 30 fractions over 6-weeks) to the resected tumor-bed and at-risk neck nodal region after written informed consent. Primary endpoint was loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) measured from randomization to first documented event of local and/or regional recurrence from index cancer. All time-to-event outcomes were computed using Kaplan-Meier (KM) method with log-rank test for comparison and expressed as 3-year point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The planned sample size (N=392) provided 80% power at an ฮฑ of 0.05 to detect a Hazard Ratio (HR) of 0.6256, assuming 3-year LRFS of 70% in the observation arm. Results: Following curative surgery, a total of 392 patients were randomized (191 to adjuvant RT; 201 to observation). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. At a median follow-up of 47.2 months (inter-quartile range=30-59.4 months), 3-year KM estimate of LRFS was 89.2% in adjuvant RT arm vs 80.9% in observation arm (HR=0.52, 95%CI=0.30-0.91; p=0.02) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and 91.1% vs 80.9% (HR=0.43, 95%CI=0.23-0.80; p=0.01) on per-protocol (PP) analyses. Cumulative incidence of loco-regional failure with death as competing event was 10.6% (95%CI=6.1%-15.1%) with adjuvant RT and 18.9% (95%CI=13.3%-24.6%) with observation (HR=0.52, 95%CI=0.30-0.91; p=0.021) in the ITT population and 8.7% (95%CI=4.3%-13.1%) vs 18.9% (95%CI=13.3%-24.6%) (HR=0.43, 95%CI=0.23-0.79; p=0.007) on PP analyses. Disease-free and overall survival were not significantly different between the two arms. Subgroup analysis identified oral tongue deriving higher benefit of adjuvant RT compared to buccal mucosa. Conclusions: Adjuvant RT significantly reduces risk of loco-regional recurrence for early-stage, node-negative adequately resected OSCC, particularly oral tongue. However, such reduction in loco-regional failure does not translate into significant survival benefit. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2017/07/009114.
๐Ÿ“ https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2026.44.16_suppl.6000