Prostate
A 5yr quality-of-life readout on ultra-hypofractionation, benchmarked against robotic-prostatectomy PROMs.
PACE-B
ForLocalised prostate cancer, definitive external-beam RT (SBRT or conventional)
TL;DR5yr PROMs comparable for SBRT vs conventional RT: pad-free 91% vs 90%, mod/big urinary leak 6% vs 4%, bowel bother 5% both arms.
The RT read is tolerability parity at maturity: 5yr urinary, bowel, and sexual PROMs track together for SBRT and conventional fractionation (pad-free 91% vs 90%, mod/big bowel 5% both). Sexual decline is arm-independent, not an SBRT penalty. Removes late toxicity as a reason to prefer the longer schedule.
For the RT reader this settles the late-QoL question: 5-fraction SBRT matches conventional fractionation on 5yr urinary, bowel, and sexual PROMs (pad-free 91% vs 90%). Continence is favourable with no SBRT penalty, and sexual decline is arm-independent. Removes late toxicity as a reason to prefer the longer schedule.
9 details 1 trial watching
Phase 3 international RCT randomising localised prostate cancer to SBRT vs conventionally fractionated RT; this report is the 5yr patient-reported outcomes secondary analysis, presented as waffle charts for visual alignment with surgical PROMs.
SBRT and CRT dose/fractionation not reported in the source abstract, so transferability of the exact schedule to a reader's practice cannot be gated from this text.
PROMs across urinary (leak-free, pad-free, leakage bother), sexual (intercourse-adequate erections, sexual bother), and bowel (bother, stool incontinence) domains, baseline to 5yr.
Urinary continence favourable and comparable; erectile function declined similarly in both arms; bowel effects low in both. See domain tables for proportions.
| 5yr outcome | SBRT | CRT |
|---|---|---|
| Leak-free | 64% (164/258) | 69% (172/249) |
| Pad-free | 91% (233/257) | 90% (225/250) |
| Mod/big urinary leak bother | 6% (15/250) | 4% (9/244) |
| Sexual PROM | SBRT (baseline→5yr) | CRT (baseline→5yr) |
|---|---|---|
| Intercourse-adequate erections | 35% (133/374) → 17% (43/250) | 40% (157/391) → 20% (47/240) |
| Mod/big sexual bother | 24% (87/367) → 31% (74/242) | 22% (85/382) → 32% (77/238) |
| Bowel PROM | SBRT (baseline→5yr) | CRT (baseline→5yr) |
|---|---|---|
| Mod/big bowel bother | 2% (7/397) → 5% (12/265) | 2% (9/415) → 5% (13/253) |
| Mod/big stool incontinence | <1% (1/374) → 2% (4/240) | <1% (1/395) → 3% (7/238) |
PRO completion counts decline over follow-up, so 5yr estimates carry attrition and responder bias. Waffle-chart format aids cross-modality reading but the trial did not randomise against surgery, so the visual surgery benchmark is informal.
Prespecified PRO secondary analysis of a phase 3 RCT; descriptive proportions only, no between-arm inferential test. Reinforces recognised prostate SBRT tolerability.
In men with localised prostate cancer choosing a definitive external-beam schedule, mature 5yr PROMs support 5-fraction SBRT as QoL-comparable to conventional fractionation; it does not inform SBRT vs surgery or higher-risk/node-positive disease.
- Durability of QoL parity beyond 5yr active Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy vs Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Phase NAn=68 · primary completion 2026-12 · randomized EPIC QoL: SBRT vs IMRT
- Direct SBRT vs prostatectomy PRO comparison