Background Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has emerged as a new treatment option for patients with oligometastatic disease. SABR delivers precise, high-dose, hypofractionated radiotherapy, and achieves excellent rates of local control for primary tumors or metastases. A recent randomized phase II trial evaluated SABR in a group of patients with a small burden of oligometastatic disease (mostly with 1–3 metastatic lesions), and found that SABR was associated with benefits in progression-free survival and overall survival. The goal of this phase III trial is to assess the impact of SABR in patients with 4–10 metastatic cancer lesions. Methods One hundred and fifty-nine patients will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio between the control arm (consisting of standard of care palliative-intent treatments), and the SABR arm (consisting of standard of care treatment + SABR to all sites of known disease). Randomization will be stratified by two factors: histology (Group 1: prostate, breast, or renal; Group 2: all others), and type of pre-specified systemic therapy (Group 1: immunotherapy/targeted; Group 2: cytotoxic; Group 3: observation). SABR is to be completed within 2 weeks, allowing for rapid initiation of systemic therapy. Recommended SABR doses are 20 Gy in 1 fraction, 30 Gy in 3 fractions, or 35 Gy in 5 fractions, chosen to minimize risks of toxicity. The primary endpoint is overall survival, and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, time to development of new metastatic lesions, quality of life, and toxicity. Translational endpoints include assessment of circulating tumor cells, cell-free DNA, and tumor tissue as prognostic and predictive markers, including assessment of immunological predictors of response and long-term survival. Discussion This study will provide an assessment of the impact of SABR on clinical outcomes and quality of life, to determine if long-term survival can be achieved for selected patients with 4–10 oligometastatic lesions. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03721341 . Date of registration: October 26, 2018. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5977-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

PURPOSE The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has risen rapidly, because of an epidemic of human papillomavirus infection. The optimal management of early-stage OPSCC with surgery or radiation continues to be a clinical controversy. Long-term randomized data comparing these paradigms are lacking. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with T1-T2, N0-2 (≤ 4 cm) OPSCC to radiotherapy (RT) (with chemotherapy if N1-2) versus transoral robotic surgery plus neck dissection (TORS + ND) (with or without adjuvant therapy). The primary end point was swallowing quality of life (QOL) at 1-year using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory. Secondary end points included adverse events, other QOL outcomes, overall survival, and progression-free survival. All analyses were intention-to-treat. Herein, we present long-term outcomes from the trial. RESULTS Sixty-eight patients were randomly assigned (n = 34 per arm) between August 10, 2012, and June 9, 2017. Median follow-up was 45 months. Longitudinal MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory analyses demonstrated statistical superiority of RT arm over time ( P = .049), although the differences beyond 1 year were of smaller magnitude than at the 1-year timepoint (year 2: 86.0 ± 13.5 in the RT arm v 84.8 ± 12.5 in the TORS + ND arm, P = .74; year 3: 88.9 ± 11.3 v 83.3 ± 13.9, P = .12). These differences did not meet the threshold to qualify as a clinically meaningful change at any timepoint. Certain differences in QOL concerns including more pain and dental concerns in the TORS + ND arm seen at 1 year resolved at 2 and 3 years; however, TORS patients started to use more nutritional supplements at 3 years ( P = .015). Dry mouth scores were higher in RT patients over time ( P = .041). CONCLUSION On longitudinal analysis, the swallowing QOL difference between primary RT and TORS + ND approaches persists but decreases over time. Patients with OPSCC should be informed about the pros and cons of both treatment options (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01590355 ).