Scholz M.C.,Prostate Oncology Specialists |
Scholz M.C.,Prostate Cancer Research Institute |
Lam R.Y.,Prostate Oncology Specialists |
Strum S.B.,Ashland Community Hospital |
And 5 more authors.
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer | Year: 2011
Background: The purpose of this study was to describe the long-term incidence of cancer progression and mortality in men with localized prostate cancer treated with primary androgen deprivation (AD). Methods: A retrospective chart review, from a medical oncology practice specializing in prostate cancer, was conducted of 73 men eligible for surgery or radiation treated with induction AD. Entry criteria consisted of a minimum of 9 months of induction AD, treatment initiation before 1999, clinical stage < T3, and outcome defined as the incidence of delayed local therapy, cancer progression, cancer mortality, and mortality from other causes. Results: Median follow-up was 12 years. Fifteen men were at low risk, 38 were at intermediate risk, and 20 were at high risk. Three men (4%) experienced metastatic disease and died of prostate cancer after 3.5, 7.7, and 11 years, respectively. Two men were in the intermediate-risk category and 1 was high risk. Nineteen men (26%) died of nonprostate cancer causes. None had metastatic disease at the time of death. Of the remaining 51 survivors, none has experienced bone metastasis. Twenty-one men (29%) required no further therapy after the first induction course of AD. Twenty-four men (33%) maintained a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level < 5.0 ng/mL with 2 to 5 cycles of intermittent AD. Twenty-eight men (38%) underwent delayed local therapy after a median of 5.5 years. Median follow-up after local therapy was 6.2 years. Three of these men experienced subsequent rising PSA levels but none has progressed to bone metastasis. Sixteen of 20 men (80%) in the high-risk category but only 12 of 53 men (23%) in the low- and intermediate-risk categories had delayed local therapy. Conclusions: Primary intermittent AD is feasible for men with localized prostate cancer. Men who are younger and men with high-risk disease undergo delayed local therapy more frequently. © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comparative analysis of prostate-specific antigen free survival outcomes for patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treatment by radical therapy. Results from the Prostate Cancer Results Study Group
Billiet I.,Urology Center Kortrijk |
Bostwick D.,Bostwick Laboratories Inc. |
Dicker A.P.,Thomas Jefferson University |
Frank S.,Andersen Center |
And 19 more authors.
BJU International | Year: 2012
A large number of studies have been conducted on the primary therapy of prostate cancer but very few randomized controlled trials have been conducted. The comparison of outcomes from individual studies involving surgery (radical prostatectomy or robotic radical prostatectomy), external beam radiation (EBRT) (conformal, intensity modulated radiotherapy, protons), brachytherapy, cryotherapy or high intensity focused ultrasound remains problematic due to the non-uniformity of reporting results and the use of varied disease outcome endpoints. Technical advances in these treatments have also made long-term comparisons difficult. The Prostate Cancer Results Study Group was formed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatments. This international group conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify all studies involving treatment of localized prostate cancer published during 2000-2010. Over 18 000 papers were identified and a further selection was made based on the following key criteria: minimum/median follow-up of 5 years; stratification into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups; clinical and pathological staging; accepted standard definitions for prostate-specific antigen failure; minimum patient number of 100 in each risk group (50 for high-risk group). A statistical analysis (standard deviational ellipse) of the study outcomes suggested that, in terms of biochemical-free progression, brachytherapy provides superior outcome in patients with low-risk disease. For intermediate-risk disease, the combination of EBRT and brachytherapy appears equivalent to brachytherapy alone. For high-risk patients, combination therapies involving EBRT and brachytherapy plus or minus androgen deprivation therapy appear superior to more localized treatments such as seed implant alone, surgery alone or EBRT. It is anticipated that the study will assist physicians and patients in selecting treatment for men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. © 2012 BJU INTERNATIONAL.