Literature DB >> 12177097

Comparison of the efficacy of local therapies for localized prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen era: a large single-institution experience with radical prostatectomy and external-beam radiotherapy.

Patrick A Kupelian1, Mohamed Elshaikh, Chandana A Reddy, Craig Zippe, Eric A Klein.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) rates after either external-beam radiotherapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All 1,682 patients had pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and biopsy Gleason scores (bGS) assigned. No adjuvant therapy was administered after local treatment. RP was the treatment in 1,054 patients (63%) and RT in 628 patients (37%). Median follow-up was 51 months (range, 1 to 134). The median follow-up for RP versus RT patients was 50.5 v 51.0 months. Biochemical relapse was considered detectable PSA levels (> 0.2 ng/mL) in RP patients and three consecutive rising PSA levels in RT patients. The analysis was repeated with a more stringent definition of biochemical control after either RP or RT-namely, reaching and maintaining a PSA level < or = 0.5 ng/mL-and excluding patients receiving any androgen deprivation (AD).
RESULTS: Eight-year bRFS rates for RP versus RT were 72% and 70%, respectively (P =.010). Multivariate analysis indicated T stage (P <.001), pretreatment PSA (P <.001), bGS (P <.001), year of therapy (P <.001), and neoadjuvant AD (P =.019) to be the only independent predictors of relapse. Age (P =.78), race (P =.29), prior transurethral resection of prostate (P =.81), and treatment modality (P =.96) were not independent predictors of treatment failure. Fifty-one percent of RP patients had favorable tumors (T1 to T2A, pretreatment PSA < or = 10 ng/mL, bGS < or = 7), compared with only 34% of RT patients (P <.001). Repeat analysis with a stringent definition of biochemical failure and excluding patients receiving AD indicated no impact of treatment modality on outcome.
CONCLUSION: Eight-year biochemical failure rates were identical between RT and RP in any subgroup. Outcome is determined mainly by pretreatment PSA levels, bGS, clinical T stage, and, for RT patients, radiation dose.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12177097     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.01.150

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  64 in total

1.  Radical versus postoperative radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a 10-year experience of an academic hospital.

Authors:  Emilios E Pakos; Pericles G Tsekeris; Evita J Pitouli; Stergiani P Gritzeli; Evangelos Briasoulis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-05-10       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Rationale for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Study RTOG P-0014.

Authors:  Howard M Sandler; Kenneth J Pienta
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2003

3.  Rationale for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Study RTOG P-0014.

Authors:  Howard M Sandler; Kenneth J Pienta
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2003

4.  Milk and dairy consumption among men with prostate cancer and risk of metastases and prostate cancer death.

Authors:  Andreas Pettersson; Julie L Kasperzyk; Stacey A Kenfield; Erin L Richman; June M Chan; Walter C Willett; Meir J Stampfer; Lorelei A Mucci; Edward L Giovannucci
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 4.254

5.  [Incidental carcinoma of the prostate: can we and should we recommend radical prostatectomy?].

Authors:  R Paul; C Knebel; H van Randenborgh; H Kübler; M Alschibaja; M Günther; R Hartung
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: Comparison of treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Yeon-Joo Kim; Kwan Ho Cho; Hong Ryull Pyo; Kang Hyun Lee; Sung Ho Moon; Tae Hyun Kim; Kyung Hwan Shin; Joo-Young Kim; Young-kyung Kim; Se Byeong Lee
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 7.  Organ-confined prostate cancer: are we moving towards more or less radical surgical intervention?

Authors:  Daniel J Stevens; Naomi L Sharma; Ashutosh K Tewari; Roger Kirby; Prasanna Sooriakumaran
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Results of radiation therapy combined with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for stage III prostate cancer: comparison of two different definitions of PSA failure.

Authors:  Michihide Mitsumori; Yoshihide Sasaki; Takashi Mizowaki; Kenji Takayama; Yasushi Nagata; Masahiro Hiraoka; Yoshiharu Negoro; Keisuke Sasai; Hidefumi Kinoshita; Toshiyuki Kamoto; Osamu Ogawa
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Benchmarks for operative outcomes of robotic and open radical prostatectomy: results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study.

Authors:  Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Martin Sanda; Derek Yecies; Lorelei A Mucci; Meir J Stampfer; Stacey A Kenfield
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Neoadjuvant LHRH analog plus estramustine phosphate combined with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a randomized study.

Authors:  Daisaku Hirano; Yusuke Nagane; Katsuhiko Satoh; Junichi Mochida; Shuji Sugimoto; Taketo Ichinose; Satoru Takahashi; Toshiya Maebayashi; Tsutomu Saitoh
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2009-05-16       Impact factor: 2.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.