Yu-Hsuan Joni Shao1, Sung Kim2, Dirk F Moore3, Weichung Shih3, Yong Lin3, Mark Stein4, Isaac Yi Kim4, Grace L Lu-Yao5. 1. Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. 3. The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Biostatistics, UMDNJ School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA. 4. The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. 5. The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. Electronic address: luyaogr@umdnj.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data regarding the difference in the clinical course from metastasis to prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) following radical prostatectomy (RP) compared with radiation therapy (RT) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between primary treatment modality and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) after metastasis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database from 1994 to 2007 for patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (PCa). We used cancer stage and Gleason score to stratify patients into low and intermediate-high risks. INTERVENTION: Radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Our outcome is time from onset of metastases to PCSM. Propensity score matching and Cox regression were used to analyze the PCSM hazard for the RP group compared with the RT group. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Our study consisted of 66,492 men diagnosed with PCa, 51,337 men receiving RT, and 15,155 men undergoing RP within 1 yr of cancer diagnosis. During the study period, 2802 men were diagnosed as having metastatic disease. A total of 916 men with metastases were included in the propensity-matched cohort; of these men, 186 died from PCa. During the follow-up, for the low-risk patients, the adjusted PCSS after metastasis was 86.2% and 79.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively; for the intermediate-high-risk patients, the PCSS after metastasis was 76.3% and 63.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively. The hazard ratios estimating the risk of PCSM between the RP and RT groups were 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-1.16) and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39-0.77) for the low- and intermediate-high-risk groups, respectively. Because of the nature of observational studies, the results may be affected by residual confounders and treatment indication. CONCLUSIONS: Following the development of metastases, men who received primary RP have a longer PCSS than men who received primary RT. Our results may have implications for the timing and nature of local PCa treatment.
BACKGROUND: Data regarding the difference in the clinical course from metastasis to prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) following radical prostatectomy (RP) compared with radiation therapy (RT) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between primary treatment modality and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) after metastasis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database from 1994 to 2007 for patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (PCa). We used cancer stage and Gleason score to stratify patients into low and intermediate-high risks. INTERVENTION: Radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Our outcome is time from onset of metastases to PCSM. Propensity score matching and Cox regression were used to analyze the PCSM hazard for the RP group compared with the RT group. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Our study consisted of 66,492 men diagnosed with PCa, 51,337 men receiving RT, and 15,155 men undergoing RP within 1 yr of cancer diagnosis. During the study period, 2802 men were diagnosed as having metastatic disease. A total of 916 men with metastases were included in the propensity-matched cohort; of these men, 186 died from PCa. During the follow-up, for the low-risk patients, the adjusted PCSS after metastasis was 86.2% and 79.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively; for the intermediate-high-risk patients, the PCSS after metastasis was 76.3% and 63.3% in the RP and RT groups, respectively. The hazard ratios estimating the risk of PCSM between the RP and RT groups were 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-1.16) and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39-0.77) for the low- and intermediate-high-risk groups, respectively. Because of the nature of observational studies, the results may be affected by residual confounders and treatment indication. CONCLUSIONS: Following the development of metastases, men who received primary RP have a longer PCSS than men who received primary RT. Our results may have implications for the timing and nature of local PCa treatment.
Authors: Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Michael J Barry; Karen M Jones; Young Kwon; Jeffrey R Gingrich; William J Aronson; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Steven Fox Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2008-08-23 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Yu-Hsuan Shao; Kitaw Demissie; Weichung Shih; Amit R Mehta; Mark N Stein; Calpurnyia B Roberts; Robert S Dipaola; Grace L Lu-Yao Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-08-27 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Daniel P Petrylak; Catherine M Tangen; Maha H A Hussain; Primo N Lara; Jeffrey A Jones; Mary Ellen Taplin; Patrick A Burch; Donna Berry; Carol Moinpour; Manish Kohli; Mitchell C Benson; Eric J Small; Derek Raghavan; E David Crawford Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-10-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eric A Klein; Fernando J Bianco; Angel M Serio; James A Eastham; Michael W Kattan; J Edson Pontes; Andrew J Vickers; Peter T Scardino Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-04-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Andrew J Vickers; Fernando J Bianco; Angel M Serio; James A Eastham; Deborah Schrag; Eric A Klein; Alwyn M Reuther; Michael W Kattan; J Edson Pontes; Peter T Scardino Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-07-24 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Timothy J Wilt; Roderick MacDonald; Indulis Rutks; Tatyana A Shamliyan; Brent C Taylor; Robert L Kane Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2008-02-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Andrea K Miyahira; Joshua M Lang; Robert B Den; Isla P Garraway; Tamara L Lotan; Ashley E Ross; Tanya Stoyanova; Steve Y Cho; Jonathan W Simons; Kenneth J Pienta; Howard R Soule Journal: Prostate Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Devin N Patel; Shalini Jha; Lauren E Howard; Christopher L Amling; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher J Kane; Martha K Terris; Brian F Chapin; Stephen J Freedland Journal: Int J Urol Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 3.369