Literature DB >> 25168545

Analysis of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment to predict for biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy or prostate seed brachytherapy.

Guila Delouya1, Vimal Krishnan2, Jean-Paul Bahary1, Sandra Larrivée3, Daniel Taussky4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the value of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score to predict biochemical failure (bF) in patients with D'Amico low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with different radiation techniques.
METHODS: We analyzed 744 patients treated with either external beam radiotherapy (52.7%) or permanent-seed prostate brachytherapy (47.3%) without any androgen deprivation. External beam radiotherapy dose levels were extreme hypofractionation (45 Gy in 9 fractions) in 10%, 76-79.2 Gy (in 1.8-2.0 Gy per fraction) in 32.7%, and 70.2-74 Gy in 10%. All patients had a minimum of 36-month follow-up. Cox regression analysis was used for univariate and multivariate analysis to predict for bF, as per the Phoenix definition (prostate-specific antigen-nadir + 2 ng/mL).
RESULTS: Median follow-up for patients without bF was 56 months (range, 36-114 months). In univariate analysis, CAPRA score as a continuous variable was predictive of bF (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.79; P <.001), and in multivariate analysis adjusted for treatment type, the HR was 1.39 (95% CI, 1.14-1.71; P = .002). D'Amico intermediate-risk vs low-risk patients had an HR for bF of 1.93 (95% CI, 1.07-3.47; P = .029) in univariate analysis, but the difference was not statistically significant anymore after adjustment for treatment type, (P = .206). The area under the curve of the CAPRA score as a continuous variable at 3 and 5 years was 0.66 and 0.62, respectively (P = .005 for both years).
CONCLUSION: The CAPRA score is predictive of bF. Each 1-point rise increased the risk of bF by 39%, which is comparable to surgical series.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25168545     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  5 in total

1.  Clinical risk-stratification for prostate cancer: Where are we, and where do we need to go?

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  External validation of the ProCaRS nomograms and comparison of existing risk-stratification tools for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  David Tiberi; George Rodrigues; Tom Pickles; Jim Morris; Juanita Crook; Andre-Guy Martin; Fabio Cury; Charles Catton; Himu Lukka; Andrew Warner; Daniel Taussky
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  An appraisal of analytical tools used in predicting clinical outcomes following radiation therapy treatment of men with prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Elspeth Raymond; Michael E O'Callaghan; Jared Campbell; Andrew D Vincent; Kerri Beckmann; David Roder; Sue Evans; John McNeil; Jeremy Millar; John Zalcberg; Martin Borg; Kim Moretti
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  The CAPRA score versus sub-types of minimal residual disease to predict biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy.

Authors:  Nigel P Murray; Socrates Aedo; Cynthia Fuentealba; Eduardo Reyes; Anibal Salazar; Eghon Guzman; Shenda Orrego
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2020-05-12

5.  The Within-Group Discrimination Ability of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Score for Men with Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Ho Won Kang; Hae Do Jung; Joo Yong Lee; Jong Kyou Kwon; Seong Uk Jeh; Kang Su Cho; Won Sik Ham; Young Deuk Choi
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 2.153

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.