Amar U Kishan1, Talha Shaikh2, Pin-Chieh Wang3, Robert E Reiter4, Jonathan Said5, Govind Raghavan3, Nicholas G Nickols6, William J Aronson7, Ahmad Sadeghi8, Mitchell Kamrava3, David Jeffrey Demanes3, Michael L Steinberg3, Eric M Horwitz2, Patrick A Kupelian3, Christopher R King3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: aukishan@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Department of Pathology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 7. Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Urology, Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The long natural history of prostate cancer (CaP) limits comparisons of efficacy between radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), since patients treated years ago received treatments considered suboptimal by modern standards (particularly with regards to androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] and radiotherapy dose-escalation]. Gleason score (GS) 9-10 CaP is particularly aggressive, and clinically-relevant endpoints occur early, facilitating meaningful comparisons. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of patients with GS 9-10 CaP following EBRT, extremely-dose escalated radiotherapy (as exemplified by EBRT+brachytherapy [EBRT+BT]), and RP. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of 487 patients with biopsy GS 9-10 CaP treated between 2000 and 2013 (230 with EBRT, 87 with EBRT+BT, and 170 with RP). Most radiotherapy patients received ADT and dose-escalated radiotherapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox regression estimated and compared 5-yr and 10-yr rates of distant metastasis-free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up was 4.6 yr. Local salvage and systemic salvage were performed more frequently in RP patients (49.0% and 30.1%) when compared with either EBRT patients (0.9% and 19.7%) or EBRT+BT patients (1.2% and 16.1%, p<0.0001). Five-yr and 10-yr distant metastasis-free survival rates were significantly higher with EBRT+BT (94.6% and 89.8%) than with EBRT (78.7% and 66.7%, p=0.0005) or RP (79.1% and 61.5%, p<0.0001). The 5-yr and 10-yr CSS and OS rates were similar across all three cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy and RP provide equivalent CSS and OS. Extremely dose-escalated radiotherapy with ADT in particular offers improved systemic control when compared with either EBRT or RP. These data suggest that extremely dose-escalated radiotherapy with ADT might be the optimal upfront treatment for patients with biopsy GS 9-10 CaP. PATIENT SUMMARY: While some prostate cancers are slow-growing requiring many years, sometimes decades, of follow-up in order to compare between radiation and surgery, high-risk and very aggressive cancers follow a much shorter time course allowing such comparisons to be made and updated as treatments, especially radiation, rapidly evolve. We showed that radiation-based treatments and surgery, with contemporary standards, offer equivalent survival for patients with very aggressive cancers (defined as Gleason score 9-10). Extremely-dose escalated radiotherapy with short-course androgen deprivation therapy offered the least risk of developing metastases, and equivalent long term survival.
BACKGROUND: The long natural history of prostate cancer (CaP) limits comparisons of efficacy between radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), since patients treated years ago received treatments considered suboptimal by modern standards (particularly with regards to androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] and radiotherapy dose-escalation]. Gleason score (GS) 9-10 CaP is particularly aggressive, and clinically-relevant endpoints occur early, facilitating meaningful comparisons. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of patients with GS 9-10 CaP following EBRT, extremely-dose escalated radiotherapy (as exemplified by EBRT+brachytherapy [EBRT+BT]), and RP. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective analysis of 487 patients with biopsy GS 9-10 CaP treated between 2000 and 2013 (230 with EBRT, 87 with EBRT+BT, and 170 with RP). Most radiotherapy patients received ADT and dose-escalated radiotherapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox regression estimated and compared 5-yr and 10-yr rates of distant metastasis-free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up was 4.6 yr. Local salvage and systemic salvage were performed more frequently in RP patients (49.0% and 30.1%) when compared with either EBRT patients (0.9% and 19.7%) or EBRT+BT patients (1.2% and 16.1%, p<0.0001). Five-yr and 10-yr distant metastasis-free survival rates were significantly higher with EBRT+BT (94.6% and 89.8%) than with EBRT (78.7% and 66.7%, p=0.0005) or RP (79.1% and 61.5%, p<0.0001). The 5-yr and 10-yr CSS and OS rates were similar across all three cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy and RP provide equivalent CSS and OS. Extremely dose-escalated radiotherapy with ADT in particular offers improved systemic control when compared with either EBRT or RP. These data suggest that extremely dose-escalated radiotherapy with ADT might be the optimal upfront treatment for patients with biopsy GS 9-10 CaP. PATIENT SUMMARY: While some prostate cancers are slow-growing requiring many years, sometimes decades, of follow-up in order to compare between radiation and surgery, high-risk and very aggressive cancers follow a much shorter time course allowing such comparisons to be made and updated as treatments, especially radiation, rapidly evolve. We showed that radiation-based treatments and surgery, with contemporary standards, offer equivalent survival for patients with very aggressive cancers (defined as Gleason score 9-10). Extremely-dose escalated radiotherapy with short-course androgen deprivation therapy offered the least risk of developing metastases, and equivalent long term survival.
Authors: Jeremie Calais; Amar U Kishan; Minsong Cao; Wolfgang P Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Ken Herrmann; Francesco Ceci; Robert E Reiter; Matthew B Rettig; John V Hegde; Narek Shaverdian; Chris R King; Michael L Steinberg; Johannes Czernin; Nicholas G Nickols Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jeremie Calais; Johannes Czernin; Minsong Cao; Amar U Kishan; John V Hegde; Narek Shaverdian; Kiri Sandler; Fang-I Chu; Chris R King; Michael L Steinberg; Isabel Rauscher; Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann; Thorsten Poeppel; Philipp Hetkamp; Francesco Ceci; Ken Herrmann; Wolfgang P Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Nicholas G Nickols Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Amar U Kishan; Ryan R Cook; Jay P Ciezki; Ashley E Ross; Mark M Pomerantz; Paul L Nguyen; Talha Shaikh; Phuoc T Tran; Kiri A Sandler; Richard G Stock; Gregory S Merrick; D Jeffrey Demanes; Daniel E Spratt; Eyad I Abu-Isa; Trude B Wedde; Wolfgang Lilleby; Daniel J Krauss; Grace K Shaw; Ridwan Alam; Chandana A Reddy; Andrew J Stephenson; Eric A Klein; Daniel Y Song; Jeffrey J Tosoian; John V Hegde; Sun Mi Yoo; Ryan Fiano; Anthony V D'Amico; Nicholas G Nickols; William J Aronson; Ahmad Sadeghi; Stephen Greco; Curtiland Deville; Todd McNutt; Theodore L DeWeese; Robert E Reiter; Johnathan W Said; Michael L Steinberg; Eric M Horwitz; Patrick A Kupelian; Christopher R King Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Junghoon Lee; Omar Y Mian; Yi Le; Hee Joon Bae; E Clif Burdette; Theodore L DeWeese; Jerry L Prince; Daniel Y Song Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Vladimir Avkshtol; Karen J Ruth; Eric A Ross; Mark A Hallman; Richard E Greenberg; Robert A Price; Brooke Leachman; Robert G Uzzo; Charlie Ma; David Chen; Daniel M Geynisman; Mark L Sobczak; Eddie Zhang; Jessica K Wong; Alan Pollack; Eric M Horwitz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-03-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Fernando S M Monteiro; Fabio A Schutz; Igor A P Morbeck; Diogo A Bastos; Fernando V de Padua; Leonardo A G A Costa; Manuel C Maia; Jose A Rinck; Stenio de Cassio Zequi; Karine M da Trindade; Wladimir Alfer; William C Nahas; Lucas V Dos Santos; Robson Ferrigno; Diogo A R da Rosa; Juan P Sade; Francisco J Orlandi; Fernando N G de Oliveira; Andrey Soares Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2021-04
Authors: Felipe Moraes Toledo Pereira; Adriano Gonçalves E Silva; Aldo Lourenço Abbade Dettino; Ana Paula Garcia Cardoso; Andre Deeke Sasse; Ariel Galapo Kann; Carlos Dzik; Daniel Herchenhorn; Denis Leonardo Fontes Jardim; Diego Lopera; Mouna Ayadi; Pamela Salman; Ray Antonio Manneh Kopp; Ricardo Saraiva De Carvalho; Sandro Roberto De Araujo Cavallero; Sergio Aguiar; Vinicius Carrera Souza; Pedro Luiz Serrano Uson Junior; Andrey Soares Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2021-04