PURPOSE: Improved outcome is reported after surgery or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with lymph node (LN) positive (N1) prostate cancer (PC). Surgical series have shown that pathologic (p)N1 PC does not behave the same in all patients. The aim of this study was to perform a matched-case analysis to compare the outcome of pN1 and pN0 PC after high-dose EBRT plus ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Radiation therapy up to 80 Gy was delivered to the prostate with a minimal dose of 45 Gy to the pelvis for pN1 patients. After matching, Kaplan-Meier statistics were used to compare the 5-year biochemical and clinical relapse-free survival (bRFS and cRFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS). Acute and late rectal and urinary toxicity was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-nine pN1 PC patients were matched 1:1 with pN0 PC patients. The median follow-up time was 60 months. The 5-year bRFS and cRFS for pN1 versus pN0 PC patients were 65% ± 7% versus 79% ± 5% (P=.08) and 70% ± 6% versus 83% ± 5% (P=.04) respectively. No significant difference was found in bRFS or cRFS rates between low volume pN1 (≤2 positive LNs) and pN0 patients. The 5-year PCSS and OS were comparable between pN1 and pN0 PC patients: PCSS: 92% ± 4% versus 93% ± 3% (P=.66); OS: 82% ± 5% versus 80% ± 5% (P=.58). Severe toxicity was rare for both groups, although pN1 patients experienced significantly more acute grade 2 rectal toxicity. CONCLUSION: Primary EBRT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT is a legitimate treatment option for pN1 PC patients, especially those with ≤2 positive LNs, and this with bRFS and cRFS rates comparable to those in pN0 PC patients. For pN1 PC patients with >2 positive LNs, bRFS and cRFS are worse than in pN0 patients, but even in this subgroup, long-term disease control is obtained.
PURPOSE: Improved outcome is reported after surgery or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with lymph node (LN) positive (N1) prostate cancer (PC). Surgical series have shown that pathologic (p)N1 PC does not behave the same in all patients. The aim of this study was to perform a matched-case analysis to compare the outcome of pN1 and pN0 PC after high-dose EBRT plus ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Radiation therapy up to 80 Gy was delivered to the prostate with a minimal dose of 45 Gy to the pelvis for pN1patients. After matching, Kaplan-Meier statistics were used to compare the 5-year biochemical and clinical relapse-free survival (bRFS and cRFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS). Acute and late rectal and urinary toxicity was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-nine pN1 PC patients were matched 1:1 with pN0 PC patients. The median follow-up time was 60 months. The 5-year bRFS and cRFS for pN1 versus pN0 PC patients were 65% ± 7% versus 79% ± 5% (P=.08) and 70% ± 6% versus 83% ± 5% (P=.04) respectively. No significant difference was found in bRFS or cRFS rates between low volume pN1 (≤2 positive LNs) and pN0 patients. The 5-year PCSS and OS were comparable between pN1 and pN0 PC patients: PCSS: 92% ± 4% versus 93% ± 3% (P=.66); OS: 82% ± 5% versus 80% ± 5% (P=.58). Severe toxicity was rare for both groups, although pN1patients experienced significantly more acute grade 2 rectal toxicity. CONCLUSION: Primary EBRT plus 2 to 3 years of ADT is a legitimate treatment option for pN1 PC patients, especially those with ≤2 positive LNs, and this with bRFS and cRFS rates comparable to those in pN0 PC patients. For pN1 PC patients with >2 positive LNs, bRFS and cRFS are worse than in pN0 patients, but even in this subgroup, long-term disease control is obtained.
Authors: Filip Poelaert; Valérie Fonteyne; Piet Ost; Bart De Troyer; Karel Decaestecker; Gert De Meerleer; Pieter De Visschere; Tom Claeys; Bert Dhondt; Nicolaas Lumen Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Julia Murray; Clare Cruickshank; Thomas Bird; Philip Bell; John Braun; Dave Chuter; Miguel Reis Ferreira; Clare Griffin; Shama Hassan; Nabil Hujairi; Alan Melcher; Elizabeth Miles; Olivia Naismith; Miguel Panades; Lara Philipps; Alison Reid; Jan Rekowski; Pete Sankey; John Staffurth; Isabel Syndikus; Alison Tree; Anna Wilkins; Emma Hall Journal: Clin Transl Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-09-24
Authors: Flora Goupy; Stéphane Supiot; David Pasquier; Igor Latorzeff; Ulrike Schick; Erik Monpetit; Geoffrey Martinage; Chloé Hervé; Bernadette Le Proust; Joel Castelli; Renaud de Crevoisier Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Krishan R Jethwa; Christopher D Hellekson; Jaden D Evans; William S Harmsen; Tyler J Wilhite; Thomas J Whitaker; Sean S Park; C Richard Choo; Bradley J Stish; Kenneth R Olivier; Rimki Haloi; Val J Lowe; Brian T Welch; J Fernando Quevedo; Lance A Mynderse; R Jeffrey Karnes; Eugene D Kwon; Brian J Davis Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-07-04