Sarah Buelens1,2, Elise De Bleser3,4, Bert Dhondt3,4, Wesley Verla3, Karel Decaestecker3, Piet Ost4,5, Valérie Fonteyne5, Kathia De Man6, Chloë Standaert7, Sylvie Rottey8, Nicolaas Lumen3,4. 1. Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. sarah.buelens@uzgent.be. 2. Cancer Research Institute Ghent, Ghent University, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. sarah.buelens@uzgent.be. 3. Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 4. Cancer Research Institute Ghent, Ghent University, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 7. Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore the prognostic importance of metastatic volume in a contemporary daily practice cohort of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer (mHNPC) and to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to predict survival for these patients. METHODS: Since 2014, 113 patients with newly diagnosed mHNPC were prospectively registered. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25.0™ with two-sided p value < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Univariate and multivariate cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic risk factors. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank statistics was constructed to analyze difference in survival in the prognostic groups. Model performance was assessed using the Concordance-index (C-index) and cross-validated in R v3.4.1. High-volume mHNPC (HVD) was defined as the presence of visceral metastasis or ≥ 4 bone metastases with ≥ 1 appendicular lesion. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis identified HVD (p = 0.047) and elevated alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (p = 0.018) as independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival (OS). Consequently, three prognostic groups were created: a good (no risk factors), intermediate (1 risk factor) and poor prognosis group (2 risk factors). Median OS for the good, intermediate and poor prognosis group was not reached, 73 and 20 months (95% CI 9-31 months with p < 0.001 and Correspondence-index of 0.78), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a pragmatic and qualitative prognostic model consisting of three prognostic risk groups for OS in a daily practice cohort of patients with newly diagnosed mHNPC. Independent prognostic risk factors included in the model were HVD and abnormal ALP.
PURPOSE: To explore the prognostic importance of metastatic volume in a contemporary daily practice cohort of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer (mHNPC) and to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to predict survival for these patients. METHODS: Since 2014, 113 patients with newly diagnosed mHNPC were prospectively registered. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25.0™ with two-sided p value < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Univariate and multivariate cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic risk factors. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank statistics was constructed to analyze difference in survival in the prognostic groups. Model performance was assessed using the Concordance-index (C-index) and cross-validated in R v3.4.1. High-volume mHNPC (HVD) was defined as the presence of visceral metastasis or ≥ 4 bone metastases with ≥ 1 appendicular lesion. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis identified HVD (p = 0.047) and elevated alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (p = 0.018) as independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival (OS). Consequently, three prognostic groups were created: a good (no risk factors), intermediate (1 risk factor) and poor prognosis group (2 risk factors). Median OS for the good, intermediate and poor prognosis group was not reached, 73 and 20 months (95% CI 9-31 months with p < 0.001 and Correspondence-index of 0.78), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a pragmatic and qualitative prognostic model consisting of three prognostic risk groups for OS in a daily practice cohort of patients with newly diagnosed mHNPC. Independent prognostic risk factors included in the model were HVD and abnormal ALP.
Authors: Susan Halabi; Chen-Yen Lin; W Kevin Kelly; Karim S Fizazi; Judd W Moul; Ellen B Kaplan; Michael J Morris; Eric J Small Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Philip Cornford; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Erik Briers; Maria De Santis; Tobias Gross; Ann M Henry; Steven Joniau; Thomas B Lam; Malcolm D Mason; Henk G van der Poel; Theo H van der Kwast; Olivier Rouvière; Thomas Wiegel; Nicolas Mottet Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nicholas D James; Johann S de Bono; Melissa R Spears; Noel W Clarke; Malcolm D Mason; David P Dearnaley; Alastair W S Ritchie; Claire L Amos; Clare Gilson; Rob J Jones; David Matheson; Robin Millman; Gerhardt Attard; Simon Chowdhury; William R Cross; Silke Gillessen; Christopher C Parker; J Martin Russell; Dominik R Berthold; Chris Brawley; Fawzi Adab; San Aung; Alison J Birtle; Jo Bowen; Susannah Brock; Prabir Chakraborti; Catherine Ferguson; Joanna Gale; Emma Gray; Mohan Hingorani; Peter J Hoskin; Jason F Lester; Zafar I Malik; Fiona McKinna; Neil McPhail; Julian Money-Kyrle; Joe O'Sullivan; Omi Parikh; Andrew Protheroe; Angus Robinson; Narayanan N Srihari; Carys Thomas; John Wagstaff; James Wylie; Anjali Zarkar; Mahesh K B Parmar; Matthew R Sydes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Campbell Tait; David Moore; Clare Hodgson; Michael Brown; Thomas Morris; Jim Growcott; Michael Malone; Andrew Hughes; Andrew Renehan; Noel W Clarke; Caroline Dive Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-07-27 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Oren Smaletz; Howard I Scher; Eric J Small; David A Verbel; Alex McMillan; Kevin Regan; W Kevin Kelly; Michael W Kattan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christopher J Sweeney; Yu-Hui Chen; Michael Carducci; Glenn Liu; David F Jarrard; Mario Eisenberger; Yu-Ning Wong; Noah Hahn; Manish Kohli; Matthew M Cooney; Robert Dreicer; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Joel Picus; Daniel Shevrin; Maha Hussain; Jorge A Garcia; Robert S DiPaola Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicholas David James; Melissa R Spears; Noel W Clarke; David P Dearnaley; Johann S De Bono; Joanna Gale; John Hetherington; Peter J Hoskin; Robert J Jones; Robert Laing; Jason F Lester; Duncan McLaren; Christopher C Parker; Mahesh K B Parmar; Alastair W S Ritchie; J Martin Russell; Räto T Strebel; George N Thalmann; Malcolm D Mason; Matthew R Sydes Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-10-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Katharina Kessel; Robert Seifert; Michael Schäfers; Matthias Weckesser; Katrin Schlack; Martin Boegemann; Kambiz Rahbar Journal: Theranostics Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 11.556