PURPOSE: We determined the prognostic importance of a positive posttreatment biopsy after prostate radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 382 patients underwent a posttreatment biopsy after external beam radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Posttreatment biopsies were classified as positive (prostatic adenocarcinoma without typical radiation induced changes), negative (no evidence of carcinoma) or adenocarcinoma with a severe treatment effect. Median followup in survivors was 9 years. Competing risks regression was used to assess relationships between prognostic predictors and cause specific mortality, distant metastasis and prostate specific antigen failure. RESULTS: The prevalence of positive biopsy, treatment effect and negative biopsy was 30%, 22% and 48%, respectively. Androgen deprivation therapy omission and high risk disease were associated with a 2.6 and 1.8-fold increase, respectively, in the odds of positive posttreatment biopsy. The 15-year PSA relapse rate associated with negative, severe treatment effect and positive posttreatment biopsies was 34%, 36% and 79%, respectively (p <0.001). After controlling for known predictors the risk of distant metastasis was 2.6-fold higher in patients with a positive biopsy (p <0.001) and cause specific mortality was twice as high in patients with a positive biopsy compared to those with negative and severe treatment effect biopsy outcomes (HR 2.00, p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: A positive posttreatment biopsy after external beam radiotherapy was associated with a higher risk of distant metastasis and prostate cancer related death. Patients with severe treatment effect classified biopsies have biological characteristics more like patients with a negative biopsy than a positive biopsy. Posttreatment biopsies were more often positive in the setting of external beam radiotherapy alone without androgen deprivation therapy or in the presence of high risk disease.
PURPOSE: We determined the prognostic importance of a positive posttreatment biopsy after prostate radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 382 patients underwent a posttreatment biopsy after external beam radiotherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Posttreatment biopsies were classified as positive (prostatic adenocarcinoma without typical radiation induced changes), negative (no evidence of carcinoma) or adenocarcinoma with a severe treatment effect. Median followup in survivors was 9 years. Competing risks regression was used to assess relationships between prognostic predictors and cause specific mortality, distant metastasis and prostate specific antigen failure. RESULTS: The prevalence of positive biopsy, treatment effect and negative biopsy was 30%, 22% and 48%, respectively. Androgen deprivation therapy omission and high risk disease were associated with a 2.6 and 1.8-fold increase, respectively, in the odds of positive posttreatment biopsy. The 15-year PSA relapse rate associated with negative, severe treatment effect and positive posttreatment biopsies was 34%, 36% and 79%, respectively (p <0.001). After controlling for known predictors the risk of distant metastasis was 2.6-fold higher in patients with a positive biopsy (p <0.001) and cause specific mortality was twice as high in patients with a positive biopsy compared to those with negative and severe treatment effect biopsy outcomes (HR 2.00, p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: A positive posttreatment biopsy after external beam radiotherapy was associated with a higher risk of distant metastasis and prostate cancer related death. Patients with severe treatment effect classified biopsies have biological characteristics more like patients with a negative biopsy than a positive biopsy. Posttreatment biopsies were more often positive in the setting of external beam radiotherapy alone without androgen deprivation therapy or in the presence of high risk disease.
Authors: Daniel J Krauss; Chen Hu; Jean-Paul Bahary; Luis Souhami; Elizabeth M Gore; Susan Maria Jacinta Chafe; Mark H Leibenhaut; Samir Narayan; Javier Torres-Roca; Jeff Michalski; Kenneth L Zeitzer; Viroon Donavanik; Howard Sandler; David G McGowan; Christopher U Jones; William U Shipley Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alan Pollack; Gunar K Zagars; John A Antolak; Deborah A Kuban; Isaac I Rosen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: S Levegrün; A Jackson; M J Zelefsky; E S Venkatraman; M W Skwarchuk; W Schlegel; Z Fuks; S A Leibel; C C Ling Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M J Zelefsky; S A Leibel; P B Gaudin; G J Kutcher; N E Fleshner; E S Venkatramen; V E Reuter; W R Fair; C C Ling; Z Fuks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Antoine Kass-Iliyya; Gordana Jovic; Claire Murphy; Cyril Fisher; Isabel Syndikus; Chakiath Jose; Christopher D Scrase; John D Graham; David Nicol; Matthew R Sydes; David Dearnaley Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Juanita Crook; Joseph P Rodgers; Thomas M Pisansky; Edouard J Trabulsi; Mahul B Amin; William Bice; Gerard Morton; Albert D Murtha; Eric Vigneault; Joelle Helou; Jeff M Michalski; Mack Roach; David Beyer; Ashesh B Jani; Eric M Horwitz; Adam Raben; Stephanie Pugh; Howard Sandler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-11-03 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniel Gorovets; Andreas G Wibmer; Assaf Moore; Stephanie Lobaugh; Zhigang Zhang; Marisa Kollmeier; Sean McBride; Michael J Zelefsky Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2022-03-17
Authors: Elliot Anderson; Lloyd M L Smyth; Richard O'Sullivan; Andrew Ryan; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Jeremy Grummet; Andrew W See Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2021-09
Authors: Wolfgang P Fendler; Jeremie Calais; Matthias Eiber; Jeffrey P Simko; John Kurhanewicz; Romelyn Delos Santos; Felix Y Feng; Robert E Reiter; Matthew B Rettig; Nicholas G Nickols; Amar U Kishan; Roger Slavik; Peter R Carroll; Courtney Lawhn-Heath; Ken Herrmann; Johannes Czernin; Thomas A Hope Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-08-17 Impact factor: 9.236