Karen E Hoffman1, David F Penson2, Zhiguo Zhao3, Li-Ching Huang3, Ralph Conwill4, Aaron A Laviana2, Daniel D Joyce2, Amy N Luckenbaugh2, Michael Goodman5, Ann S Hamilton6, Xiao-Cheng Wu7, Lisa E Paddock8, Antoinette Stroup8, Matthew R Cooperberg9, Mia Hashibe10, Brock B O'Neil11, Sherrie H Kaplan12, Sheldon Greenfield12, Tatsuki Koyama3, Daniel A Barocas2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Center, Houston. 2. Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. 4. Office of Patient and Community Education, Patient Advocacy Program, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia. 6. Department of Preventative Medicine, Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Louisiana State University New Orleans School of Public Health, New Orleans. 8. Department of Epidemiology, Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, New Brunswick. 9. Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco. 10. Department of Family and Preventative Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City. 11. Department of Urology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City. 12. Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine, Irvine.
Abstract
Importance: Understanding adverse effects of contemporary treatment approaches for men with favorable-risk and unfavorable-risk localized prostate cancer could inform treatment selection. Objective: To compare functional outcomes associated with prostate cancer treatments over 5 years after treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, population-based cohort study of 1386 men with favorable-risk (clinical stage cT1 to cT2bN0M0, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤20 ng/mL, and Grade Group 1-2) prostate cancer and 619 men with unfavorable-risk (clinical stage cT2cN0M0, PSA of 20-50 ng/mL, or Grade Group 3-5) prostate cancer diagnosed in 2011 through 2012, accrued from 5 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program sites and a US prostate cancer registry, with surveys through September 2017. Exposures: Treatment with active surveillance (n = 363), nerve-sparing prostatectomy (n = 675), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT; n = 261), or low-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 87) for men with favorable-risk disease and treatment with prostatectomy (n = 402) or EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (n = 217) for men with unfavorable-risk disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported function, based on the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (range, 0-100), 5 years after treatment. Regression models were adjusted for baseline function and patient and tumor characteristics. Minimum clinically important difference was 10 to 12 for sexual function, 6 to 9 for urinary incontinence, 5 to 7 for urinary irritative symptoms, and 4 to 6 for bowel and hormonal function. Results: A total of 2005 men met inclusion criteria and completed the baseline and at least 1 postbaseline survey (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [59-70] years; 1529 of 1993 participants [77%] were non-Hispanic white). For men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, nerve-sparing prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary incontinence at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, -10.9 [95% CI, -14.2 to -7.6]) and sexual function at 3 years (adjusted mean difference, -15.2 [95% CI, -18.8 to -11.5]) compared with active surveillance. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy was associated with worse urinary irritative (adjusted mean difference, -7.0 [95% CI, -10.1 to -3.9]), sexual (adjusted mean difference, -10.1 [95% CI, -14.6 to -5.7]), and bowel (adjusted mean difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -7.6 to -2.4]) function at 1 year compared with active surveillance. EBRT was associated with urinary, sexual, and bowel function changes not clinically different from active surveillance at any time point through 5 years. For men with unfavorable-risk disease, EBRT with ADT was associated with lower hormonal function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference, -5.3 [95% CI, -8.2 to -2.4]) and bowel function at 1 year (adjusted mean difference, -4.1 [95% CI, -6.3 to -1.9]), but better sexual function at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.2-18.7]) and incontinence at each time point through 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 23.2 [95% CI, 17.7-28.7]), than prostatectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of men with localized prostate cancer, most functional differences associated with contemporary management options attenuated by 5 years. However, men undergoing prostatectomy reported clinically meaningful worse incontinence through 5 years compared with all other options, and men undergoing prostatectomy for unfavorable-risk disease reported worse sexual function at 5 years compared with men who underwent EBRT with ADT.
Importance: Understanding adverse effects of contemporary treatment approaches for men with favorable-risk and unfavorable-risk localized prostate cancer could inform treatment selection. Objective: To compare functional outcomes associated with prostate cancer treatments over 5 years after treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, population-based cohort study of 1386 men with favorable-risk (clinical stage cT1 to cT2bN0M0, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤20 ng/mL, and Grade Group 1-2) prostate cancer and 619 men with unfavorable-risk (clinical stage cT2cN0M0, PSA of 20-50 ng/mL, or Grade Group 3-5) prostate cancer diagnosed in 2011 through 2012, accrued from 5 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program sites and a US prostate cancer registry, with surveys through September 2017. Exposures: Treatment with active surveillance (n = 363), nerve-sparing prostatectomy (n = 675), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT; n = 261), or low-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 87) for men with favorable-risk disease and treatment with prostatectomy (n = 402) or EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (n = 217) for men with unfavorable-risk disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported function, based on the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (range, 0-100), 5 years after treatment. Regression models were adjusted for baseline function and patient and tumor characteristics. Minimum clinically important difference was 10 to 12 for sexual function, 6 to 9 for urinary incontinence, 5 to 7 for urinary irritative symptoms, and 4 to 6 for bowel and hormonal function. Results: A total of 2005 men met inclusion criteria and completed the baseline and at least 1 postbaseline survey (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [59-70] years; 1529 of 1993 participants [77%] were non-Hispanic white). For men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, nerve-sparing prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary incontinence at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, -10.9 [95% CI, -14.2 to -7.6]) and sexual function at 3 years (adjusted mean difference, -15.2 [95% CI, -18.8 to -11.5]) compared with active surveillance. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy was associated with worse urinary irritative (adjusted mean difference, -7.0 [95% CI, -10.1 to -3.9]), sexual (adjusted mean difference, -10.1 [95% CI, -14.6 to -5.7]), and bowel (adjusted mean difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -7.6 to -2.4]) function at 1 year compared with active surveillance. EBRT was associated with urinary, sexual, and bowel function changes not clinically different from active surveillance at any time point through 5 years. For men with unfavorable-risk disease, EBRT with ADT was associated with lower hormonal function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference, -5.3 [95% CI, -8.2 to -2.4]) and bowel function at 1 year (adjusted mean difference, -4.1 [95% CI, -6.3 to -1.9]), but better sexual function at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.2-18.7]) and incontinence at each time point through 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 23.2 [95% CI, 17.7-28.7]), than prostatectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of men with localized prostate cancer, most functional differences associated with contemporary management options attenuated by 5 years. However, men undergoing prostatectomy reported clinically meaningful worse incontinence through 5 years compared with all other options, and men undergoing prostatectomy for unfavorable-risk disease reported worse sexual function at 5 years compared with men who underwent EBRT with ADT.
Authors: Svetlana Avulova; Zhiguo Zhao; Daniel Lee; Li-Ching Huang; Tatsuki Koyama; Karen E Hoffman; Ralph M Conwill; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Vivien Chen; Matthew R Cooperberg; Michael Goodman; Sheldon Greenfield; Ann S Hamilton; Mia Hashibe; Lisa E Paddock; Antoinette Stroup; Matthew J Resnick; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-12-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ted A Skolarus; Rodney L Dunn; Martin G Sanda; Peter Chang; Thomas K Greenfield; Mark S Litwin; John T Wei Journal: Urology Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Mark S Litwin; Sheldon Greenfield; Eric P Elkin; Deborah P Lubeck; Jeanette M Broering; Sherrie H Kaplan Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Martin G Sanda; Rodney L Dunn; Jeff Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Laurel Northouse; Larry Hembroff; Xihong Lin; Thomas K Greenfield; Mark S Litwin; Christopher S Saigal; Arul Mahadevan; Eric Klein; Adam Kibel; Louis L Pisters; Deborah Kuban; Irving Kaplan; David Wood; Jay Ciezki; Nikhil Shah; John T Wei Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Arnold L Potosky; William W Davis; Richard M Hoffman; Janet L Stanford; Robert A Stephenson; David F Penson; Linda C Harlan Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Martin G Sanda; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Erin Kirkby; Ronald C Chen; Tony Crispino; Joann Fontanarosa; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Greene; Laurence H Klotz; Danil V Makarov; Joel B Nelson; George Rodrigues; Howard M Sandler; Mary Ellen Taplin; Jonathan R Treadwell Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Behfar Ehdaie; Clare M Tempany; Ford Holland; Daniel D Sjoberg; Adam S Kibel; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jeremy C Durack; Oguz Akin; Andrew J Vickers; Peter T Scardino; Dan Sperling; Jeffrey Y C Wong; Bertram Yuh; David A Woodrum; Lance A Mynderse; Steven S Raman; Allan J Pantuck; Marc H Schiffman; Timothy D McClure; Geoffrey A Sonn; Pejman Ghanouni Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 54.433
Authors: Chad Tang; Xiudong Lei; Grace L Smith; Hubert Y Pan; Karen E Hoffman; Rachit Kumar; Brian F Chapin; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Steven J Frank; Benjamin D Smith Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-12-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ting Martin Ma; James M Lamb; Maria Casado; Xiaoyan Wang; T Vincent Basehart; Yingli Yang; Daniel Low; Ke Sheng; Nzhde Agazaryan; Nicholas G Nickols; Minsong Cao; Michael L Steinberg; Amar U Kishan Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Niklas Westhoff; Ramona Ernst; Karl Friedrich Kowalewski; Laura Schmidt; Thomas Stefan Worst; Maurice Stephan Michel; Jost von Hardenberg Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Dong-Ho Mun; Lin Yang; Shahrokh F Shariat; Sylvia Reitter-Pfoertner; Gerald Gredinger; Thomas Waldhoer Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-27 Impact factor: 3.390