Literature DB >> 33364186

Prognostic Value of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Population Based Retrospective Study.

Shengming Jin1,2, Jiaming Wei1,2, Junjie Wang1,2, Beihe Wang1,2, Junlong Wu1,2, Hualei Gan2,3, Bo Dai1,2, Xiaojian Qin1,2, Guowen Lin1,2, Yu Wei1,2, Chen Yang4, Yijun Shen1,2, Yiping Zhu1,2, Yao Zhu1,2, Dingwei Ye1,2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Our study aims to examine the impact of definitive local therapy in prostate cancer patients with different metastatic sites.
METHODS: Totally, 5,849 patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate carcinoma from 2010 to 2014 were selected from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). Log-rank analyses, multivariable regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess prognostic impact of local treatment in patients with different metastatic sites. Survival curves and forest plots were also plotted to describe the prognostic value of definitive local therapy.
RESULTS: In our study, 159 patients received radical prostatectomy, and 62 received brachytherapy, while 5,628 did not receive local definitive local therapy. Survival analysis revealed that patients who received definitive local therapy had a better 5-year overall survival (OS) (P = 0.011) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (P = 0.012). Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that type of treatment was an independent prognostic indicator for OS (P = 0.011) and CSS (P = 0.012), along with age at diagnosis, chemotherapy, PSA level, and Gleason score. According to subgroup analysis, patients with bone metastasis or distant lymph node (LN) metastasis were significantly more likely to benefit from definitive local therapy. In addition, forest plots demonstrated that RP group had significant favorable OS and CSS in subgroups of younger age at diagnosis, T2-3 stage, N0-1 stage, Gleason score =7 or ≥8, bone metastasis, and distant LN metastasis.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggested that local therapy improved survival in prostate cancer patients with bone or distant LN metastasis. Furthermore, patients who were at T2-3 stage or Gleason score ≥7 also significantly benefit from definitive local therapy.
Copyright © 2020 Jin, Wei, Wang, Wang, Wu, Gan, Dai, Qin, Lin, Wei, Yang, Shen, Zhu, Zhu and Ye.

Entities:  

Keywords:  brachytherapy; distant metastasis; prognosis; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Year:  2020        PMID: 33364186      PMCID: PMC7753115          DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.527952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Oncol        ISSN: 2234-943X            Impact factor:   6.244


  27 in total

1.  The prognosis of different distant metastases pattern in prostate cancer: A population based retrospective study.

Authors:  Jiafeng Shou; Qi Zhang; Shuai Wang; Dahong Zhang
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 4.104

2.  EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: Treatment of Relapsing, Metastatic, and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

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

3.  Complete excision of primary breast tumor improves survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer at diagnosis.

Authors:  Elisabetta Rapiti; Helena M Verkooijen; Georges Vlastos; Gerald Fioretta; Isabelle Neyroud-Caspar; André Pascal Sappino; Pierre O Chappuis; Christine Bouchardy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Prognostic impact of definitive local therapy of the primary tumor in men with metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis: A population-based, propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Samuel Antwi; Todd M Everson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 2.984

5.  Might men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer benefit from definitive treatment of the primary tumor? A SEER-based study.

Authors:  Stephen H Culp; Paul F Schellhammer; Michael B Williams
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Identifying optimal candidates for local treatment of the primary tumor among patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer: a SEER-based study.

Authors:  Nicola Fossati; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jesse Sammon; Akshay Sood; Alessandro Larcher; Maxine Sun; Pierre Karakiewicz; Giorgio Guazzoni; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti; Mani Menon; Firas Abdollah
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 7.  The role of cytoreductive/debulking surgery in ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Mark T Wakabayashi; Paul S Lin; Amy A Hakim
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 11.908

8.  Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016.

Authors:  Kimberly D Miller; Rebecca L Siegel; Chun Chieh Lin; Angela B Mariotto; Joan L Kramer; Julia H Rowland; Kevin D Stein; Rick Alteri; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 508.702

9.  Distribution of metastatic sites in patients with prostate cancer: A population-based analysis.

Authors:  Giorgio Gandaglia; Firas Abdollah; Jonas Schiffmann; Vincent Trudeau; Shahrokh F Shariat; Simon P Kim; Paul Perrotte; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Maxine Sun
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 4.104

10.  Prognostic value of primary tumor surgery in minor salivary-gland carcinoma patients with distant metastases at diagnosis: first evidence from a SEER-based study.

Authors:  Xiao Shi; Nai-Si Huang; Rong-Liang Shi; Wen-Jun Wei; Yu-Long Wang; Qing-Hai Ji
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.