INTRODUCTION: Identifying the optimal management of unfavorable-risk (Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification [ProCaRS] high intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk categories) non-metastatic prostate cancer is an important public health concern given the large burden of this disease. We compared the rate of metastatic progression-free survival among men diagnosed with unfavorable-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer who were initially treated with radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Information was obtained from medical records at two academic centers in Canada from 333 men diagnosed with unfavorable-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer between 2007 and 2012. Median followup was 90.4 months. Men were eligible for the study if they received either primary radiation therapy (n=164) or radical prostatectomy (n=169), in addition to various adjuvant and salvage therapies when deemed clinically appropriate. Patients were matched on prognostic covariates using two matching techniques. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) for metastatic progression-free survival between groups. RESULTS: After matching, treatment groups were balanced on prognostic variables except for percent core positivity. Hazard ratios from all Cox proportional hazards models (i.e., before and after matching, and with and without multivariable adjustment) showed no difference in the rate of metastatic progression-free survival between groups (adjusted unmatched HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.63, 2.13, p=0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic progression-free survival did not differ between men diagnosed with unfavorable risk non-metastatic prostate cancer who were treated with either radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy.
INTRODUCTION: Identifying the optimal management of unfavorable-risk (Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification [ProCaRS] high intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk categories) non-metastatic prostate cancer is an important public health concern given the large burden of this disease. We compared the rate of metastatic progression-free survival among men diagnosed with unfavorable-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer who were initially treated with radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Information was obtained from medical records at two academic centers in Canada from 333 men diagnosed with unfavorable-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer between 2007 and 2012. Median followup was 90.4 months. Men were eligible for the study if they received either primary radiation therapy (n=164) or radical prostatectomy (n=169), in addition to various adjuvant and salvage therapies when deemed clinically appropriate. Patients were matched on prognostic covariates using two matching techniques. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) for metastatic progression-free survival between groups. RESULTS: After matching, treatment groups were balanced on prognostic variables except for percent core positivity. Hazard ratios from all Cox proportional hazards models (i.e., before and after matching, and with and without multivariable adjustment) showed no difference in the rate of metastatic progression-free survival between groups (adjusted unmatched HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.63, 2.13, p=0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic progression-free survival did not differ between men diagnosed with unfavorable risk non-metastatic prostate cancer who were treated with either radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy.
Authors: Carlos G Grijalva; Christianne L Roumie; Harvey J Murff; Adriana M Hung; Cole Beck; Xulei Liu; Marie R Griffin; Robert A Greevy Journal: J Comp Eff Res Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 1.744
Authors: M Alan Brookhart; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Kenneth J Rothman; Robert J Glynn; Jerry Avorn; Til Stürmer Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2006-04-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: George Rodrigues; Himu Lukka; Padraig Warde; Michael Brundage; Luis Souhami; Juanita Crook; Fabio Cury; Charles Catton; Gary Mok; Andre-Guy Martin; Eric Vigneault; Jim Morris; Andrew Warner; Sandra Gonzalez Maldonado; Tom Pickles Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Michel Bolla; Hein van Poppel; Bertrand Tombal; Kris Vekemans; Luigi Da Pozzo; Theo M de Reijke; Antony Verbaeys; Jean-François Bosset; Roland van Velthoven; Marc Colombel; Cees van de Beek; Paul Verhagen; Alphonsus van den Bergh; Cora Sternberg; Thomas Gasser; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Pierre Scalliet; Karin Haustermans; Laurence Collette Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-10-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Jennifer R Stark; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Gunnar Steineck; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan; J Athene Lane; Malcolm Mason; Chris Metcalfe; Peter Holding; Michael Davis; Tim J Peters; Emma L Turner; Richard M Martin; Jon Oxley; Mary Robinson; John Staffurth; Eleanor Walsh; Prasad Bollina; James Catto; Andrew Doble; Alan Doherty; David Gillatt; Roger Kockelbergh; Howard Kynaston; Alan Paul; Philip Powell; Stephen Prescott; Derek J Rosario; Edward Rowe; David E Neal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ming Yin; Jing Zhao; Paul Monk; Douglas Martin; Edmund Folefac; Monika Joshi; Ning Jin; Amir Mortazavi; Claire Verschraegen; Steven Clinton Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 4.452
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: 2018-01-10 Impact factor: 7.450