Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer may benefit from local treatment: a population-based propensity score-adjusted analysis
Tóm tắt
To evaluate whether elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPC) may benefit from local treatment (LT). Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with non-metastatic cT3–4 LAPC who were treated with LT [radical prostatectomy (RP), radiation therapy (RT)] or non-LT (NLT) were identified. After propensity score matching (PSM), cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates were assessed. In the assessment of LT vs. NLT and RP vs. RT, multivariable competing risk regression (MVA CRR) analysis was used. 368 and 482 paired patients were matched for LT vs. NLT and RP vs. RT, respectively. 5 and 10 years CSM rates were 9.4 vs. 18.5% in LT and 24.9 vs. 29.3% in NLT-treated patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). 5 and 10 years CSM rates were 3.4% vs. 8.6% in RP and 6.7% vs. 15.1% in RT-treated patients, respectively (P = 0.10). In the MVA CRR model, after PSM, NLT resulted in higher CSM rates in Gleason score 8–10 [subhazard ratio (sHR) = 2.83, P < 0.001], cT3b/4 (sHR = 3.97/2.56, P = 0.003/0.002), cN0 (sHR = 2.52, P < 0.001) or PSA > 10 ng/ml [sHR (PSA = 10.1–20 ng/ml) = 4.59, P = 0.03; sHR (PSA > 20 ng/ml) = 2.77, P = 0.001] patients compared with LT. However, no statistically significant difference in CSM was observed between RP and RT, except for cT3a patients in whom higher CSM rates were noted for RT compared with RP (sHR = 3.91, P = 0.02). LAPC patients may benefit from local treatment despite advanced age. However, this benefit was only seen in patients with cT3b/4, Gleason score 8–10, cN0 or PSA > 10 ng/ml.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Warde P, Mason M, Ding K et al (2011) Combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet 378(9809):2104–2111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61095-7
Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A et al (2009) Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet 373(9660):301–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61815-2
Mitchell CR, Boorjian SA, Umbreit EC et al (2012) 20-Year survival after radical prostatectomy as initial treatment for cT3 prostate cancer. BJU Int 110(11):1709–1713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11372.x
Loeb S, Smith ND, Roehl KA, Catalona WJ (2007) Intermediate-term potency, continence, and survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy for clinically high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer. Urology 69(6):1170–1175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.02.054
Moltzahn F, Karnes J, Gontero P et al (2015) Predicting prostate cancer-specific outcome after radical prostatectomy among men with very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa: a multi-institutional outcome study of 266 patients. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 18(1):31–37. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2014.41
Van Poppel H, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L et al (2006) Radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer: results of a feasibility study (EORTC 30001). Eur J Cancer 42(8):1062–1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2005.11.030
Carver BS, Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2006) Long-term outcome following radical prostatectomy in men with clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. J Urol 176(2):564–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.03.093
National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and EndResults Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group, Adamo MP, Boten JA et al (2017) Validation of prostate-specific antigen laboratory values recorded in surveillance, epidemiology, and end results registries. Cancer 123:697–703. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30401
Hu CY, Xing Y, Cormier JN, Chang GJ (2013) Assessing the utility of cancer-registry-processed cause of death in calculating cancer-specific survival. Cancer 119:1900–1907. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27968
D’Agostino RB Jr (1998) Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 17:2265–2281. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::aid-sim918>3.0.co;2-b
Gray R (1988) A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Ann Stat 6:1140–1154. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2241622
Scosyrev E, Messing EM, Mohile S, Golijanin D, Wu G (2012) Prostate cancer in the elderly: frequency of advanced disease at presentation and disease-specific mortality. Cancer 118(12):3062–3070. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26392
Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G et al (2007) Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 177:2106–2131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.003
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 59:572–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.01.025
Gandaglia G, Sun M, Trinh QD et al (2014) Survival benefit of definitive therapy in patients with clinically advanced prostate cancer: estimations of the number needed to treat based on competing-risks analysis. BJU Int 114(6b):E62–E69. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12645
Weiner AB, Matulewicz RS, Schaeffer EM et al (2017) Contemporary management of men with high-risk localized prostate cancer in the United States. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20(3):283–288. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2017.5
Boorjian Stephen A, Jeffrey Karnes R, Viterbo Rosalia et al (2011) Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer 117(13):2883–2891. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25900
Cheng L1, Zincke H, Blute ML et al (2001) Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer 91(1):66–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010101)91:1<66::AID-CNCR9>3.0.CO;2-P
Van Poppel H, Goethuys H, Callewaert P et al (2000) Radical prostatectomy can provide a cure for well-selected clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 38:372–379. https://doi.org/10.1159/000020311
Piccirillo JF, Vlahiotis A, Barrett LB et al (2008) The changing prevalence of comorbidity across the age spectrum. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 67(2):124–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2008.01.013
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71:618–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003
Lunardi P, Ploussard G, Grosclaude P et al (2017) Current impact of age and comorbidity assessment on prostate cancer treatment choice and over/undertreatment risk. World J Urol 35(4):587–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1900-9
Bratt O, Folkvaljon Y, Hjälm Eriksson M et al (2015) Undertreatment of men in their seventies with high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 68(1):53–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.026