Retrospective study on the benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy in men with intraductal carcinoma of prostate.
Adjuvant radiotherapy
Biochemical recurrence
Prostate cancer
Radical prostatectomy
Journal
Radiation oncology (London, England)
ISSN: 1748-717X
Titre abrégé: Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265111
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Apr 2019
25 Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
12
11
2018
accepted:
28
03
2019
entrez:
26
4
2019
pubmed:
26
4
2019
medline:
10
9
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is an independent biomarker of recurrence and survival with particular treatment response, yet no study has tested its response to radiotherapy. The aim of our project was to test the impact of adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) in patients with localized to locally advanced prostate cancer (PC) and IDC-P. We performed a retrospective study of men with pT2-T3 PC treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without ART, from two centres (1993-2015). Exclusion criteria were the use of another type of treatment prior to biochemical recurrence (BCR), and detectable prostate- specific antigen (PSA) following RP or ART. Primary outcome was BCR (2 consecutive PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/ml). Patients were grouped by treatment (RP We reviewed 293 RP specimens (median follow-up 99 months, 69 BCR). Forty-eight patients (16.4%) were treated by RP + ART. Multivariate Cox regression for BCR indicated that IDC-P had the strongest impact (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.44-3.97), while ART reduced the risk of BCR (HR = 0.38, 95%CI: 0.17-0.85). Other HRF were all significant except for pT3b stage. IDC-P[+] patients who did not receive ART had the worst BCR-free survival (log-rank P = 0.023). Furthermore, IDC-P had the same impact on BCR-free survival as ≥1 HRF (log-rank P = 0.955). Men with IDC-P who did not receive ART had the highest BCR rates, and IDC-P had the same impact as ≥1 HRF, which are often used as ART indications. Once validated, ART should be considered in patients with IDC-P.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is an independent biomarker of recurrence and survival with particular treatment response, yet no study has tested its response to radiotherapy. The aim of our project was to test the impact of adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) in patients with localized to locally advanced prostate cancer (PC) and IDC-P.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
We performed a retrospective study of men with pT2-T3 PC treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without ART, from two centres (1993-2015). Exclusion criteria were the use of another type of treatment prior to biochemical recurrence (BCR), and detectable prostate- specific antigen (PSA) following RP or ART. Primary outcome was BCR (2 consecutive PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/ml). Patients were grouped by treatment (RP
RESULTS
RESULTS
We reviewed 293 RP specimens (median follow-up 99 months, 69 BCR). Forty-eight patients (16.4%) were treated by RP + ART. Multivariate Cox regression for BCR indicated that IDC-P had the strongest impact (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.44-3.97), while ART reduced the risk of BCR (HR = 0.38, 95%CI: 0.17-0.85). Other HRF were all significant except for pT3b stage. IDC-P[+] patients who did not receive ART had the worst BCR-free survival (log-rank P = 0.023). Furthermore, IDC-P had the same impact on BCR-free survival as ≥1 HRF (log-rank P = 0.955).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Men with IDC-P who did not receive ART had the highest BCR rates, and IDC-P had the same impact as ≥1 HRF, which are often used as ART indications. Once validated, ART should be considered in patients with IDC-P.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31018850
doi: 10.1186/s13014-019-1267-3
pii: 10.1186/s13014-019-1267-3
pmc: PMC6482557
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
60Références
Mod Pathol. 2006 Dec;19(12):1528-35
pubmed: 16980940
J Urol. 2009 Mar;181(3):956-62
pubmed: 19167731
J Clin Pathol. 2009 Jul;62(7):579-83
pubmed: 19246509
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Feb 1;76(2):361-8
pubmed: 19394158
Lancet. 2012 Dec 8;380(9858):2018-27
pubmed: 23084481
Eur Urol. 2013 Dec;64(6):905-15
pubmed: 23721958
Prostate. 2014 May;74(6):680-7
pubmed: 24481730
Eur Urol. 2014 Aug;66(2):243-50
pubmed: 24680359
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jun;50(9):1610-6
pubmed: 24703897
Eur Urol. 2014 Aug;66(2):251-2
pubmed: 24830627
Cancer. 2014 Oct 1;120(19):3089-96
pubmed: 24917426
Int J Urol. 2015 Jan;22(1):89-95
pubmed: 25141965
Prostate. 2015 Feb 15;75(3):225-32
pubmed: 25307858
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec 1;32(34):3892-8
pubmed: 25366677
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015 Oct;139(10):1234-41
pubmed: 26414467
Mod Pathol. 2016 Feb;29(2):166-73
pubmed: 26743470
Am J Surg Pathol. 2016 Jun;40(6):e67-82
pubmed: 26848801
Am J Surg Pathol. 2017 Apr;41(4):e1-e7
pubmed: 28177964
Eur Urol. 2017 Nov;72(5):689-709
pubmed: 28189428
Cancer. 2017 Jul 1;123(13):2489-2496
pubmed: 28323339
Oncotarget. 2017 Jul 24;8(33):55374-55383
pubmed: 28903426
Urol Oncol. 2017 Dec;35(12):673.e9-673.e14
pubmed: 28919182
BJU Int. 2018 Jun;121(6):971-978
pubmed: 28977728
BJU Int. 2018 Jun;121(6):845-853
pubmed: 29063728
Prostate. 2018 Jan;78(1):11-16
pubmed: 29094384
Int J Urol. 2018 Mar;25(3):284-289
pubmed: 29315854
Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Apr;11(4):425-438
pubmed: 29355037
Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 2017;108(1):5-11
pubmed: 29367511
Prostate. 2018 Jul;78(10):697-706
pubmed: 29603326
BJU Int. 2019 Apr;123(4):624-631
pubmed: 30113732