Differences in real-world outcomes by risk classification for localized prostate cancer patients after radiation therapy.
external beam radiation therapy
high‐risk localized prostate cancer
localized prostate cancer
low/intermediate‐risk localized prostate cancer
real‐world study
Journal
The Prostate
ISSN: 1097-0045
Titre abrégé: Prostate
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8101368
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Apr 2024
29 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
05
03
2024
received:
14
12
2023
accepted:
16
04
2024
medline:
30
4
2024
pubmed:
30
4
2024
entrez:
30
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Limited real-world evidence exists on the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) who received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as the initial treatment. This study evaluated clinical outcomes of US patients with high-risk LPC (HR-LPC) and low/intermediate-risk LPC (LIR-LPC) who received EBRT. This retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data from 2012 to 2019 included patients ≥ 65 years old who received EBRT as initial therapy. Baseline patient characteristics were summarized, metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival, and time to initiation of advanced prostate cancer treatment were compared using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and adjusted Cox proportional hazard (PH) models. 5-year survival probabilities stratified by race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, NH Asian, and Hispanic) were assessed. Of 11,313 eligible patients, 41% (n = 4600) had HR-LPC and 59% (n = 6713) had LIR-LPC. Patient characteristics for both groups were comparable, with mean age at EBRT initiation > 70 years, 86% white, and mean follow-up time >40 months. More patients in the HR-LPC than LIR-LPC groups (78% vs 34%) had concurrent androgen deprivation therapy use and for a longer duration (median 10.4 months vs. 7.4 months). A higher proportion of HR-LPC patients developed metastasis, died, or received advanced prostate cancer treatment. Adjusted Cox PH survival analyses showed significantly (p < 0.0001) higher risk of mortality (hazard ratios [HR], 1.57 [1.38, 2.34]), metastasis or death (HR, 1.97 [1.78, 2.17]), and advanced prostate cancer therapy use (HR, 2.57 [2.11, 3.14]) for HR-LPC than LIR-LPC patients. Within 5 years after the initial EBRT treatment, 18%-26% of patients with HR-LPC are expected to have died or developed metastasis. The 5-year MFS rate in the HR-LPC group was lower than the LIR-LPC group across all racial/ethnic subgroups. NH Black patients with HR-LPC had the highest all-cause mortality rate and lowest rate of receiving advanced prostate cancer treatment, compared to other racial/ethnic subgroups. This real-world study of clinical outcomes in patients with LPC treated with EBRT suggests substantial disease burden in patients with HR-LPC and highlights the need for additional treatment strategies to improve clinical outcomes in patients with HR-LPC.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Limited real-world evidence exists on the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) who received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as the initial treatment. This study evaluated clinical outcomes of US patients with high-risk LPC (HR-LPC) and low/intermediate-risk LPC (LIR-LPC) who received EBRT.
METHODS
METHODS
This retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data from 2012 to 2019 included patients ≥ 65 years old who received EBRT as initial therapy. Baseline patient characteristics were summarized, metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival, and time to initiation of advanced prostate cancer treatment were compared using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and adjusted Cox proportional hazard (PH) models. 5-year survival probabilities stratified by race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, NH Asian, and Hispanic) were assessed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 11,313 eligible patients, 41% (n = 4600) had HR-LPC and 59% (n = 6713) had LIR-LPC. Patient characteristics for both groups were comparable, with mean age at EBRT initiation > 70 years, 86% white, and mean follow-up time >40 months. More patients in the HR-LPC than LIR-LPC groups (78% vs 34%) had concurrent androgen deprivation therapy use and for a longer duration (median 10.4 months vs. 7.4 months). A higher proportion of HR-LPC patients developed metastasis, died, or received advanced prostate cancer treatment. Adjusted Cox PH survival analyses showed significantly (p < 0.0001) higher risk of mortality (hazard ratios [HR], 1.57 [1.38, 2.34]), metastasis or death (HR, 1.97 [1.78, 2.17]), and advanced prostate cancer therapy use (HR, 2.57 [2.11, 3.14]) for HR-LPC than LIR-LPC patients. Within 5 years after the initial EBRT treatment, 18%-26% of patients with HR-LPC are expected to have died or developed metastasis. The 5-year MFS rate in the HR-LPC group was lower than the LIR-LPC group across all racial/ethnic subgroups. NH Black patients with HR-LPC had the highest all-cause mortality rate and lowest rate of receiving advanced prostate cancer treatment, compared to other racial/ethnic subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This real-world study of clinical outcomes in patients with LPC treated with EBRT suggests substantial disease burden in patients with HR-LPC and highlights the need for additional treatment strategies to improve clinical outcomes in patients with HR-LPC.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC
Informations de copyright
© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
ACS Health & Medical Content Team. Key statistics for prostate cancer. Accessed June 4, 2023. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/prostate-cancer/about/key-statistics.html#written_by
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17‐48.
Murthy V, Aggarwal R, Koo PJ. The emerging role of Next‐Generation imaging in prostate cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2022;24(1):33‐42.
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas SM, Adra N. et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer, Version 4.2023. Accessed January 31, 2024. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf
Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part I: introduction, risk assessment, staging, and risk‐based management. J Urol. 2022;208(1):10‐18.
Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part II: principles of active surveillance, principles of surgery, and follow‐up. J Urol. 2022;208(1):19‐25.
Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline. part III: principles of radiation and future directions. J Urol. 2022;208(1):26‐33.
Wong YN, Mitra N, Hudes G, et al. Survival associated with treatment vs observation of localized prostate cancer in elderly men. JAMA. 2006;296(22):2683‐2693.
Siegel DA, O'Neil ME, Richards TB, Dowling NF, Weir HK. Prostate cancer incidence and survival, by stage and Race/Ethnicity—United States, 2001‐2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(41):1473‐1480.
Yamoah K, Lee KM, Awasthi S, et al. Racial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer outcomes in the veterans affairs health care system. JAMA Network Open. 2022;5(1):e2144027.
Moses KA, Orom H, Brasel A, Gaddy J, Underwood, 3rd W. Racial/ethnic disparity in treatment for prostate cancer: does cancer severity matter? Urology. 2017;99:76‐83.
SEER Program. Overview of the SEER Program. Accessed June 4, 2023. https://seer.cancer.gov/about/overview.html
DeSantis CE, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(3):211‐233.
Lowder D, Rizwan K, McColl C, et al. Racial disparities in prostate cancer: a complex interplay between socioeconomic inequities and genomics. Cancer Lett. 2022;531:71‐82.
Healthcare Delivery Research Program. Measures that are Limited or not Available in the Data. Accessed September 25, 2023. https://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/seermedicare/considerations/measures.html#13
Wilt TJ, Jne KM, Barry MJ, et al. Follow‐up of prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prosate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(2):132‐142.
Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. Fifteen‐year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(17):1547‐1558.
Bechis SK, Carroll PR, Cooperberg MR. Impact of age at diagnosis on prostate cancer treatment and survival. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(2):235‐241.
Agrawal V, Ma X, Hu JC, Barbieri CE, Nagar H. Trends in diagnosis and disparities in initial management of high‐risk prostate cancer in the US. JAMA Network Open. 2020;3(8):e2014674.
Borregales LD, DeMeo G, Gu X, et al. Grade migration of prostate cancer in the United States during the last decade. JNCI. 2022;114(7):1012‐1019.
Mason MD, Parulekar WR, Sydes MR, et al. Final report of the intergroup randomized study of combined androgen‐deprivation therapy plus radiotherapy versus androgen‐deprivation therapy alone in locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(19):2143‐2150.
Warde P, Mason M, Ding K, et al. Combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2011;378(9809):2104‐2111.
Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, et al. Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG‐7/SFUO‐3): an open randomised phase III trial. The Lancet. 2009;373(9660):301‐308.
Fosså SD, Wiklund F, Klepp O, et al. Ten‐ and 15‐yr prostate cancer‐specific mortality in patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced or aggressive intermediate prostate cancer, randomized to lifelong endocrine treatment alone or combined with radiotherapy: final results of the scandinavian prostate cancer Group‐7. Eur Urol. 2016;70(4):684‐691.
James ND, de Bono JS, Spears MR, et al. Abiraterone for prostate cancer not previously treated with hormone therapy. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(4):338‐351.
Attard G, Murphy L, Clarke NW, et al. Abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for high‐risk non‐metastatic prostate cancer: a meta‐analysis of primary results from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. The Lancet. 2022;399(10323):447‐460.
McKay RR, Feng FY, Wang AY, Wallis CJD, Moses KA. Recent advances in the management of High‐Risk localized prostate cancer: local therapy, systemic therapy, and biomarkers to guide treatment decisions. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2020;40:1‐12.
Uhr A, Glick L, Gomella LG. An overview of biomarkers in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. Can J Urol. 2020;27(S3):24‐27.
Rajwa P, Pradere B, Gandaglia G, et al. Intensification of systemic therapy in addition to definitive local treatment in nonmetastatic unfavourable prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Eur Urol. 2022;82(1):82‐96.
Burgess L, Roy S, Morgan S, Malone S. A review on the current treatment paradigm in high‐risk prostate cancer. Cancers. 2021;13(17):4257.