Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-02-2019 | Original Article

Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer may benefit from local treatment: a population-based propensity score-adjusted analysis

Authors: Wei Sheng, Ruth Kirschner-Hermanns, Hongwei Zhang

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 2/2019

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate whether elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPC) may benefit from local treatment (LT).

Methods

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.

Results

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).

Conclusion

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.

Available only for authorised users

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 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRefPubMed

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 CrossRef

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 CrossRefPubMed

10.

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

11.

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

12.

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 CrossRefPubMed

13.

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 CrossRefPubMed

14.

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 CrossRefPubMed

15.

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 CrossRefPubMed

16.

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 CrossRefPubMed

17.

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 CrossRefPubMed

18.

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

19.

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 CrossRefPubMed

20.

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 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

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 CrossRefPubMed

22.

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 CrossRefPubMed

23.

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 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer may benefit from local treatment: a population-based propensity score-adjusted analysis
Authors: Wei Sheng
Ruth Kirschner-Hermanns
Hongwei Zhang
Publication date: 01-02-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2389-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer may benefit from local treatment: a population-based propensity score-adjusted analysis

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Follow-up of negative MRI-targeted prostate biopsies: when are we missing cancer?

Comparison between the effects of deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade during transurethral resection of bladder tumor on endoscopic surgical condition and recovery profile: a prospective, randomized, and controlled trial

The BET-inhibitor PFI-1 diminishes AR/AR-V7 signaling in prostate cancer cells

MRI-targeted biopsies: What’s next?

Old wine in new bottles?

Increased amount and duration of tea consumption may be associated with decreased risk of renal stone disease