8 research outputs found
Conservative management of lowâ risk prostate cancer among young versus older men in the United States: Trends and outcomes from a novel national database
Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151903/1/cncr32332.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151903/2/cncr32332_am.pd
Recommended from our members
Factors influencing noncompletion of radiotherapy among men with localized prostate cancer
199 Background: Treatment non-completion may occur with radiotherapy (RT), especially with protracted treatment courses such as RT for prostate cancer, and may affect the efficacy of RT. For men with localized prostate cancer managed with primary RT, we evaluated associations between rates of treatment non-completion and RT fractionation schedules. Methods: The National Cancer Database identified men diagnosed from 2004-2014 treated with primary RT. Patients receiving 180cGy/fraction (conventional), 200cGy/fraction (conventional), 250cGy/fraction (moderate hypofractionation), and 300cGy/fraction (moderate hypofractionation) were defined as having completed radiotherapy if they received ≥40 fractions, ≥37 fractions, ≥28 fractions, and ≥19 fractions, respectively. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was defined as 5-8 fractions of 600-800cGy/fraction. Odds ratios compared rates of treatment noncompletion, adjusting for various sociodemographic covariates. Propensity-adjusted multivariable Cox regression assessed the association between treatment completion and overall survival. Results: Of 93,079 patients, 90.5% (N = 84,260) received conventional fractionation, 2.3% (N = 2,181) received moderate hypofractionation, and 7.1% (N = 6,638) received SBRT. Rates of non-completion were 10.0% (N = 8,406) among patients who received conventional fractionation, 7.5% (N = 163) among patients who received moderate hypofractionation, and 1.7% (N = 115) among patients who received SBRT (OR versus conventional: 0.214, 95%CI 0.177-0.258, P < 0.001). The rate of non-completion among 15,417 African American patients was 11.8%, compared to 8.8% among 74,189 white patients (OR 1.39, 95%CI 1.31-1.47, P < 0.001). On subgroup analysis, the disparity in non-completion persisted for conventional fractionation (12.4% vs. 9.4%, OR 1.36, 95%CI 1.29-1.44, P < 0.001) and moderate hypofractionation (13.6% vs. 6.6%, OR 2.24, 95%CI 1.52-3.29, P < 0.001), but not for SBRT (2.0% vs. 1.6%, OR 1.25, 95%CI 0.76-2.06, P = 0.384). Non-completion was associated with worse survival on propensity-adjusted multivariate analysis (HR 1.37, 95%CI 1.31-1.43, P < 0.001). Conclusions: SBRT was associated with lower rates of RT non-completion among men with localized prostate cancer. African American race was associated with greater rates of treatment non-completion, although the disparity may be decreased among men receiving SBRT
Recommended from our members
Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in Black Patients
Recommended from our members
Association of black race with improved outcomes following definitive radiotherapy with androgen deprivation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer: A meta-analysis of eight randomized trials
327 Background: Though Black men with prostate cancer are more likely to have aggressive disease features than White men, race-specific differences in initial treatment responses in localized disease remains unknown. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained for 9259 patients (including 1674 [18.1%] Black men and 7585 [81.9%] White men) enrolled on eight randomized controlled trials evaluating definitive radiotherapy (RT) ± short-term or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT and LTADT). The primary endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), distant metastasis (DM), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Fine-Gray subdistribution HR (sHR) models were developed to evaluate the cumulative incidences of all endpoints after stratification by National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk grouping. A meta-analysis was done to estimate pair-wise comparisons of treatments within and between Black and White men, after adjusting for age, Gleason score, clinical T stage, and initial PSA. Results: Black men were more likely to have NCCN high-risk disease at enrollment (656/1674 [39.2%] vs 2506/7585 [33%], p<0.001). However, within the high-risk stratum Black men had lower 10-year rates of BCR (46.1% vs. 50.4%, p=0.02), DM (14% vs. 21.6%, p<0.001), and PCSM (4.9% vs. 9.8%, p<0.001). After adjusting for age and disease characteristics, Black men with high-risk prostate receiving RT+STADT had lower rates of BCR (sHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.86, p<0.001), DM (sHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84, p=0.001) and PCSM (sHR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.95, p=0.04). There were no differences in BCR, DM, or PCSM among men receiving RT+LTADT. The interaction between race and the impact of adding STADT to RT alone on BCR was statistically significant (p=0.003). Conclusions: Black men enrolled on randomized trials with long-term follow-up have higher risk disease at enrollment, but have better BCR, DM, and PCSM outcomes with RT-based therapy compared with White men, particularly with the addition of STADT
Addition of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Brachytherapy Boost to External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials
In men with localized prostate cancer, the addition of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or a brachytherapy boost (BT) to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have been shown to improve various oncologic end points. Practice patterns indicate that those who receive BT are significantly less likely to receive ADT, and thus we sought to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the predicted outcomes of a randomized trial of EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT.
A systematic review identified published randomized trials comparing EBRT with or without ADT, or EBRT (with or without ADT) with or without BT, that reported on overall survival (OS). Standard fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed for each comparison, and a meta-regression was conducted to adjust for use and duration of ADT. Network meta-analyses were performed to compare EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. Bayesian analyses were also performed, and a rank was assigned to each treatment after Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses to create a surface under the cumulative ranking curve.
Six trials compared EBRT with or without ADT (n = 4,663), and 3 compared EBRT with or without BT (n = 718). The addition of ADT to EBRT improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.81]), whereas the addition of BT did not significantly improve OS (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.36]). In a network meta-analysis, EBRT plus ADT had improved OS compared with EBRT plus BT (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]). Bayesian modeling demonstrated an 88% probability that EBRT plus ADT resulted in superior OS compared with EBRT plus BT.
Our findings suggest that current practice patterns of omitting ADT with EBRT plus BT may result in inferior OS compared with EBRT plus ADT in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. ADT for these men should remain a critical component of treatment regardless of radiotherapy delivery method until randomized evidence demonstrates otherwise