Survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy vs. external beam radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients with Gleason Score 9-10 at biopsy: A population-based analysis

TY - JOUR

T1 - Survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy vs. external beam radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients with Gleason Score 9-10 at biopsy: A population-based analysis

AU - Knipper, Sophie

AU - Palumbo, Carlotta

AU - Pecoraro, Angela

AU - Rosiello, Giuseppe

AU - Tian, Zhe

AU - Briganti, Alberto

AU - Zorn, Kevin C

AU - Saad, Fred

AU - Tilki, Derya

AU - Graefen, Markus

AU - Karakiewicz, Pierre I

N1 - Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2020/3

Y1 - 2020/3

N2 - PURPOSE: Gleason Score (GS) 9-10 prostate cancer is associated with particularly adverse oncological outcomes and the optimal treatment is unknown. Therefore, cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) ± adjuvant radiation therapy (aRT) vs. external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were tested.METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2015), 17,897 clinically localized prostate cancer patients with biopsy GS 9-10 were identified who either received RP ± aRT or EBRT. Temporal trends, cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing-risks regression analyses were used after propensity score matching. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to primary treatment type (RP only vs. EBRT).RESULTS: Of all, 8,890 (49.7%) underwent EBRT vs. 9,007 (50.3%) underwent RP. Of those, 2,584 (28.7%) received aRT. No significant change in treatment assignment was recorded over time. In cumulative incidence smoothed plots, 10 year CSM rates were 19.9% vs. 19.6% (P = 0.3) and 10 year other-cause mortalityrates were 11.5% vs. 31.2%, respectively, in RP vs. EBRT patients (P < 0.001). In multivariable competing-risks regression analyses, RP did not reach independent predictor status of lower CSM (hazard ratio (HR): 0.93, P = 0.2). In sensitivity analyses within RP only vs. EBRT patients, RP represented an independent predictor of lower CSM (HR: 0.76, P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: In biopsy GS 9-10 patients, no CSM differences were observed after RP ± aRT vs. EBRT. However, in patients in whom RP did not have to be combined with aRT, RP seems to be associated with a minor improvement in cancer-specific survival compared to EBRT. This applied to the majority of GS 9-10 RP patients.

AB - PURPOSE: Gleason Score (GS) 9-10 prostate cancer is associated with particularly adverse oncological outcomes and the optimal treatment is unknown. Therefore, cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) ± adjuvant radiation therapy (aRT) vs. external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were tested.METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2015), 17,897 clinically localized prostate cancer patients with biopsy GS 9-10 were identified who either received RP ± aRT or EBRT. Temporal trends, cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing-risks regression analyses were used after propensity score matching. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to primary treatment type (RP only vs. EBRT).RESULTS: Of all, 8,890 (49.7%) underwent EBRT vs. 9,007 (50.3%) underwent RP. Of those, 2,584 (28.7%) received aRT. No significant change in treatment assignment was recorded over time. In cumulative incidence smoothed plots, 10 year CSM rates were 19.9% vs. 19.6% (P = 0.3) and 10 year other-cause mortalityrates were 11.5% vs. 31.2%, respectively, in RP vs. EBRT patients (P < 0.001). In multivariable competing-risks regression analyses, RP did not reach independent predictor status of lower CSM (hazard ratio (HR): 0.93, P = 0.2). In sensitivity analyses within RP only vs. EBRT patients, RP represented an independent predictor of lower CSM (HR: 0.76, P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: In biopsy GS 9-10 patients, no CSM differences were observed after RP ± aRT vs. EBRT. However, in patients in whom RP did not have to be combined with aRT, RP seems to be associated with a minor improvement in cancer-specific survival compared to EBRT. This applied to the majority of GS 9-10 RP patients.

U2 - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.09.015

DO - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.09.015

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 31653563

VL - 38

SP - 79.e9-79.e14

JO - UROL ONCOL-SEMIN ORI

JF - UROL ONCOL-SEMIN ORI

SN - 1078-1439

IS - 3

ER -