Dataset Information

Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (?60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis.

ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to compare prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in young men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated by either external beam radiation (EBRT) alone or brachytherapy with or without external beam radiation.Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database, 15,505 patients ?60 years of age diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009 and treated with radiation therapy alone were identified. Incidence of PCSM was determined for both groups and compared using competing risk models.The overall 8-year PCSM for the study population was 1.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-2.2). For patients treated with EBRT or brachytherapy with or without external beam, the 8-year PCSM was found to be 2.8% (CI: 2.2-3.4) and 1.2% (CI: 0.9-1.6), respectively (p < 0.001). Univariable analysis demonstrated that brachytherapy was associated with lower PCSM risk (hazard ratio = 0.40; CI: 0.30-0.54; p < 0.001). High Gleason risk category, black race, higher Tumor (T) stage, and higher grade were all associated with greater mortality risk (p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, brachytherapy continued to be associated with a significantly lower mortality risk (hazard ratio = 0.65; CI: 0.47-0.89; p = 0.008). Subgroup analyses found that among those with Gleason score ?8, younger patients had increased risk of PCSM (p = 0.001).In men ?60 years of age with prostate cancer, radiation therapy continues to offer excellent outcomes. After adjusting for relevant variables, the use of brachytherapy was associated with reduced PCSM compared to treatment with EBRT alone.

SUBMITTER: Ashamalla H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5568111 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar - Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (≤60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis.

Ashamalla Hani H Guirguis Adel A McCool Kyle K McVorran Shauna S Mattes Malcolm M Metzger Daniel D Oromendia Clara C Ballman Karla V KV Mokhtar Bahaa B Tchelebi Mounzer M Katsoulakis Evangelia E Rafla Sameer S

Brachytherapy 20170127 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>The aim of the study was to compare prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in young men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated by either external beam radiation (EBRT) alone or brachytherapy with or without external beam radiation.<h4>Methods and materials</h4>Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database, 15,505 patients ≤60 years of age diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009 and treated with radiation therapy alone were identified ...[more]

PMID: 28139417

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To understand the threat posed by localized prostate cancer and the potential impact of surgery or radiation, patients and healthcare providers require information on long-term outcomes following conservative management. OBJECTIVE:To describe 15-yr survival outcomes and cancer therapy utilization among men 65 years and older managed conservatively for newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS:This is a population-based cohort study with participants living in predefined geographic areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The study includes 31 137 Medicare patients aged ?65 yr diagnosed with localized prostate cancer in 1992-2009 who initially received conservative management (no surgery, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, or androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]). All patients were followed until death or December 31, 2009 (for prostate cancer-specific mortality [PCSM]) and December 31, 2011 (for overall mortality). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Competing-risk analyses were used to examine PCSM, overall mortality, and utilization of cancer therapies. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:The 15-yr risk of PCSM for men aged 65-74 yr diagnosed with screening-detected prostate cancer was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7-8.0%) for T1c Gleason 5-7 and 22% (95% CI 16-35%) for Gleason 8-10 disease. After 15 yr of follow-up, 24% (95% CI 21-27%) of men aged 65-74 yr with screening-detected Gleason 5-7 cancer received ADT. The corresponding result for men with Gleason 8-10 cancer was 38% (95% CI 32-44%). The major study limitations are the lack of data for men aged <65 yr and detailed clinical information associated with secondary cancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS:The 15-yr outcomes following conservative management of newly diagnosed Gleason 5-7 prostate cancer among men aged ?65 yr are excellent. Men with Gleason 8-10 disease managed conservatively face a significant risk of PCSM. PATIENT SUMMARY:We examined the long-term survival outcomes for a large group of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who did not have surgery, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, or androgen deprivation therapy in the first 6 mo after cancer diagnosis. We found that the 15-yr disease-specific survival is excellent for men diagnosed with Gleason 5-7 disease. The data support conservative management as a reasonable choice for elderly patients with low-grade localized prostate cancer.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate clinicopathologic and treatment characteristics from a population-based cohort of penile cancer, with an emphasis in older adults, due to incomplete evidence to guide therapy in this age subgroup.Materials and methodsPatients with malignant penile tumors diagnosed 2004-2016 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER)-18 dataset. Demographic and treatment characteristics were obtained. Population was analyzed by age at diagnosis (<65 vs ≥65 years). We examined univariate associations between age groups with Chi-square analysis. To study survival, we calculated Kaplan-Meier survival curves, but due to the high number of competing events, we also performed a univariate competing risk analysis using the cumulative incidence function, and a multivariate analysis using the Fine-Gray method. We also described competing mortality due to penile cancer and other causes of death.ResultsWe included 3,784 patients. Median age was 68 years, 58.7% were aged ≥65. Older patients were less likely to have received chemotherapy (p<0.001), primary site surgery (p = 0.002), or therapeutic regional surgery (p <0.001). Median overall survival (OS) in patients <65 years was not reached (95% CI incalculable) vs 49 months in those ≥65 years (95% CI 45-53, p <0.0001). On univariate analysis, age was associated with a lower incidence of penile cancer death. On multivariate analysis, stage at diagnosis, and receipt of primary site surgery were associated with a higher incidence of penile cancer death. Estimated penile cancer-specific mortality was higher in patients <65 years in stages II-IV. Estimated mortality due to other causes was higher in older patients across all stages.ConclusionsOlder patients are less likely to receive surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy for penile cancer. Primary surgical resection was associated with better penile cancer-specific mortality on multivariate analysis. Competing mortality risks are highly relevant when considering OS in older adults with penile cancer. Factors associated with undertreatment of older patients with penile cancer need to be studied, in order to develop treatment strategies tailored for this population.

Project description:BackgroundActive surveillance (AS) is a management option for men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Opinions differ on whether it is safe to include young men (≤60 yr) or men with intermediate-risk disease.ObjectiveTo assess whether reasons for discontinuation, treatment choice after AS, and adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy (RP; N1, or ≥GG3, or ≥pT3) differ for men ≤60 yr or those with European Association of Urology (EAU) intermediate-risk disease from those for men >60 yr or those with EAU low-risk disease.Design setting and participantsWe analyzed data from 5411 men ≤60 yr and 14 959 men >60 yr, 14 064 men with low-risk cancer, and 2441 men with intermediate-risk cancer, originating from the GAP3 database (21 169 patients/27 cohorts worldwide).Outcome measurements and statistical analysisCumulative incidence curves were used to estimate the rates of AS discontinuation and treatment choice.Results and limitationsThe probability of discontinuation of AS due to disease progression at 5 yr was similar for men aged ≤60 yr (22%) and those >60 yr (25%), as well as those of any age with low-risk disease (24%) versus those with intermediate-risk disease (24%). Men with intermediate-risk disease are more prone to discontinue AS without evidence of progression than men with low-risk disease (at 1/5 yr: 5.9%/14.2% vs 2.0%/8.8%). Adverse pathology at RP was observed in 32% of men ≤60 yr compared with 36% of men >60 yr (p = 0.029), and in 34% with low-risk disease compared with 40% with intermediate-risk disease (p = 0.048).ConclusionsOur descriptive analysis of AS practices worldwide showed that the risk of progression during AS is similar across the age and risk groups studied. The proportion of adverse pathology was higher among men >60 yr than among men ≤60 yr. These results suggest that men ≤60 yr and those with EAU intermediate-risk disease should not be excluded from opting for AS as initial management.Patient summaryData from 27 international centers reflecting daily clinical practice suggest that younger men or men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer do not hold greater risk for disease progression during active surveillance.

Project description:ImportanceUnderstanding adverse effects of contemporary treatment approaches for men with favorable-risk and unfavorable-risk localized prostate cancer could inform treatment selection.ObjectiveTo compare functional outcomes associated with prostate cancer treatments over 5 years after treatment.Design, setting, and participantsProspective, population-based cohort study of 1386 men with favorable-risk (clinical stage cT1 to cT2bN0M0, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤20 ng/mL, and Grade Group 1-2) prostate cancer and 619 men with unfavorable-risk (clinical stage cT2cN0M0, PSA of 20-50 ng/mL, or Grade Group 3-5) prostate cancer diagnosed in 2011 through 2012, accrued from 5 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program sites and a US prostate cancer registry, with surveys through September 2017.ExposuresTreatment with active surveillance (n = 363), nerve-sparing prostatectomy (n = 675), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT; n = 261), or low-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 87) for men with favorable-risk disease and treatment with prostatectomy (n = 402) or EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (n = 217) for men with unfavorable-risk disease.Main outcomes and measuresPatient-reported function, based on the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (range, 0-100), 5 years after treatment. Regression models were adjusted for baseline function and patient and tumor characteristics. Minimum clinically important difference was 10 to 12 for sexual function, 6 to 9 for urinary incontinence, 5 to 7 for urinary irritative symptoms, and 4 to 6 for bowel and hormonal function.ResultsA total of 2005 men met inclusion criteria and completed the baseline and at least 1 postbaseline survey (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [59-70] years; 1529 of 1993 participants [77%] were non-Hispanic white). For men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, nerve-sparing prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary incontinence at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, -10.9 [95% CI, -14.2 to -7.6]) and sexual function at 3 years (adjusted mean difference, -15.2 [95% CI, -18.8 to -11.5]) compared with active surveillance. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy was associated with worse urinary irritative (adjusted mean difference, -7.0 [95% CI, -10.1 to -3.9]), sexual (adjusted mean difference, -10.1 [95% CI, -14.6 to -5.7]), and bowel (adjusted mean difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -7.6 to -2.4]) function at 1 year compared with active surveillance. EBRT was associated with urinary, sexual, and bowel function changes not clinically different from active surveillance at any time point through 5 years. For men with unfavorable-risk disease, EBRT with ADT was associated with lower hormonal function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference, -5.3 [95% CI, -8.2 to -2.4]) and bowel function at 1 year (adjusted mean difference, -4.1 [95% CI, -6.3 to -1.9]), but better sexual function at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.2-18.7]) and incontinence at each time point through 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 23.2 [95% CI, 17.7-28.7]), than prostatectomy.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort of men with localized prostate cancer, most functional differences associated with contemporary management options attenuated by 5 years. However, men undergoing prostatectomy reported clinically meaningful worse incontinence through 5 years compared with all other options, and men undergoing prostatectomy for unfavorable-risk disease reported worse sexual function at 5 years compared with men who underwent EBRT with ADT.

Project description:PurposeTo compare patient-reported disease-specific functional outcomes after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and EBRT combined with low-dose-rate brachytherapy prostate boost (EB-LDR) among men with localized prostate cancer.Methods and materialsThe prospective, population-based Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation study enrolled men with localized prostate cancer in 2011 to 2012. The 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measured patient-reported disease-specific function at baseline and at 6, 12, and 36 months. Higher domain scores indicate better function. Minimal clinically important difference was defined as 6 for urinary incontinence, 5 for urinary irritative function, 4 for bowel function, 12 for sexual function, and 4 for hormonal function. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were fit to estimate the effect of treatment on patient-reported outcomes.ResultsFive-hundred seventy-eight men received EBRT and 109 received EB-LDR. Median patient age was 69 years, and 70% had intermediate- or high-risk disease. Men in the EB-LDR group were younger (P < .001) and less likely to receive androgen deprivation therapy (P < .001). Baseline urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal function was similar between treatment groups (P > .05). On multivariable analyses, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse urinary irritative function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference [AMD] -14.4, P < .001), 12 months (AMD -12.9, P < .001), and 36 months (AMD -4.7, P = .034) than men receiving EBRT. At 12 months, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse bowel function (AMD -5.8, P = .002), but these differences were not seen at 36 months. There were no significant differences in sexual or hormone function between treatment groups.ConclusionsMen treated with EB-LDR report worse bowel function at 1 year and worse urinary irritative function through 3 years compared with men treated with EBRT alone. These side effect profiles should be discussed with patients when considering EB-LDR versus EBRT treatment.

Project description:Diabetic men have decreased risk for prostate cancer (PCa) overall and lower PSA compared to non-diabetics. This may affect the outcomes of PSA-based screening. We investigated the effect of PSA-based screening at 4-year intervals on PCa incidence and mortality separately among users and non-users of antidiabetic medication with the hypothesis that screening would detect less low-grade cancer and more high-grade cancer in diabetic men. A cohort of 80,458 men from the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC) were linked to national prescription database to obtain information on antidiabetic medication purchases. PCa risk and mortality were compared between the FinRSPC screening arm (SA) and the control arm (CA) separately among users and non-users of antidiabetic medication. Among antidiabetic medication users median PSA was lower than in non-users (0.93 and 1.09 ng/ml, respectively, P for difference = 0.001). Screening increased overall PCa incidence compared to CA after the first screen both among medication users and non-users (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08-1.60 and HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.44-1.66, respectively). On the second and third screen the difference between SA and CA attenuated only among medication users. Detection of Gleason 6 tumors was lower among medication users, whereas no difference was observed in detection of Gleason 8-10 cancers. Concordantly, screening affected PCa mortality similarly regardless of antidiabetic medication use (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.14-1.07 and HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.11-0.33 among users and non-users after three screens, respectively. P for difference = 0.18). Median PSA is lower in men using antidiabetic drugs than among non-users. Systematic PSA screening detects less low-risk tumors among medication users, whereas detection of high-risk tumors and mortality effects are similar regardless of medication use. This suggests that antidiabetic medication users may form a suitable target group for PCa screening, with less screening-related overdiagnosis of indolent tumors.

Dataset Information

Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (?60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis.

Publications

Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (≤60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets