Dataset Information

Brachytherapy Combined With or Without Hormone Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of brachytherapy combined with or without hormone therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: We systemically searched the Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase databases for studies published between the databases' dates of inception and February 2019. The primary endpoints were the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) rates and 10-year bPFS rates. The results were expressed as the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Based on the heterogeneity evaluated with the I 2 statistic, a meta-analysis was performed using either a random- or fixed-effects model. Results: A total of 16 cohort studies including 9,359 patients met all the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. Our data showed that brachytherapy (BT) combined with hormone therapy (HT) increased the patients' 5-year bPFS rates (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, P = 0.005) and 10-year bPFS rates (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.23, P = 0.001) compared with BT monotherapy. However, BT combined with HT did not increase the patients' 5-year OS rates (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.99-1.095, P = 0.1) compared with BT monotherapy. Conclusions: BT combined with HT can increase the bPFS rates of patients with localized prostate cancer, but it does not improve patients' OS rates.

SUBMITTER: Zhou X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7042206 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Brachytherapy Combined With or Without Hormone Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Zhou Xueliang X Jiao Dechao D Dou Mengmeng M Chen Jianjian J Han Bin B Li Zhaonan Z Li Yahua Y Liu Juanfang J Han Xinwei X

Frontiers in oncology 20200219

<b>Purpose:</b> The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of brachytherapy combined with or without hormone therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. <b>Methods and Materials:</b> We systemically searched the Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase databases for studies published between the databases' dates of inception and February 2019. The primary endpoints were the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) rat ...[more]

PMID: 32140449

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeIn radiation therapy (RT), brachytherapy-inert source spacers are commonly used in clinical practice to achieve high spatial accuracy. These implanted devices are critical technical components of precise radiation delivery but provide no direct therapeutic benefits.Methods and materialsHere we have fabricated implantable nanoplatforms or chemoradiation therapy (INCeRT) spacers loaded with silica nanoparticles (SNPs) conjugated containing a drug, to act as a slow-release drug depot for simultaneous localized chemoradiation therapy. The spacers are made of poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA) as matrix and are physically identical in size to the commercially available brachytherapy spacers (5 mm × 0.8 mm). The silica nanoparticles, 250 nm in diameter, were conjugated with near infrared fluorophore Cy7.5 as a model drug, and the INCeRT spacers were characterized in terms of size, morphology, and composition using different instrumentation techniques. The spacers were further doped with an anticancer drug, docetaxel. We evaluated the in vivo stability, biocompatibility, and biodegradation of these spacers in live mouse tissues.ResultsThe electron microscopy studies showed that nanoparticles were distributed throughout the spacers. These INCeRT spacers remained stable and can be tracked by the use of optical fluorescence. In vivo optical imaging studies showed a slow diffusion of nanoparticles from the spacer to the adjacent tissue in contrast to the control Cy7.5-PLGA spacer, which showed rapid disintegration in a few days with a burst release of Cy7.5. The docetaxel spacers showed suppression of tumor growth in contrast to control mice over 16 days.ConclusionsThe imaging with the Cy7.5 spacer and therapeutic efficacy with docetaxel spacers supports the hypothesis that INCeRT spacers can be used for delivering the drugs in a slow, sustained manner in conjunction with brachytherapy, in contrast to the rapid clearance of the drugs when administered systemically. The results demonstrate that these spacers with tailored release profiles have potential in improving the combined therapeutic efficacy of chemoradiation therapy.

Project description:Background: Recent randomized clinical trials have examined the efficacy of different combinations of systemic and local treatment approaches for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We compared the efficacy of these combined regimens in order to identify the optimal therapy for specific patient subgroups. Methods: The treatments were abiraterone (ABI), apalutamide (APA), docetaxel (DOC), enzalutamide (ENZ), and radiotherapy (RT) combined with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Five electronic databases were searched up to May 7, 2020 for relevant trials. The risk of bias in the included trials was evaluated with the Cochrane tool. The hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was determined for the included trials and indirect comparisons were performed using the R software. Results: In total, 10 randomized, controlled trials with 11,194 patients were included in the meta-analysis. ADT + RT was superior to ADT monotherapy in terms of overall survival (HR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.85-1.1) and conferred a survival benefit in a subgroup of low-volume patients (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54-0.87). Combined systemic treatments were significantly superior to ADT monotherapy in comparisons of survival and prostate-specific antigen response, including in the high-volume subgroup; meanwhile, in the low-volume subgroup only ADT + ENZ (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.69) showed a significant clinical benefit. In the Gleason score <8 subgroup, all combined systemic treatments were superior to ADT monotherapy, but the results were only significant for ADT + APA (HR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33-0.95) and ADT + DOC (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.92). In the Gleason score ≥8 subgroup, ADT monotherapy was inferior (albeit not significantly) to combined treatments. In a ranking of performed comparisons, ADT + ENZ was the optimal regimen, although this was non-significant. Combined therapies also demonstrated superiority in quality-of-life indicators such as time to skeletal events and pain progression. Conclusion: ADT + radiotherapy led to superior outcomes in mHSPC patients with low-volume disease. While all combined systemic regimens confer a survival advantage over ADT monotherapy, the optimal treatment approach for certain mHSPC patient subgroups remains to be determined.

Project description:Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been suggested to confer several clinical benefits in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing transperineal prostate brachytherapy (TPPB). Unlike gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor agonists, a GnRH antagonist such as degarelix can achieve castrate levels of testosterone without testosterone flare. However, normalization of serum testosterone levels following completion of neoadjuvant ADT in either form of treatment has never been compared in clinical trials.This is a single-center, open-label, randomized controlled study that will compare the efficacy and safety of degarelix with those of existing GnRH agonists combined with (125)I-TPPB. A total of 56 patients with low/intermediate-risk clinically localized PCa will be enrolled and randomized to one of two treatment groups: the GnRH agonist group and the degarelix group. Patients in the GnRH agonist group will receive leuprorelin acetate or goserelin acetate, and those in the degarelix group will receive the initial dose of 240 mg as 2 subcutaneous injections of 120 mg each, and then 80 mg of maintenance doses every 4 weeks for 12 weeks. Those randomly assigned to the 12-week intervention period will subsequently undergo 48-weeks of follow-up after (125)I-TPPB. The primary endpoint is defined as normalization of serum testosterone levels (>50 ng/dL) following completion of neoadjuvant ADT. All patients will be assessed every 4 weeks for the first 24 weeks, then every 12 weeks for the next 36 weeks after administrations of these drugs. Secondary endpoints are the proportion of normalized serum luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), the percent reduction in prostate specific antigen (PSA) compared with pretreatment levels, the percent reduction in total prostate volume (TPV) during neoadjuvant ADT, the percent increase in TPV after (125)I-TPPB, the percent reduction in hemoglobin, serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP), changes in free testosterone and bone mineral content measurement, the proportion of patients who have serum testosterone levels over 50 ng/dL at 12 weeks following completion of neoadjuvant ADT, and the improvement of quality of life (QOL).The present study will provide additional insight regarding the benefit and potency of degarelix and will examine its potential as a new option for administration in neoadjuvant ADT.Identification number: UMIN000015519 . Registration date: October 24, 2014.

Project description:PurposeProstate brachytherapy (PB) has well-documented excellent long-term outcomes in all risk groups. There are significant uncertainties regarding the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with brachytherapy. The purpose of this report was to review systemically the published literature and summarize present knowledge regarding the impact of ADT on biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).Methods and materialsA literature search was conducted in Medline and Embase covering the years 1996-2016. Selected were articles with >100 patients, minimum followup 3 years, defined risk stratification, and directly examining the role and impact of ADT on bPFS, CSS, and OS. The studies were grouped to reflect disease risk stratification. We also reviewed the impact of ADT on OS, cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and on-going brachytherapy randomized controlled trials (RCTs).ResultsFifty-two selected studies (43,303 patients) were included in this review; 7 high-dose rate and 45 low-dose rate; 25 studies were multi-institutional and 27 single institution (retrospective review or prospective data collection) and 2 were RCTs. The studies were heterogeneous in patient population, risk categories, risk factors, followup time, and treatment administered, including ADT administration and duration (median, 3-12 months);71% of the studies reported a lack of benefit, whereas 28% showed improvement in bPFS with addition of ADT to PB. The lack of benefit was seen in low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk (IR) disease and most high-dose rate studies. A bPFS benefit of up to 15% was seen with ADT use in patients with suboptimal dosimetry, those with multiple adverse risk factors (unfavorable IR [uIR]), and most high-risk (HR) studies. Four studies reported very small benefit to CSS (2%). None of the studies showed OS advantage; however, three studies reported an absolute 5-20% OS detriment with ADT. Literature suggests that OS detriment is more likely in older patients or those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Four RCTs with an adequate number of patients and well-defined risk stratification are in progress. One RCT will answer the question regarding the role of ADT with PB in favorable IR patients and the other three RCTs will focus on optimal duration of ADT in the uIR and favorable HR population.ConclusionsPatients treated with brachytherapy have excellent long-term disease outcomes. Existing evidence shows no benefit of adding ADT to PB in low-risk and favorable IR patients. UIR and HR patients and those with suboptimal dosimetry may have up to 15% improvement in bPFS with addition of 3-12 months of ADT, with uncertain impact on CSS and a potential detriment on OS. To minimize morbidity, one should exercise caution in prescribing ADT together with PB, in particular to older men and those with existing cardiovascular disease. Due to the retrospective nature of this evidence, significant selection, and treatment bias, no definitive conclusions are possible. RCT is urgently needed to define the potential role and optimal duration of ADT in uIR and favorable HR disease.

Project description:Purpose: To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of currently available docetaxel-based systemic triplet therapies for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Methods: We searched for eligible publications in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Improvements in overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free time (rPFS) were compared indirectly using network meta-analysis and evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Other secondary endpoints, such as time to castration-resistant prostate cancer and/or adverse events (AEs), were also compared and evaluated. Results: Five trials were selected and analyzed using a network meta-analysis. Compared to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel, darolutamide (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.68, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.57–0.80) and abiraterone (HR: 0.75, 95% CrI: 0.59–0.95) triplet therapy had significantly longer OS, and darolutamide triplet therapy was the first treatment ranked. Abiraterone (HR: 0.49, 95% CrI: 0.39–0.61) and enzalutamide (HR: 0.52, 95% CrI: 0.30–0.89) had significantly better rPFS than ADT plus docetaxel; however, all three therapies, including abiraterone, apalutamide, and enzalutamide, were the best options with a similar SUCRA. At most secondary endpoints, systemic triplet therapy was superior to ADT plus docetaxel. The risk of any AEs in darolutamide or abiraterone triplet therapy was comparable with ADT plus docetaxel (odds ratio [OR]: 2.53, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.68–12.63; OR: 1.07, 95% CrI: 0.03–36.25). Abiraterone triplet therapy had an increased risk of grade≥3 AEs (OR: 1.56, 95% CrI: 1.15–2.11). Conclusion: Systemic triplet therapy was more effective than ADT plus docetaxel for mHSPC. Of the triplet therapy regimens, darolutamide ranked first in terms of improved OS. Abiraterone and enzalutamide triplet ranked first in terms of rFPS, however, it did not confer a statistically difference among all triplet regimens. The overall risk of AEs was comparable. More studies are required for current and potential combinations of systemic triplet therapy.

Dataset Information

Brachytherapy Combined With or Without Hormone Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Publications

Brachytherapy Combined With or Without Hormone Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets