Dataset Information

Prognostic Value of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Population Based Retrospective Study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Our study aims to examine the impact of definitive local therapy in prostate cancer patients with different metastatic sites.

Methods

Totally, 5,849 patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate carcinoma from 2010 to 2014 were selected from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). Log-rank analyses, multivariable regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess prognostic impact of local treatment in patients with different metastatic sites. Survival curves and forest plots were also plotted to describe the prognostic value of definitive local therapy.

Results

In our study, 159 patients received radical prostatectomy, and 62 received brachytherapy, while 5,628 did not receive local definitive local therapy. Survival analysis revealed that patients who received definitive local therapy had a better 5-year overall survival (OS) (P = 0.011) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (P = 0.012). Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that type of treatment was an independent prognostic indicator for OS (P = 0.011) and CSS (P = 0.012), along with age at diagnosis, chemotherapy, PSA level, and Gleason score. According to subgroup analysis, patients with bone metastasis or distant lymph node (LN) metastasis were significantly more likely to benefit from definitive local therapy. In addition, forest plots demonstrated that RP group had significant favorable OS and CSS in subgroups of younger age at diagnosis, T2-3 stage, N0-1 stage, Gleason score =7 or ?8, bone metastasis, and distant LN metastasis.

Conclusions

Our study suggested that local therapy improved survival in prostate cancer patients with bone or distant LN metastasis. Furthermore, patients who were at T2-3 stage or Gleason score ?7 also significantly benefit from definitive local therapy.

SUBMITTER: Jin S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7753115 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prognostic Value of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Population Based Retrospective Study.

Jin Shengming S Wei Jiaming J Wang Junjie J Wang Beihe B Wu Junlong J Gan Hualei H Dai Bo B Qin Xiaojian X Lin Guowen G Wei Yu Y Yang Chen C Shen Yijun Y Zhu Yiping Y Zhu Yao Y Ye Dingwei D

Frontiers in oncology 20201208

<h4>Purpose</h4>Our study aims to examine the impact of definitive local therapy in prostate cancer patients with different metastatic sites.<h4>Methods</h4>Totally, 5,849 patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate carcinoma from 2010 to 2014 were selected from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). Log-rank analyses, multivariable regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to assess prognostic impact of local treatment in patients with different metastatic sites. Surv ...[more]

PMID: 33364186

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe prognostic value of androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) for the treatment response of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to synthesize relevant studies that assessed the prognostic value of AR-V7 status for the treatment response of mCRPC patients treated with androgen receptor signalling inhibitors (ARSis) and chemotherapy.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases by using the keywords AR-V7 and prostate cancer to identify relevant studies published before 25 September 2019. The main outcomes were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale.ResultsA total of 1,545 patients from 21 studies were included. For the mCRPC patients treated with ARSis, AR-V7-positive patients had a lower PSA response rate (OR 6.01, 95% CI 2.88-12.51; P < 0.001), shorter PFS (HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.80-3.64; P < 0.001) and shorter OS (HR 4.28, 95% CI 2.92-6.27; P < 0.001) than AR-V7-negative patients. Although AR-V7-positive patients treated with chemotherapy also had a lower PSA response rate (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.38-3.62; P = 0.001) and shorter OS than AR-V7-negative patients (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02-2.53; P = 0.043), there was no significant difference in PFS (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.74-1.49; P = 0.796) between these groups. Furthermore, AR-V7-positive patients receiving ARSis had a shorter median OS than those receiving chemotherapy (HR 3.50, 95% CI 1.98-6.20; P < 0.001); There was no significant difference among AR-V7-negative patients (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.64-2.62; P = 0.47).ConclusionsAR-V7 is a potential biomarker of treatment resistance in mCRPC patients. AR-V7-positive mCRPC patients had poorer treatment outcomes than AR-V7-nagetive patients when treated with ARSis. AR-V7-positive patients have better outcomes when treated with taxane than ARSis. Furthermore, the ability of AR-V7 status to predict treatment outcomes varies from different detection methods. The detection of AR-V7 before treatment is important for the selection of treatment modalities for mCRPC patients.

Project description:BackgroundThe lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) was first reported to predict the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and there are no studies investigating the predictive value of LIPI for patients with PCa. This study explores the prognostic value of the LIPI in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).MethodsData from 502 patients with mHSPC primarily treated with maximal androgen blockade (MAB; 89% of patients received MAB) and 158 patients with mCRPC who received abiraterone were retrospectively analyzed. All cases were classified into LIPI-good, LIPI-intermediate, and LIPI-poor groups based on their LIPI score as calculated with the derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and lactate dehydrogenase level. The potential for LIPI to be used in predicting mCRPC-free survival (CFS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, PSA-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), and overall survival (OS) was analyzed. A propensity score matching (PSM) methodology was performed to balance the baseline factors of the different groups.ResultsIn the mHSPC cohort, patients of the LIPI-good (mCFS: 25.7 months; mOS: 93.3 months), LIPI-intermediate (mCFS: 14.8 months; mOS: 51.9 months), and LIPI-poor group (mCFS: 6.8 months; mOS: 18.5 months) had sequentially worse clinical outcomes (P<0.001 for all pairwise comparisons). The results remained consistent after PSM. Multivariate Cox regression further confirmed that LIPI was an independent predictor of survival outcomes. Subgroup analysis verified that LIPI was associated with an unfavorable prognosis in all subgroups except for cases with visceral metastases or those receiving abiraterone or docetaxel. As for patients with mCRPC receiving abiraterone, LIPI was also an indicator of poor prognosis. Specifically, cases in the LIPI-good, LIPI-intermediate, and LIPI-poor groups had a ladder-shaped worse PSA response [71.4% (50/70) vs. 56.5% (39/69) vs. 36.8% (7/19); P=0.015], PSA-PFS (14.9 vs. 9.3 vs. 3.1 months; P<0.001), and OS (14.6 vs. 32.3 vs. 53.4 months; P<0.001). The results were robust even after PSM. Multivariate Cox regression confirmed that LIPI was an independent prognosticator of PSA-PFS and OS in patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that the baseline LIPI was a significant prognostic biomarker for patients with both mHSPC and mCRPC and could potentially facilitate risk classification and clinical decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundGermline DNA damage repair gene mutations (gDDRm) have been found in approximately 12% of patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). Previous studies of the clinical impact of gDDRm have mainly been in the setting of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study aimed to determine the prognostic value of gDDRm in de novo metastatic and castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC).Materials and methodsWe retrospectively collected the records of 139 consecutive men with de novo mCSPC who initially received systemic therapies following guidelines. This included 128 patients who underwent genetic testing at our center and 11 patients referred to our center after being identified as gDDRm carriers. Time to mCRPC was collected. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analysis were used to analyze the association between gDDRm and clinical outcomes. Survival outcomes were adjusted using multivariable Cox regression models.ResultsOf the 139 patients with de novo mCSPC, 28 gDDRm carriers were identified. Median time progressing to mCRPC was significantly shorter in patients carrying gDDRm than in those without mutations (8.3 vs 13.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 2.37; p < .001). Moreover, median progression time was almost halved in BRCA2 carriers (6.3 vs. 13.2 months; HR, 3.73; p < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the presence of gDDRm indicated poor therapy response regardless of disease volume and prostate-specific antigen nadir within the first 7 months. Presence of gDDRm remained independently associated with increased risk of progression to mCRPC in multivariate analysis (adjusted HR, 1.98; p = .006).ConclusionOur study suggested that positive gDDRm status predicted rapid progression to castration resistance in patients with de novo mCSPC. We propose identifying gDDRm status at the time of diagnosis for mCSPC patients, considering it is the first step of tailoring individualized treatment. In addition, DNA repair genes were a good therapeutic target for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, and our results call for more frontline targeted therapy trials in gDDRm carriers to prolong the progression time.Implications for practiceResults of this study suggested that positive germline DNA damage repair gene mutation (gDDRm) status predicted earlier progression to castration resistance in patients with de novo metastatic and castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). These findings indicated the importance of intense therapy for some subgroups of mCSPC, especially for mCSPC harboring gDDRm with low-volume disease. Moreover, gDDRm was a good therapeutic target for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, and these findings call for more molecular marker driven trials moving to the mTNPC setting.

Project description:BackgroundRadiotherapy to the prostate (RTp) prolongs survival for patients with low-volume, newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer (ndmPC).Objectiveto evaluate whether cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (cRP) is equally beneficial as RTp in low-volume ndmPC.Design setting and participantsA multicenter prospective registry was established in 2014 to observe patients with ndmPC. Eligible patients were offered cRP or RTp. For this study we selected only patients with low-volume ndmPC (n = 109). Of these, 48, 26, and 35 patients underwent cRP, RTp, and no local therapy (NLT), respectively. Median follow-up was 32 mo (interquartile range 16-49).InterventioncRP was compared with RTp and NLT.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisOverall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and local event-free survival (LEFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors prognostic for OS were identified using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis.Results and limitationsThe 2-yr OS was 93%, 100%, and 69%, and 2-yr CSS was 93%, 100%, and 75% for cRP, RTp, and NLT, respectively. The cRP and RTp groups had better OS compared to NLT and there was no significant difference between cRP and RTp. The 2-yr LEFS was 92%, 77%, and 60% for cRP, RTp, and NLT, respectively. The cRP group had better LEFS compared to RTp and NLT, and there was no significant difference between RTp and NLT. Advanced tumor stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, and NLT were negative prognostic factors for OS. The main limitation is selection of fitter patients with less advanced tumors for cRP and the small sample size.ConclusionsFor selected patients with low-volume ndmPC, cRP is able to achieve similar OS and CSS to RTp. cRP is effective in preventing local events due to disease progression.Patient summaryPatients with a low volume of newly diagnosed prostate cancer that has spread beyond the prostate gland might benefit from removal of the prostate, which we found was as effective as radiotherapy to the prostate in prolonging survival. Removal of the prostate is effective in preventing urinary problems caused by cancer progression.

Project description:BackgroundFor metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa), radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiation therapy (RT) may improve overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Compared with RT, RP shows significant advantages in improving patient outcomes. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) even slightly elevates CSM with no statistical difference in OS compared with no local treatment (NLT).ObjectiveTo evaluate OS and CSS after local treatment (LT) (including RP and RT) versus NLT in mPCa. Design, setting, and participants Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2018), 20098 patients with metastatic prostate cancer were selected in this study, of which 19433 patients had no local treatment, 377 patients with radical prostate treatment, and 288 patients with RT.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisMultivariable competing risks regression analysis after propensity score matching (PSM) was used to calculate CSM. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate OS.Results and limitationsA total of 20098 patients were included: NLT (n = 19433), RP (n=377) and RT (n=288). In a competing risk regression analysis after PSM (ratio 1:1), RP resulted in a significantly lower CSM (hazard ratio [HR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.45) than NLT, while RT showed a slightly lower CSM (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95). In a competing risk regression analysis after PSM (ratio 1:1), RP led to a lower CSM (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.76) versus RT. As for all-cause mortality (ACM), RP (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.31-0.45) and RT (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.56-0.79). also showed a downward trend. In terms of OS, RP and RT significantly improved the survival probability compared with NLT, with the effect of RP being more pronounced. Obviously, older age, Gleason scores ≥8, AJCC T3-T4 stage, AJCC N1, AJCC M1b-M1c were all associated with higher CSM (P <0.05). The same results held true for ACM. The limitation of this article is that it is not possible to assess the effect of differences in systemic therapy on CSM in mPCa patients and clinical trials are needed to verify the results.ConclusionsFor patients with mPCa, both RP and RT are beneficial to patients, and the efficacy of RP is better than RT from the perspective of CSM and ACM. Older age, higher gleason scores and the more advanced AJCC TNM stage all put patients at higher risk of dying.Patient summaryA large population-based cancer database showed that in addition to first-line therapy (hormonal treatment), RP and radiotherapy can also benefit patients with mPCa.

Dataset Information

Prognostic Value of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Population Based Retrospective Study.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Prognostic Value of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients With Different Metastatic Sites: A Population Based Retrospective Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets