Impact of family history on oncological outcomes in primary therapy for localized prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The influence of family history on oncological outcomes of prostate cancer remains controversial. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to investigate the impact of family history of localized prostate cancer on oncological outcomes.Methods
On May 2020, we systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and Scopus for studies that compared patients who had localized prostate cancer with or without a positive family history of prostate cancer. Our aim was to evaluate the association of family history with biochemical recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival by means of a multivariate Cox regression analysis.Results
Eleven studies with 39,716 patients were included in the systematic review, and eight studies with 33,027 patients for the meta-analysis. A positive family history was not associated with worse biochemical recurrence-free survival (pooled HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.79-1.17) or cancer-specific survival (pooled HR: 1.1; 95% CI: 0.52-2.35). Subgroup analyses showed no association between positive family history and poor biochemical recurrence-free survival in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy (pooled HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.76-1.31) or radiation therapy (pooled HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.67-1.30).Conclusions
This meta-analysis indicated that family history of prostate cancer does not increase the risk of biochemical recurrence or cancer-specific mortality in localized prostate cancer patients.
SUBMITTER: Urabe F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8384618 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IMPORTANCE:One in 6 American men will be diagnosed as having prostate cancer during their lifetime. Although there are no data to support the use of primary androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for early-stage prostate cancer, primary ADT has been widely used for localized prostate cancer, especially among older patients. OBJECTIVE:To determine the long-term survival impact of primary ADT in older men with localized (T1/T2) prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This was a population-based cohort study of 66,717 Medicare patients 66 years or older diagnosed from 1992 through 2009 who received no definitive local therapy within 180 days of prostate cancer diagnosis. The study was conducted in predefined US geographical areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Instrumental variable analysis was used to assess the impact of primary ADT and control for potential biases associated with unmeasured confounding variables. The instrumental variable comprised combined health services areas with various usage rates of primary ADT. The analysis compared survival outcomes in the top tertile areas with those in the bottom tertile areas. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Prostate cancer-specific survival and overall survival. RESULTS:With a median follow-up of 110 months, primary ADT was not associated with improved 15-year overall or prostate cancer-specific survival following the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Among patients with moderately differentiated cancers, the 15-year overall survival was 20.0% in areas with high primary ADT use vs 20.8% in areas with low use (difference: 95% CI, -2.2% to 0.4%), and the 15-year prostate cancer survival was 90.6% in both high- and low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.1% to 1.2%). Among patients with poorly differentiated cancers, the 15-year cancer-specific survival was 78.6% in high-use areas vs 78.5%, in low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.8% to 2.4%), and the 15-year overall survival was 8.6% in high-use areas vs 9.2% in low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.5% to 0.4%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Primary ADT is not associated with improved long-term overall or disease-specific survival for men with localized prostate cancer. Primary ADT should be used only to palliate symptoms of disease or prevent imminent symptoms associated with disease progression.
| S-EPMC5499229 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: To compare the oncologic outcomes of cryoablation (CA) and radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and Methods: PCa patients who received CA or RP between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to compare the prostate cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). We conducted 1:3 propensity score matching and adjusted standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) to balance the clinicopathological characteristics. Results: Ninety-seven thousand seven hundred eighty-three patients were identified after preliminary screening. After matching, the CA and RP groups included 1,942 and 5,826 patients and had median follow-up periods of 85 and 72 months, respectively. CA had lower CSS and OS rates (hazard ratio [HR], 2.07; P = 0.007; HR, 2.09; P < 0.001, respectively) than did RP, which was consistent in the SMRW model (CSM: HR, 2.66; P < 0.001; OS: HR, 2.29; P < 0.001). The 10-years CSS and OS for CA vs. RP were 98.1 vs. 99.2% and 61.3 vs. 79.9%, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with low- to intermediate-risk localized PCa, CA had lower CSS rates than did RP. However, the high 10-years CSS rates indicated that CA could be an option for those who are not RP candidates. Further high-quality trials are needed to confirm and expand our findings.
| S-EPMC7479211 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic study aimed to assess and compare the comprehensive evidence regarding the impact of neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) on surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) before radical prostatectomy (RP).MethodsLiterature searches were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Using PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases, we identified relevant studies published before July 2020. The pooled effect sizes were calculated in terms of the odds ratios (ORs)/standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the fixed or random-effects model.ResultsWe identified 22 clinical trials (6 randomized and 16 cohort) including 20,199 patients with PCa. Our meta-analysis showed no significant differences in body mass index (SMD = 0.10, 95% CI: -0.08-0.29, p = 0.274) and biopsy Gleason score (GS) (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.76-2.35 p = 0.321) between the two groups. However, the NHT group had a higher mean age (SMD = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.07-0.31, p = 0.001), preoperative prostate-specific antigen (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.19-0.75, p = 0.001), and clinic tumor stage (OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.53-3.29, p < 0.001). Compared to the RP group, the NHT group had lower positive surgical margins (PSMs) rate (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.29-0.67, p < 0.001) and biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.26-0.83, p = 0.009). Between both groups, there were no significant differences in estimated blood loss (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI: -0.24-0.13, p = 0.556), operation time (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI: -0.12-0.51, p = 0.219), pathological tumor stage (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.54-1.06, p = 0.104), specimen GS (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.49-1.68, p = 0.756), and lymph node involvement (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.40-1.45, p = 0.404).ConclusionsNHT prior to RP appeared to reduce the tumor stage, PSMs rate, and risk of BCR in patients with PCa. According to our data, NHT may be more suitable for older patients with higher tumor stage. Besides, NHT may not increase the surgical difficulty of RP.
| S-EPMC7897693 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The impact of statin use on localized prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial, especially for patients treated with radiation therapy. We assessed the impact of statin use on biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients treated for PCa with different modalities of radiation therapy. We evaluated 3555 patients undergoing radiation therapy between January 2001 and January 2022. The impact of statin use on BCR was analyzed for three treatment groups: external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), low-dose-rate seed brachytherapy (LDR), and EBRT plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy (EBRT + HDR). Median follow-up was 52 months among 1208 patients treated with EBRT, 1679 patients treated with LDR, and 599 patients treated with EBRT + HDR. A total of 1544 (43%) patients were taking a statin at the time of treatment, and 497 (14%) patients were in the D'Amico high-risk group. Only intermediate-risk patients treated with LDR fared better with statin use in univariate analysis (p = 0.025). This association was not significant in multivariate analysis (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.18-1.10, p = 0.06). Statin use was not associated with a reduced risk of BCR in patients treated with radiation therapy. In the era of precision medicine, further investigation is needed to assess the benefit of statins in well-defined patients.
| S-EPMC9331711 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several retrospective and a few prospective studies have shown that metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) could delay clinical progression and postpone the initiation of systemic treatment in oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, these endpoints are strongly influenced by variables such as concomitant use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and follow-up imaging protocols. The aim of this manuscript was to assess palliative ADT- and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)-free survival as long-term oncological outcomes in oligorecurrent PCa treated by MDT. We retrospectively identified consecutive post-prostatectomy oligorecurrent PCa patients treated by MDT (salvage lymphadenectomy, radiotherapy, or metastasectomy) at our tertiary referral center. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they developed recurrence following radical prostatectomy, had ?5 metastatic lesions on imaging and had a serum testosterone >50 ng/dL or a testosterone suppression therapy-free interval of >2 years prior to the first MDT as an assumption of recovered serum testosterone (if no testosterone measurement available). Patients with castration-resistant or synchronous oligometastatic PCa at the time of first MDT were excluded. Repeated MDTs were allowed, as well as a period of concomitant ADT. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess palliative ADT-free and mCRPC-free survival. We identified 191 eligible patients who underwent MDT. Median follow-up from first MDT until last follow-up or death was 45 months (IQR 27-70; mean 51 months). Estimated median palliative-ADT free survival was 66 months (95% CI 58-164) and estimated median mCRPC-free survival was not reached (mean 117 months, 95% CI 103-132). In total, 314 MDTs were performed and 25 patients (13%) received ?3 MDTs. This study demonstrated that (repeated) MDT is feasible and holds promise in terms of palliative ADT-free and mCRPC-free survival for patients with oligorecurrent PCa. However, these findings should be confirmed in prospective randomized controlled trials.
| S-EPMC7464259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextDespite a lack of data, increasing numbers of patients are receiving primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) as an alternative to surgery, radiation, or conservative management for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between PADT and survival in elderly men with localized prostate cancer.Design, setting, and patientsA population-based cohort study of 19,271 men aged 66 years or older receiving Medicare who did not receive definitive local therapy for clinical stage T1-T2 prostate cancer. These patients were diagnosed in 1992-2002 within predefined US geographical areas, with follow-up through December 31, 2006, for all-cause mortality and through December 31, 2004, for prostate cancer-specific mortality. Instrumental variable analysis was used to address potential biases associated with unmeasured confounding variables.Main outcome measuresProstate cancer-specific survival and overall survival.ResultsAmong patients with localized prostate cancer (median age, 77 years), 7867 (41%) received PADT, and 11,404 were treated with conservative management, not including PADT. During the follow-up period, there were 1560 prostate cancer deaths and 11,045 deaths from all causes. Primary androgen deprivation therapy was associated with lower 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival (80.1% vs 82.6%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.33) and no increase in 10-year overall survival (30.2% vs 30.3%; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05) compared with conservative management. However, in a prespecified subset analysis, PADT use in men with poorly differentiated cancer was associated with improved prostate cancer-specific survival (59.8% vs 54.3%; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70-1.00; P = .049) but not overall survival (17.3% vs 15.3%; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.84-1.01).ConclusionPrimary androgen deprivation therapy is not associated with improved survival among the majority of elderly men with localized prostate cancer when compared with conservative management.
| S-EPMC2645653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:To investigate how pretreatment testosterone levels correlate with progression-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival in a propensity-adjusted localized prostate cancer population. Methods:Men diagnosed with clinical NCCN-risk stratified very-low, low, intermediate, high, and/or very-high risk prostate cancer who had a baseline total serum testosterone level?100?ng/dl measured within the 100?days preceding the first definitive therapy were identified from our prospectively gathered institutional database. Cohorts below (100-239?ng/dl), within (240-593?ng/dl), or above (594?+?ng/dl) one standard deviation from the mean testosterone level (416?ng/dl) were used for comparison. Progression-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival were evaluated. A separate cohort of men not receiving ADT was used to evaluate testosterone recovery after various treatment modalities (surgery, external beam radiation, brachytherapy, or combined EBRT?+?Brachy). Results:There was no statistically significant difference between the low, average, and high testosterone cohorts for PFS, MFS, or OS. In men not using ADT, there were no statistically significant changes in testosterone levels 1 year after therapy, regardless of therapy type. Conclusion:In men with serum testosterone levels >=100?ng/dl at diagnosis, baseline testosterone does not impact PFS, MFS, or OS. Recovery of testosterone back to baseline is expected for men undergoing either surgery, external beam or brachytherapy, or combined modality radiation when not using ADT.
| S-EPMC7201500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile multiple randomized trials have evaluated the benefit of radiation therapy (RT) dose escalation and the use and prolongation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the treatment of prostate cancer, few studies have evaluated the relative benefit of either form of treatment intensification with each other. Many trials have included treatment strategies that incorporate either high or low dose RT, or short-term or long-term ADT (STADT or LTADT), in one or more trial arms. We sought to compare different forms of treatment intensification of RT in the context of localized prostate cancer.MethodsUsing preferred reporting items for systemic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we collected over 40 phases III clinical trials comparing different forms of RT for localized prostate cancer. We performed a meta-regression of 40 individual trials with 21,429 total patients to allow a comparison of the rates and cumulative proportions of 5-year overall survival (OS), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and distant metastasis (DM) for each treatment arm of every trial.ResultsDose-escalation either in the absence or presence of STADT failed to significantly improve any 5-year outcome. In contrast, adding LTADT to low dose RT significantly improved 5-year PCSM (Odds ratio [OR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-0.54, p < 0.001) and DM (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.63. p < 0.001) over low dose RT alone. Adding STADT also significantly improved 5-year PCSM over low dose RT alone (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.75, p < 0.001).ConclusionWhile limited by between-study heterogeneity and a lack of individual patient data, this meta-analysis suggests that adding ADT, versus increasing RT dose alone, offers a more consistent improvement in clinical endpoints.
| S-EPMC9018418 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeAndrogen deprivation therapy may increase diabetes risk. As the benefits of primary androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer are controversial, and most prostate cancer survivors are of advanced age with comorbidities, it is important to determine if primary androgen deprivation therapy increases the risk of diabetes and to determine the susceptibility factors.Materials and methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 12,191 men diagnosed with incident localized prostate cancer during 1995 to 2008, age 35 to 100 years, and without diabetes or receipt of prostatectomy or radiation 1 year after diagnosis. Patients were enrolled in 1 of 3 managed health plans and followed through 2010. Primary androgen deprivation therapy was defined as androgen deprivation therapy within 1 year after diagnosis. Incident diabetes was ascertained using inpatient and outpatient diagnosis codes, diabetes medications and hemoglobin A1c values. We estimated primary androgen deprivation therapy associated diabetes risk using Cox proportional hazard models in conventional and propensity score analyses.ResultsDiabetes developed in 1,203 (9.9%) patients during followup (median 4.8 years) with incidence rates of 2.5 and 1.6 events per 100 person-years in the primary androgen deprivation therapy and nonprimary androgen deprivation therapy groups, respectively. Primary androgen deprivation therapy was associated with a 1.61-fold increased diabetes risk (95% CI 1.38-1.88). The number needed to harm was 29. The association was stronger in men age 70 or younger than in older men (HR 2.25 vs 1.40, p value for interaction=0.008).ConclusionsPrimary androgen deprivation therapy may increase diabetes risk by 60% and should be used with caution when managing localized prostate cancer. Because of the consistent association between androgen deprivation therapy and greater diabetes risk across disease states, we recommend routine screening and lifestyle interventions to reduce the risk of diabetes in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy.
| S-EPMC4543371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCancer outcomes are complex, involving prevention, early detection and optimal multidisciplinary care. Postoperative infection and surgical site-infection (SSI) are not only uncomfortable for patients and costly, but may also be associated with poor oncological outcomes. A meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the oncological effects of SSI in patients with colorectal cancer.MethodsAn ethically approved PROSPERO-registered meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 2007 and 2017 reporting the effects of postoperative infective complications on oncological survival in colorectal cancer. Results were separated into those for SSI and those concerning anastomotic leakage. Articles with a Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score of at least 18 were included. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals were computed for risk factors using an observed to expected and variance fixed-effect model.ResultsOf 5027 articles were reviewed, 43 met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 154 981 patients. Infective complications had significant negative effects on overall survival (HR 1·37, 95 per cent c.i. 1·28 to 1·46) and cancer-specific survival (HR 2·58, 2·15 to 3·10). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 7·4 per cent and had a significant negative impact on disease-free survival (HR 1·14, 1·09 to 1·20), overall survival (HR 1·34, 1·28 to 1·39), cancer-specific survival (HR 1·43, 1·31 to 1·55), local recurrence (HR 1·18, 1·06 to 1·32) and overall recurrence (HR 1·46, 1·27 to 1·68).ConclusionThis meta-analysis identified a significant negative impact of postoperative infective complications on overall and cancer-specific survival in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.
| S-EPMC7528523 | biostudies-literature