Comparison of outcome endpoints in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer after combined-modality radiotherapy

Andreas Boehle*, Katharina Katic, Inke R. König, Irina Robrahn-Nitschke, Bernd Brandenburg

*Corresponding author for this work
3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare a standard radio-oncological and a surgical biochemical failure definition after combined-modality radiation therapy (CRT) in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Methods: 425 men were treated with external beam radiotherapy (59.4 Gy, 33 fractions) and 125J seed-brachytherapy (S-BT, 100 Gy). Biochemical recurrence (BR) was defined either as radio-oncologic (rBR), using a +2 ng/mL prostate-specific antigen (PSA) increase above a nadir value, or as surgical (sBR), using a 2-year posttreatment PSA of ≥0.2 ng/mL. Biochemical recurrence-free, metastasis-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival were calculated at 5 and 10 years using the Kaplan-Meier method. Standard validation tests were used to compare both thresholds. Results: After a median of 7 years, overall recurrence rates were 10.4% and 31.5% for rBR and sBR definitions, respectively. Both failure definitions proved sensitive for the prediction of metastases and cancer-specific death, whereas the rBR definition was significantly more specific. The accuracies of a correct prediction of metastases and death of prostate cancer were 73.1% vs. 96.2% and 72.2% vs. 92.9% for sBR vs. rBR, respectively. The inferior validity results of the sBR definition were attributable to a PSA-bounce phenomenon occurring in 56% of patients with sBR. Still, using the less suitable sBR definition, the results of CRT compared favorably to BRFS rates of surgical interventions. Conclusion: After CRT, the radio-oncological (aka Phoenix) failure definition is more reliable than a fixed surgical endpoint. Exclusively in high-risk patients, sBR offers a direct comparison across surgical and nonsurgical treatment options at 5 and 10 years.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBrachytherapy
Volume19
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)24-32
Number of pages9
ISSN1538-4721
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01.01.2020

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Ethical Statement: All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent was not required.

Research Areas and Centers

  • Research Area: Luebeck Integrated Oncology Network (LION)

DFG Research Classification Scheme

  • 2.22-01 Epidemiology, Medical Biometry/Statistics
  • 2.22-14 Hematology, Oncology
  • 2.22-23 Reproductive Medicine, Urology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of outcome endpoints in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer after combined-modality radiotherapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this