Short-term-androgen-deprivation therapy reduces disease recurrence in intermediate-risk-prostate-cancer patients receiving high-dose radiotherapy?

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. S334
Author(s):  
M. Cabeza Rodriguez ◽  
J. Olivera ◽  
P. Samper Ots ◽  
A. Cascales Garcia ◽  
C. Diaz ◽  
...  
2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 176-176
Author(s):  
Shelly Bian ◽  
Deborah A. Kuban ◽  
Lawrence B. Levy ◽  
Jeong Hoon Oh ◽  
Katherine Castle ◽  
...  

176 Background: Independently, dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy (DE-EBRT) and short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improve outcomes for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer; however, the incremental benefit of adding short-term ADT to DE-EBRT is uncertain. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of adding ADT to DE-EBRT and to identify men most likely to benefit from ADT. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 636 men treated for intermediate-risk prostate cancer with DE-EBRT (>75 Gy) from 1995 to 2009. The adult comorbidity evaluation-27 index categorized severity of comorbidity. Recursive partitioning analysis defined unfavorable disease. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests compared failure-free survival (FFS) with and without ADT. Results: Median age was 70 years (interquartile range [IQR] 65–74). Overall, 45% received DE-EBRT alone and 55% DE-EBRT with ADT (median 6 months, IQR 6-8). Median follow up was 4.3 years. On Cox-proportional hazard regression analysis that adjusted for differences in comorbidities and tumor characteristics, administration of ADT improved FFS (adjusted hazard ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.18–0.72; p=0.004). Recursive partitioning analysis of men without ADT classified Gleason 4+3=7 or ≥ 50% positive cores as unfavorable disease (5-year FFS 96.3% favorable vs. 81.6% unfavorable; p<0.001). The addition of ADT to DE-EBRT improved 5-year FFS for men with unfavorable disease (n=334; 81.6% vs. 92.9%; p=0.009) but did not improve FFS for men with favorable disease (n=302; 96.3% vs. 97.4%; p=0.874). When stratified by comorbidity, ADT improved FFS for men with unfavorable disease and no or mild comorbidity (p=0.006) but did not improve FFS for men with unfavorable disease and moderate to severe comorbidity (p=0.380). Conclusions: The addition of ADT to DE-EBRT improves FFS for men with unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer (Gleason 4+3=7 or ≥ 50% positive cores) especially those with no or minimal comorbidity. Men with favorable intermediate-risk disease or with moderate to severe comorbidity may not benefit from the addition of ADT to DE-EBRT.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5019-5019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdenour Nabid ◽  
Nathalie Carrier ◽  
Eric Vigneault ◽  
Luis Souhami ◽  
Céline Lemaire ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 109-109
Author(s):  
Sagar Anil Patel ◽  
Kevin H. Nguyen ◽  
Alan K. Lee ◽  
David Jeffrey Demanes ◽  
Albert Chang

109 Background: While level one evidence has shown an overall survival (OS) advantage with the addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiotherapy (RT) for intermediate risk prostate cancer (PCa), the benefit in the era of modern dose escalation is controversial, especially given the heterogeneity within this risk group. We assessed the impact of adding ADT to high dose RT on OS for intermediate risk PCa stratified by number of intermediate risk factors (IRF). Methods: We identified 114,339 men with intermediate risk PCa (Gleason 7, clinical stage T1-2, PSA < 20 ng/mL) using the National Cancer Database. Men were stratified into the following subgroups based on the number of IRFs (Gleason 7, cT2b-c, PSA > 10-20 ng/mL): A) Gleason 3+4 and no other IRF, B) Gleason 4+3 and no other IRF, C) two IRFs, and D) three IRFs. The addition of ADT to dose-escalated external beam RT (DE-EBRT, ≥ 75.6 Gy), brachytherapy (BT), or combination EBRT+BT on OS was assessed within each subgroup using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests in propensity score-matched cohorts in all men and subsequently only in those with Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index (CDI) of zero. Results: There was no OS benefit with the addition of ADT to DE-EBRT, BT, or EBRT+BT in groups A, B, and C, even after limiting the cohort to men with CDI = 0. However, in group D, the addition of ADT to DE-EBRT was associated with a trend for OS improvement in patients with CDI = 0 only (8-year OS with and without ADT 68.3% and 62.4%, respectively, log-rank P= .07). Conversely, there was a trend for OS decrement with the addition of ADT to DE-EBRT in men with CDI ≥ 1 (8-year OS with and without ADT 61.8% and 67.5%, respectively, log-rank P= .06). There was no OS benefit of ADT in group D treated with BT or EBRT+BT, regardless of comorbidity status. Conclusions: The OS benefit of ADT in men with intermediate risk PCa may be limited to those with 3 IRFs and minimal comorbidities treated with DE-EBRT. If prospectively validated, extreme dose escalation achieved with BT (alone or in combination with EBRT) may obviate the addition of ADT in all men with intermediate risk disease, especially in an era of advanced molecular imaging.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document