scholarly journals PD13-07 DISPARITIES IN ADHERENCE TO NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK TREATMENT GUIDELINES FOR HIGH-RISK, LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e268
Author(s):  
Felix Chen* ◽  
Kiran Clair ◽  
Jenny Chang ◽  
Robert Bristow ◽  
Sora Tanjasiri ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 581-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Spratt ◽  
Jingbin Zhang ◽  
María Santiago-Jiménez ◽  
Robert T. Dess ◽  
John W. Davis ◽  
...  

Purpose It is clinically challenging to integrate genomic-classifier results that report a numeric risk of recurrence into treatment recommendations for localized prostate cancer, which are founded in the framework of risk groups. We aimed to develop a novel clinical-genomic risk grouping system that can readily be incorporated into treatment guidelines for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Two multicenter cohorts (n = 991) were used for training and validation of the clinical-genomic risk groups, and two additional cohorts (n = 5,937) were used for reclassification analyses. Competing risks analysis was used to estimate the risk of distant metastasis. Time-dependent c-indices were constructed to compare clinicopathologic risk models with the clinical-genomic risk groups. Results With a median follow-up of 8 years for patients in the training cohort, 10-year distant metastasis rates for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low, favorable-intermediate, unfavorable-intermediate, and high-risk were 7.3%, 9.2%, 38.0%, and 39.5%, respectively. In contrast, the three-tier clinical-genomic risk groups had 10-year distant metastasis rates of 3.5%, 29.4%, and 54.6%, for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk, respectively, which were consistent in the validation cohort (0%, 25.9%, and 55.2%, respectively). C-indices for the clinical-genomic risk grouping system (0.84; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93) were improved over NCCN (0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.86) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.84), and 30% of patients using NCCN low/intermediate/high would be reclassified by the new three-tier system and 67% of patients would be reclassified from NCCN six-tier (very-low– to very-high–risk) by the new six-tier system. Conclusion A commercially available genomic classifier in combination with standard clinicopathologic variables can generate a simple-to-use clinical-genomic risk grouping that more accurately identifies patients at low, intermediate, and high risk for metastasis and can be easily incorporated into current guidelines to better risk-stratify patients.


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
T. Saika ◽  
T. Uesugi ◽  
K. Edamura ◽  
M. Kobuke ◽  
H. Nose ◽  
...  

77 Background: To reveal a predictive factor for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after permanent prostate brachytherapy (PPB) using iodine-125 (125I) seed implantation in patients with localized prostate cancer classified as low or intermediate risk based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Methods: From January 2004 to December 2009, consecutive 418 Japanese patients with clinically localized prostate cancer classified as low or intermediate risk based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines were treated by PPB. The clinical factors including pathological data reviewed by central pathologist and follow-up data were prospectively collected. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to assess the factors associated with BCR. Results: Median follow-up was 36.0 months. The 2, 3, 4 and 5-year BCR free rates using Phoenix definition were 98.3%, 96.0%, 91.6% and 87.0% respectively. On univariate analysis, primary Gleason grade 4 in biopsy specimen was strong predicting factor (p<0.0001), while Gleason sum, age, initial PSA, initial PSA density, T stage and D90 were insignificant factors. Multivariate analysis indicated that primary Gleason grade 4 was most powerful prognostic factor associated with BCR (hazard ratio=10.101, 95% IC 3.080-33.126, p=0.0001). Conclusions: The primary Gleason grade 4 carried a worse BCR than the primary grade 3 in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Therefore, the indication for PPB in patients with Gleason sum 4+3 should deserve careful and thoughtful consideration. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document