Adjuvant versus neoadjuvant androgen deprivation with radiation therapy for prostate cancer: Does sequencing matter?

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 37-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Weller ◽  
Rahul D. Tendulkar ◽  
Chandana A. Reddy ◽  
Kevin L. Stephans ◽  
Patrick Kupelian
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
The Impact

37 Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is typically given neoadjuvantly and concurrently with radiation therapy (RT) rather than adjuvantly in the management of intermediate and high risk prostate cancer. Our objective is to compare outcomes between patients who receive adjuvant ADT (ADJ), i.e. immediately after the completion of RT, with those who receive a neoadjuvant and concurrent regimen (NEO). Methods: From 1995-2002, 515 patients with CaP were definitively treated with RT and ADT. ADT was given for a duration of 6 months in all cases. NEO was given 2-3 months prior to the start of RT. ADJ was initiated immediately following the completion of RT. ADT sequencing was NEO in 311 (60%) and ADJ in 204 (40%). The distribution by NCCN risk classification for NEO was high in 67%, intermediate in 26%, and low in 7%. The risk group distribution for ADJ was high in 69%, and intermediate in 31%. RT dose was either 78 Gy at 2 Gy/fx (n=168) or 70 Gy at 2.5 Gy/fx (n=347). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate biochemical relapse free survival (bRFS, Phoenix definition), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the impact of ADT timing on outcomes. Results: The median follow up for all patients was 8 years. For the entire cohort, the 10-yr bRFS, DMFS and OS rates were 61%, 80% and 66%, respectively. The 10-yr bRFS rates for ADJ vs. NEO were 63% vs. 60% (p=0.98). The 10-yr DMFS rates for ADJ vs. NEO were both 80% (p=0.60). The 10-yr OS rates for ADJ vs. NEO were 65% vs. 67% (p=0.98). There were no statistically significant differences in bRFS, DMFS or OS between the two groups after accounting for patient, tumor and treatment characteristics on both univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions: There is no difference between neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant ADT in the setting of dose-escalated RT for localized prostate cancer. This suggests that the synergy between radiation therapy and androgen deprivation is independent of the sequencing of both modalities and that the initiation of RT does not need to be delayed for a course of neoadjuvant ADT.

Prostate-Only Versus Whole-Pelvic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer (POP-RT): Outcomes From Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.20.03282
Author(s):  
Vedang Murthy ◽  
Priyamvada Maitre ◽  
Sadhana Kannan ◽  
Gitanjali Panigrahi ◽  
Rahul Krishnatry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE We report the clinical outcomes of a randomized trial comparing prophylactic whole-pelvic nodal radiotherapy to prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS This phase III, single center, randomized controlled trial enrolled eligible patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for node-negative prostate adenocarcinoma, with estimated nodal risk ≥ 20%. Randomization was 1:1 to PORT (68 Gy/25# to prostate) or whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT, 68 Gy/25# to prostate, 50 Gy/25# to pelvic nodes, including common iliac) using computerized stratified block randomization, stratified by Gleason score, type of androgen deprivation, prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, and prior transurethral resection of the prostate. All patients received image-guided, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and minimum 2 years of androgen deprivation therapy. The primary end point was 5-year biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), and secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS From November 2011 to August 2017, a total of 224 patients were randomly assigned (PORT = 114, WPRT = 110). At a median follow-up of 68 months, 36 biochemical failures (PORT = 25, WPRT = 7) and 24 deaths (PORT = 13, WPRT = 11) were recorded. Five-year BFFS was 95.0% (95% CI, 88.4 to 97.9) with WPRT versus 81.2% (95% CI, 71.6 to 87.8) with PORT, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.52; P < .0001). WPRT also showed higher 5-year DFS (89.5% v 77.2%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.73; P = .002), but 5-year OS did not appear to differ (92.5% v 90.8%; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.05; P = .83). Distant metastasis-free survival was also higher with WPRT (95.9% v 89.2%; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.82; P = .01). Benefit in BFFS and DFS was maintained across prognostic subgroups. CONCLUSION Prophylactic pelvic irradiation for high-risk, locally advanced prostate cancer improved BFFS and DFS as compared with PORT, but OS did not appear to differ.

Effect of adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy to dose-escalated radiation therapy on failure-free survival for select men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 176-176
Author(s):  
Shelly Bian ◽  
Deborah A. Kuban ◽  
Lawrence B. Levy ◽  
Jeong Hoon Oh ◽  
Katherine Castle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Recursive Partitioning ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Severe Comorbidity

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.

The relative contributions of the Genomic Prostate Score and comorbidity profile in predicting outcomes in surgically treated men with clinically low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16607-e16607
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cullen ◽  
Dudith Pierre-Victor ◽  
H. Jeffrey Lawrence ◽  
Huai-Ching Kuo ◽  
Isabell Sesterhenn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Stratum ◽  
Diagnostic Biopsy ◽  
Using Data

e16607 Background: The 17-gene Oncotype Dx Genomic Prostate Score® (GPS™) assay has been validated as a predictor of aggressive prostate cancer (PCa) in men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) for clinically low and intermediate risk PCa. This study examined the performance of the GPS assay as a predictor of adverse pathology (AP) and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival (BRFS), after adjusting for the presence of major comorbidities commonly seen in older men. Methods: Additional analyses were performed using data from a prior clinical validation study of the GPS assay. GPS values (scaled 0-100), determined from diagnostic biopsy tissue, were categorized into 3 levels: lowest quartile (Q1), middle quartiles (combined Q2-Q3) versus the highest quartile (Q4). Major comorbidities included heart disease, stroke, COPD, and other cancers. The associations between GPS result and the presence of ≥1 major comorbidity and outcomes were examined. AP was defined as high-grade (Gleason Score ≥ 4+3) and/or pT3 tumor. BCR was defined as 2 successive PSA levels > 0.2 ng/mL. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine AP; Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to model BRFS. Results: Among 389 eligible men, median age at diagnosis and follow-up time was 62 and 5.6 years, respectively. The prevalence of ≥1 major comorbidity differed significantly across GPS category, rising from 10.2% to 19.7% to 25.5% for GPS Quartiles 1, 2-3, and 4, respectively (p = 0.0024). However, presence of ≥1 major comorbidity was not a significant predictor of AP or BCR in multivariable models with GPS, age, race, and NCCN risk stratum. Men whose GPS result was in the highest quartile had 4-fold higher odds of AP (OR: 4.1; 95% CI = 2.1-7.99, p < 0.0001) at RP and a 3.5 times higher risk of BCR (HR = 3.49; 95% CI = 1.59-7.64, p = 0.002) compared to men in the lowest GPS quartile (Table 1). Conclusions: A high GPS result remains the strongest predictor of BCR and AP in this cohort of low and intermediate risk PCa men, after adjusting for the presence of major comorbidities. Further work will explore the relationships between specific comorbidities and metabolic syndrome, with GPS testing and PCa outcomes.

Causes of Mortality After Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy and Androgen Deprivation for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul D. Tendulkar ◽  
Grant K. Hunter ◽  
Chandana A. Reddy ◽  
Kevin L. Stephans ◽  
Jay P. Ciezki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Causes Of Mortality

scholarly journals PD-0135: The impact of radiation therapy technology and treatment protocol on high-risk prostate cancer outcome

2013 ◽  
Vol 106 ◽  
pp. S50-S51
Author(s):  
P. Munck af Rosenschöld ◽  
A. Jackson ◽  
P. Ghadjar ◽  
J.H. Oh ◽  
J. Sveistrup ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Outcome ◽  
The Impact

Intermediate versus short-course hormone therapy and mortality in men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with radiation therapy.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 83-83
Author(s):  
Akash Nanda ◽  
Ming-Hui Chen ◽  
Brian Joseph Moran ◽  
Michelle H. Braccioforte ◽  
Anthony Victor D'Amico
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Background Radiation ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
High Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Short Course ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
The Impact

83 Background: Radiation therapy (RT) plus 28-36 months of hormonal therapy (HT) is standard-of-care for men with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) based on randomized trials comparing these HT durations to 4-6 months. However, it is unknown whether shorter durations of HT may also decrease mortality. We evaluate the impact of intermediate-course HT on the risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) in men with HRPC treated with RT. Methods: The study cohort comprised 554 men with HRPC (PSA > 20; Gleason score 8 or higher; or clinical stage T2c or higher) consecutively treated at the Chicago Prostate Cancer Center between 1997 and 2007. All men received brachytherapy with or without external beam RT and HT of intermediate (> 6 to 24; median 12 months) or short (up to 6; median 4 months) duration. A Cox regression multivariable analysis was performed assessing whether intermediate compared to short-course HT was associated with a decreased risk of ACM, adjusting for age, year and type of RT, treatment propensity score, and known PC prognostic factors. Results: After a median follow up of 4.3 years a total of 64 (11.6%) men died. Intermediate compared to short-course HT was associated with a significantly decreased risk of ACM (adjusted hazard ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.20 - 0.94, P = 0.03). Other significant covariates are shown in the table. The 5-year estimates of ACM for intermediate versus short-course HT were 7.0% and 15.7%, respectively. Conclusions: In men with HRPC treated with RT, a median HT duration of 12 months was associated with a significantly decreased risk of ACM when compared to a median HT duration of 4 months. This raises the hypothesis that HT durations shorter than 28-36 months may be sufficient to decrease mortality in men with HRPC. The ongoing RADAR trial by the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group comparing 18 to 6 months of HT may provide level I evidence to validate this hypothesis. [Table: see text]

Association of radiation therapy with overall survival in patients undergoing surgery for T3N0M0 adenocarcinoma of the rectum.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 528-528
Author(s):  
David Mitchell Marcus ◽  
Dana Nickleach ◽  
Bassel F. El-Rayes ◽  
Jerome Carl Landry
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
The Impact

528 Background: The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery, but many physicians question the benefit of multimodality therapy in patients with stage T3N0M0 disease. We aimed to determine the impact of radiation therapy (RT) on overall survival (OS) in this group of patients. Methods: We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database to identify patients undergoing surgery for T3N0M0 adenocarcinoma of the rectum from 2004 to 2010. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare OS for patients receiving RT vs. no RT, along with for pre-op vs. post-op RT among patients that received RT. Multivariable analysis (MVA) using a Cox proportional hazards model was performed to assess the association of RT with OS after adjusting for patient age, gender, race, tumor grade, carcinoembryonic antigen, type of surgery, and circumferential margin status. The analysis was repeated separately on patients that underwent total colectomy (TC) vs. sphincter-sparing surgery. Results: The cohort included 8,679 patients, including 4,705 who received RT and 3,974 who did not. Median age was 66 years. Five year OS was 76.5% in patients who received RT, compared to 60.0% in patients who did not receive RT (p <0.001). Five year OS was 76.9% for patients receiving pre-op RT vs. 75.7% in patients receiving post-op RT (p = 0.247). In patients undergoing TC, five year OS was 74.7% for patients receiving RT, compared to 47.5% in patients not receiving RT (p <0.001). In patients undergoing sphincter-sparing surgery, five year OS was 77.7% in patients receiving RT, compared to 62.9% in patients not receiving RT (p <0.001). Use of RT was significantly associated with OS on MVA, both in the entire cohort (HR 0.70 [95% CI 0.60-0.81]; p<0.001) and in subsets of patients undergoing TC (HR 0.55 [95% CI 0.38-0.79]; p=0.001) and sphincter-sparing surgery (HR 0.70 [95% CI 0.59-0.84]; p<0.001). Conclusions: The use of RT is associated with superior OS in patients undergoing surgery for T3N0M0 adenocarcinoma of the rectum. This benefit is demonstrated in both the pre-op and post-op settings and applies to patients undergoing both TC and sphincter-sparing surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document