scholarly journals Might definitive local therapy of the primary tumor improve the survival benefits of metastatic prostate cancer? —evidence from a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 648-660
Author(s):  
Muran Xiao ◽  
Rong Cong ◽  
Qijie Zhang ◽  
Wei Xiang ◽  
Hui Xiao
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Wang ◽  
Zhiqiang Qin ◽  
Yamin Wang ◽  
Chen Chen ◽  
Yichun Wang ◽  
...  

The recommended therapy by EAU guidelines for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without chemotherapy. The role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of mPCa is still controversial. Hence, a meta-analysis was conducted by comprehensively searching the databases PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for the relevant studies published before September 1st, 2017. Our results successfully shed light on the relationship that RP for mPCa was associated with decreased cancer-specific mortality (CSM) (pooled HR = 0.41, 95%CI = 0.36–0.47) and enhanced overall survival (OS) (pooled HR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.44–0.55). Subsequent stratified analysis demonstrated that no matter how RP compared with no local therapy (NLT) or radiation therapy (RT), it was linked to a lower CSM (pooled HR = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.30–0.43 and pooled HR = 0.56, 95%CI 0.43–0.73, respectively) and a higher OS (pooled HR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.44–0.56 and pooled HR = 0.46, 95%CI 0.33–0.65, separately). When comparing different levels of Gleason score, M-stage or N-stage, our results indicated that high level of Gleason score, M-stage or N-stage was associated with increased CSM. In summary, the outcomes of the present meta-analysis demonstrated that RP for mPCa was correlated with decreased CSM and enhanced OS in eligible patients of involved studies. In addition, patients with less aggressive tumors and good general health seemed to benefit the most. Moreover, no matter compared with NLT or RT, RP showed significant superiority in OS or CSM. Upcoming prospective randomized controlled trials were warranted to provide more high-quality data.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Shuai Liu ◽  
Xiao-ying Wang ◽  
Tian-bao Huang ◽  
Xiao-xi Ma ◽  
Zhi-zhong Xia ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> It has been reported that compared with no local therapy (NLT), patients treated with local therapy (LT) using radiotherapy (RT) possess higher survival rate in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the impact of RT on prognosis in patients with mPCa. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We retrieved the literature in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until June 2019 using structured search terms. Several studies were included, which evaluated patients with mPCa who received RT versus NLT. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 14,542 patients were analyzed in 7 included papers (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 5 cohort retrospective studies [CRS]), and 2,232 mPCa patients were treated with RT and 12,310 with NLT. The data of RCTs and CRS were analyzed separately. In RCTs, RT was associated with no significant difference in overall survival (OS) (pooled hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85–1.09; <i>p</i> = 0.55; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 42%) relative to NLT, while survival benefit was observed in the low-metastatic burden group (pooled HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.54–0.86; <i>p</i> = 0.001; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%), and no survival benefit was observed in the high-metastatic burden group (pooled HR = 1.07; 95% CI: 0.92–1.24; <i>p</i> = 0.39; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). In CRS, RT results in lower cancer-specific mortality (CSM) (pooled HR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.34–0.75; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) and higher OS (pooled HR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.55–0.68; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) relative to NLT. Subsequent analysis demonstrated that high level of M-stage or N-stage was associated with increased CSM (pooled HR = 2.08; 95% CI: 1.69–2.55; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0% and pooled HR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.03–1.30; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%; respectively). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Our observations in aggregate indicated that RT at least does not appear to be harmful and may be beneficial for low-metastatic burden patients and better condition patients. More prospective and randomized studies evaluating RT for mPCa are warranted.


2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 772-776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Rocha ◽  
Charity J. Morgan ◽  
Arnoud J. Templeton ◽  
Gregory R. Pond ◽  
Gurudatta Naik ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (19) ◽  
pp. 7341-7351
Author(s):  
Fan Li ◽  
Hui Xiang ◽  
Zisen Pang ◽  
Zejia Chen ◽  
Jinlong Dai ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 188-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan Ramos-Esquivel ◽  
Joao M. Baptista ◽  
Luis Corrales-Rodriguez ◽  
Ileana Gonzðlez ◽  
Melissa Juarez Villegal ◽  
...  

188 Background: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is the standard of treatment for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostatic cancer. Nevertheless, recent trials have suggested a role for chemotherapy in these patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of docetaxel-based chemotherapy in combination with ADT for patients with hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer. Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) were identified after systematic searching of electronic databases (MEDLINE, OVID and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), as well as ASCO conference proceedings from 2010 to 2015. We included only RCT comparing ADT versus the combination of ADT plus docetaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. A random-effect model was used to determine the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for the efficacy outcomes: overall survival (OS) and clinical progression-free survival (PFS), according to the inverse-variance method. Heterogeneity was measured using the Q and I2statistics. Results: Three RCT (n = 2 262), were included in our meta-analysis (E3805, GETUG-AFU 15 and the M1 subgroup from STAMPEDE Trial). Docetaxel-based chemotherapy plus ADT was associated with improved OS (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.60-0.90; p = 0.003). The heterogeneity of these trials was moderate (Tau2: 0.02; I2: 51%; p = 0.13). Clinical PFS was also significantly better in patients receiving docetaxel-based chemotherapy (HR: 0.67; 95% CI 0.55-0.82; p = 0.0001), with moderate between-study heterogeneity detected (Tau2: 0.01; I2: 42%; p = 0.19). Different subset of patients in these trials can explain the aforementioned heterogeneity. Regarding adverse drug reactions grade 3 or higher, neutropenia was reported in a range from 36% in the GETUG-AFU 15 Trial to 12% in the STAMPEDE trial and febrile neutropenia was reported from 6.1% in the E3805 Trial to 12% in the STAMPEDE Trial. Conclusions: The addition of docetaxel-based chemotherapy to ADT improves OS and clinical PFS. New trials are needed to determine which patients benefit the most from this intervention.


2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith D. Canby-Hagino ◽  
Gregory P. Swanson ◽  
E. David Crawford ◽  
Joseph W. Basler ◽  
Javier Hernandez ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document