Elderly patients aged ≥ 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer may benefit from local treatment: a population-based propensity score-adjusted analysis

Protocol of a randomised, controlled trial comparing immediate curative therapy with conservative treatment in men aged ≥75 years with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer (SPCG 19/GRand-P)

BACKGROUND

Older men (aged ≥75 years) with high risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) are increasingly treated with curative therapy (surgery or radiotherapy). However, it is unclear if curative therapy prolongs life and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in this age group compared to conservative therapy, which has evolved considerably during the last decade.

STUDY DESIGN

The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG) 19/Norwegian Get-Randomized Research Group-Prostate (GRand-P) is a randomised, two-armed, controlled, multicentre, phase III trial carried out at study centres in Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden.

ENDPOINTS

The primary endpoints are overall survival and HRQoL (burden of disease scale, European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] Elderly Cancer patients). Secondary endpoints are PCa-specific survival, metastasis-free survival, role-functioning scale (EORTC quality of life questionnaire 30-item core), urinary irritative/obstructive scale (26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC-26]), bowel scale (EPIC-26), intervention-free survival, PCa morbidity, use of secondary and tertiary systemic therapies, mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and mean total healthcare costs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 980 men (aged ≥75 years) with non-metastatic, high-risk PCa will initially be screened with Geriatric 8 (G8) health status screening tool and Mini-COG© brief cognitive test. Participants identified by G8 as 'fit' or 'frail' will be randomised (ratio 1:1) to either immediate curative therapy (radiotherapy or prostatectomy) or conservative therapy (endocrine therapy or observation). Participants who are unable or unwilling to participate in randomisation will be enrolled in a separate observation group. Randomised patients will be followed for 10 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethics approval has been granted in Norway (457593), Denmark (H-22051998), Finland (R23043) and Sweden (Dnr 2023-05296-01). The trial is registered on Clinicaltrials.org (NCT05448547).

The Latest Data Specifically Focused on Long-Term Oncologic Prognostication for Very Old Adults with Acute Vulnerable Localized Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Purpose: Few studies have evaluated the prime treatment choice for men older than 80 years with acute vulnerable localized prostate cancer (AV-LPC). Clinicians have been deeply troubled by this near end-of-life medical choice for a very specific group of patients. We compared the oncological prognostication of very old patients with AV-LPC after they underwent either radical prostatectomy (RP) or massive-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) coupled with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) over a long-term investigation. Methods: In this nationwide cohort study, we used the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database and retrieved information related to patients (aged ≥ 80 years) with AV-LPC who underwent standard RP (the RP group) or massive-dose IMRT + long-term ADT (at least 72 Gy and ADT use ≥18 months; the IMRT + ADT group). After potential confounders were controlled for using propensity score matching (PSM), we utilized the Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the oncologic prognostication. Results: The IMRT + ADT group had a significantly higher adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for all-cause mortality (aHR, 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41−2.87) than the RP group. Analysis of the secondary outcomes revealed that compared with the RP group, the aHRs of biochemical failure, locoregional recurrence, and distant metastasis in the IMRT + ADT group were 1.77 (95% CI: 1.36−2.11, p < 0.0001), 1.12 (95% CI: 1.04−1.33, p < 0.0001), and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.06−1.71, p = 0.0311), respectively. Conclusion: RP provides more favorable oncological prognostication than IMRT in very old adults with AV-LPC.

How socioeconomic and clinical factors impact prostate-cancer-specific and other-cause mortality in prostate cancer stratified by clinical stage: Competing-risk analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyze the causes of death and risk factors of prostate-cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) at different clinical stages using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.

METHODS

The characteristics and cause-specific death classifications of males with prostate cancer (PCa) were extracted. Multivariate competing-risk regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors and quantify the cumulative incidence of PCSM and OCM at different clinical stages.

RESULTS

Of the 244,433 PCa patients who were included, 19,274 died from 7356 PCSM, and 11,918 from OCM. The proportion of PCSM gradually increased from 2010 to 2016. The risk factors for PCSM in the localized PCa stage included older age, not being married, living in a county with higher poverty rates, and higher PSA levels and Gleason scores. Meanwhile, Medicaid and lower education levels were the additional risk factors of OCM. The risk factors for PCSM in the regional PCa stage included older age, not being married, Medicaid, living in a county with higher poverty rates, and higher PSA levels and Gleason scores. Meanwhile, the income level did not affect OCM risk. The risk factors for PCSM in the distant metastatic PCa stage included a separated/divorced/widowed marital status, Medicaid, and higher PSA levels and Gleason scores. Meanwhile, older age, an unmarried or separated/divorced/widowed marital status, and higher PSA levels were risk factors for OCM. In addition, receiving both surgery and radiation was worse than just receiving surgery for PCa specific survival in localized and regional PCa patients.

CONCLUSION

Some pretreatment and treatment factors may influence OCM that are not identical to those for PCSM at the corresponding stage. Decision-makers and managers should fully consider OCM to maximize treatment benefits for PCa.

A comparison of the survival outcomes of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy in patients over 75 years old with non-metastatic prostate cancer: A Korean multicenter study

PURPOSE

To compare overall survivals (OSs) and cancer-specific survivals (CSSs) after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiation therapy (RT), the latter of which has long been recommended primarily for elderly patients (≥75 years) with non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), given the Korean male life span of 79.7 years (2018).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data for aged ≥75 years who underwent RARP or RT at seven tertiary hospitals were analyzed. To account for indication-related bias, inverse probability of treatment-weighting (IPTW) was applied before and after Cox regression.

RESULTS

Of the 1,110 study subjects, 883 underwent RARP and 227 RT from 2007 to 2016. The differences between groups including the age (≥80 y; 25.4% vs. 32.8%; p=0.034), concomitant diabetes (14.9% vs. 22.9%; p=0.007), coronary heart disease (3.5% vs. 7.5%; p=0.015), and PCa risk stratification (high-risk; 18.2% vs. 59.7%; p<0.001) were balanced after IPTW. During a mean follow-up of 74.5 months, OSs (91.9% vs. 91.0%) and CSSs (97.8% vs. 98.0%) were similar. After IPTW, overall mortality was associated with diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 2.273; p<0.0001) and inversely with low-risk PCa (HR, 0.314; p<0.0001), the last of which was solely associated with cancer-specific mortality (HR, 0.245; p=0.0005). The implementation of local treatment between RARP and RT demonstrated no impact on survival, for whole and high-risk populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Even aged over 75 years, patients who underwent RARP for non-metastatic PCa had similar survival with RT regardless of risk stratification. However, the survival needs to be weighed with the morbidity of local treatment in a future study.

The comparison of the survival outcome between robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer in men over 70 years: Korean Nationwide Observational Study

This study aimed to investigate the survival after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in comparison with radiation therapy (RT) in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) with non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), given the contemporary Korean life span of 80 years. From the National Health Insurance Sharing Service data, men aged ≥ 70 years diagnosed with PCa from 2006 through 2016 undergoing RARP or RT without systemic chemotherapy or prolonged androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were identified, then the mortality was compared after adjusting host factors. Data revealed 13,952 patients with RARP (N = 7535) or RT (N = 6417). Patients who underwent RARP were younger (73.81 ± 3.58 vs. 75.05 ± 3.83 years) and had a higher income. While the majority of the RARP group (94.1%) received no additional therapy, 57.4% of the RT group combined ADT. The adjusted mortality rate for total patients was lower in the RARP group (HR = 0.767, 95% CI 0.072-0.818, p < 0.0001). From the age of 75 years, more patients underwent RT (n = 3239) than RARP (n = 2478). When dividing patients by this age cut-off, the adjusted mortality for the younger patient (70-74 years) was lower in the RARP group than the RT group (HR = 0.580, p < 0.0001). In contrast, the adjusted mortality rate for men older than 75 years was similar (HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.897-1.07, p = 0.649). This study demonstrates that even the patient over 75 years old who could afford to undergo robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for non-metastatic PCa had a similar survival in comparison with RT, which had long been a standard of care for this particular age group.

Increased curative treatment is associated with decreased prostate cancer-specific and overall mortality in senior adults with high-risk prostate cancer; results from a national registry-based cohort study

Background

The association between curative treatment (CurTrt) and mortality in senior adults (≥70 years) with high‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) is poorly documented. In a population‐based cohort we report temporal trends in treatment and PCa‐specific mortality (PCSM), investigating the association between CurTrt and mortality in senior adults with high‐risk PCa, compared to findings in younger men (<70 years).

Methods

Observational study from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Patients with high‐risk PCa were stratified for three diagnostic periods (2005‐08, 2009‐12 and 2013‐16), age (<70, vs ≥70) and primary treatment (CurTrt: Radical prostatectomy (RP), Radiotherapy (RAD) vs no curative treatment (NoCurTrt)). Competing risk and Kaplan‐Meier methods estimated PCSM and overall mortality (OM), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds for CurTrt, and multivariable Fine Gray and Cox regression models evaluated the hazard ratios for PCSM and OM.

Results

Of 19 763 evaluable patients, 54% were aged ≥70 years. Senior adults had more unfavorable PCa characteristics than younger men. Across diagnostic periods, use of CurTrt increased from 15% to 51% in men aged ≥70 and 65% to 81% in men aged < 70 years. With median five years follow‐up, PCSM decreased in all patients (P < .05), in the third period restricted to senior adults. In all patients NoCurTrt was associated with three‐fold higher 5‐year PCSM and two‐fold higher OM compared to CurTrt.

Conclusions

In high‐risk PCa patients, increased use of CurTrt, greatest in senior men, was observed along with decreased PCSM and OM in both senior and younger adults. CurTrt should increasingly be considered in men ≥70 years.

Non-metastatic prostate cancer: rationale for conservative treatment and impact on disease-related morbidity and mortality in the elderly

Purpose: To determine the rationale for not offering local treatment to prostate cancer patients with non-metastatic disease at diagnosis who later died of prostate cancer and to document local and systemic complications caused by disease progression.Material and Methods: In this population-based, retrospective study we reviewed the medical records of all patients who died of prostate cancer in 2009-2014 in Vestfold County (Vestfold Mortality Study), who were non-metastatic at diagnosis and who had received no local treatment to the prostate (n = 117).Results: A review of patient records demonstrated that the chronological age of 75 years or older was the main rationale for not offering local treatment to the prostate (37%, n = 43). No consideration was given to the functional status and patient health. These elderly patients stood for almost one-fifth of the total PC mortality in Vestfold County. In addition to dying from PC, 86% of patients developed local complications attributable to PC progression. Observation of strict limits for local treatment with regard to tumor characteristics contributed further to the underuse of local treatment.Conclusions: Our study demonstrated systematic undertreatment of elderly patients with aggressive, non-metastatic PC with regard to local treatment based on chronological age alone. The patients in this study died of prostate cancer and the majority experienced significant morbidity caused by local tumor growth.