Oncological results, functional outcomes and health-related quality-of-life in men who received a radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: a study on long-term patient outcome with risk stratification

Choosing the right questions - A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures used in radiotherapy and proton beam therapy

The implementation of PROMs into clinical practice has been shown to improve quality of care. This systematic review aims to identify which PROMs are suitable for implementation within routine clinical practice in a radiotherapy or PBT service.The bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and EMCARE were searched. Articles published between 1st January 2008 to 1st June 2023, that reported PROMs being utilised as an outcome measure were included. Inclusion criteria also included being written in English, involving human patients, aged 16 and above, receiving external beam radiotherapy or PBT for six defined tumour sites. PROMs identified within the included articles were subjected to quality assessment using the COSMIN reporting guidelines. Results are reported as per PRISMA guidelines. A total of 268 studies were identified in the search, of which 52 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The use of 39 different PROMs was reported. The PROMs identified were mostly tumour or site-specific quality of life (n = 23) measures but also included generic cancer (n = 3), health-related quality-of-life (n = 6), and symptom specific (n = 7) measures.None of the PROMs identified received a high GRADE score for good content. There were 13 PROMs that received a moderate GRADE score. The remaining PROMs either had limited evidence of development and validation within the patient cohorts investigated, or lacked relevance or comprehensiveness needed for routine PROMs collection in a radiotherapy or PBT service.This review highlights that there are a wide variety of PROMs being utilised within radiotherapy research, but most lack specificity to radiotherapy side-effects. There is a risk that by using non-specific PROMs in clinical practice, patients might not receive the supportive care that they need.

Effects of surgery versus radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer in terms of urinary, bowel, and sexual domains

BACKGROUND

The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPCa) after treatment mainly surgery and radiotherapy (RT) has received increasing attention. The aim of this study is to compare the HRQoL of LPCa after surgery and RT.

METHODS

Web of Science, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched after January 2000 to observe the HRQoL scores after surgery and RT at different treatment time points.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies were included in this study, and the results showed that LPCa received surgery had better bowel scores than RT at ≤3 (weighted mean differences [WMD] = 4.18; p = 0.03), 3-6 (WMD = 4.16; p < 0.001), 6-12 (WMD = 2.99; p = 0.004), 24-60 (WMD = 1.87; p = 0.06), and ≥60 (WMD = 4.54; p = 0.02) months. However, LPCa received RT had higher urinary scores at ≤3 (WMD = -7.39; p = 0.02), 3-6 (WMD = -6.03; p = 0.02), 6-12 (WMD = -4.90; p < 0.001), 24-60 (WMD = -3.96; p < 0.001), ≥60 (WMD = -2.95; p < 0.001) months and had better sexual scores at ≤3 (WMD = -13.58; p = 0.09), 3-6 (WMD = -12.32; p = 0.06), 6-12 (WMD = -12.03; p = 0.002), 24-60 (WMD = -11.29; p < 0.001), and ≥60 (WMD = -3.10; p = 0.46) months than surgery. The scores difference between surgery and RT decreased over time.

CONCLUSION

Overall, for LPCa, surgery was associated with better HRQoL in the bowel domain, whereas RT was associated with better HRQoL in the urinary and sexual domains, with the difference between surgery and RT narrowing over time.

Factors affecting health-related quality of life among prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is recognized as the leading cause of malignancy-related incidence and mortality in the male population. The treatment regimens have long-term effects detrimental to the patient's quality of life. Hence, this review was aimed to determine the overall HRQOL and its associated among prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

The review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cumulative Index to the Nursing and Allied Literature (CINAHL), which provided articles that were critically examined, yielding 52 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review.

RESULTS

Out of 52 studies, 30 studies reported poor overall HRQOL in various domains after prostate cancer treatment. Contrastingly, 15 studies reported good overall quality of life after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer. Nonetheless, seven studies showed that the absence of a significant change in the overall quality of life after treatment. According to the studies, older age, comorbidities, higher clinical stage, higher Gleason score, greater cancer severity, African American race, impaired mental health, neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and lower level of education were the major poor predictors of HRQOL among prostate cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

The overall HRQOL in prostate cancer patients was generally poor in various functional domains after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer.

The efficacy and safety of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The optimal treatment for patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remains a debate and selection of patients to receive proper therapy is still an unsettled question. This systematic review was conducted to compare the effectiveness of prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with high-risk PCa and to select candidates for optimal treatment.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible studies. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of all included studies. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS); the secondary outcomes were biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and clinical recurrence-free survival (CRFS). The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to Gleason score (GS), T stage and RT types. Quality of life (QoL) was compared with these two treatments.

Results

A total of 25 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, RP showed more survival benefits than RT on CSS (P = 0.003) and OS (P = 0.002); while RT was associated with better BRFS (P = 0.002) and MFS (P = 0.004). Subgroup analyses showed RT was associated with similar or even better survival outcomes compared to RP in patients with high GS, high T stage or received external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy (EBRT + BT). As for QoL, RP was associated with poorer urinary and sexual function but better performance in the bowel domain.

Conclusion

RP could prolong the survival time of patients with high-risk PCa; however, RT could delay the disease progression, and combined RT (EBRT + BT) even brought preferable CSS and similar OS compared to RP. RT might be the prior choice for patients with high T stage or high GS. RP could lead to poorer urinary and sexual function, while bringing better performance in the bowel domain.

Oncological control in high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and salvage radiotherapy compared to radiotherapy plus primary hormone therapy

INTRODUCTION

In patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (HRPCa), multimodal treatment plays a fundamental role.

OBJECTIVE

To compare relapse-free survival (RFS) in patients with HRPCa, treated primarily with radiotherapy (RT)+hormone therapy (HT) versus radical prostatectomy (RP) and salvage RT (sRT)±HT when biochemical recurrence (BCR) appears.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 226 patients with HRPCa (1996-2008), treated primarily with RT+HT (n=137) or RP (n=89). The Kaplan-Meier method has been used to evaluate survival and the log-rank test has been used to evaluate the contrast between the different categories of the variables. Multivariate analysis has been performed using Cox regression to determine variables with an impact on RFS with statistical significance (P<0.05).

RESULTS

The median follow-up of the series was 111 (IQR 85-137.5) months. After RT+HT, 32 (23.4%) patients relapsed, and after RP (P=0.0001), 41 (46.1%) cases. When comparing the primary treatments, the RFS at 5 and 10 years was higher after RT+HT versus RP in monotherapy (P=0.001). The primary treatment with RT+HT reduced the risk of BCR when compared to the RP (HR=0.41, P=0.002). The estimation of the RFS at 5 and 10 years after RP+sRT±HT was 89.7 and 87.1%, while after primary RT+HT was 91.6 and 71.1%, respectively (P=0.01). The only factor that behaved as an independent predictor of RFS was the multimodal treatment with RP+sRT±HT when BCR showed up (HR=2.39, P=0.01).

CONCLUSION

In HRPCa, multimodal treatment with RP+sRT±HT if BCR, significantly improves RFS with respect to treatment with RT+HT.

Effect of Prostate Cancer Severity on Functional Outcomes After Localized Treatment: Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation Study Results

BACKGROUND

Whether prostate cancer severity modifies patient-reported functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized cancer is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether differences in predicted function over time between RP and EBRT varied by risk group.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) study is a prospective, population-based, observational study that enrolled men with localized prostate cancer in 2011-2012. Among 2117 CEASAR participants who underwent RP or EBRT, 817 had low-risk, 902 intermediate-risk, and 398 high-risk disease.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Patient-reported, disease-specific function was measured using the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (at baseline and 6, 12, and 36 mo). Predicted function was estimated using regression models and compared by disease risk.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Low-risk EBRT patients reported 3-yr sexual function scores 12 points higher than those of low-risk RP patients (RP, 39 points [95% confidence interval {CI}, 37-42] vs EBRT, 52 points [95% CI, 47-56]; p<0.001). The difference in 3-yr scores for high-risk patients was not clinically significant (RP, 32 points [95% CI, 28-35] vs EBRT, 38 points [95% CI, 33-42]; p=0.03). However, when using a commonly used binary definition of sexual function (erections firm enough for intercourse), no major differences were noted between RP and EBRT at 3 yr across low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease strata. No clinically significant interactive effects between treatment and cancer severity were observed for incontinence, bowel, irritative voiding, and hormone domains. The primary limitation is the lack of firmly established thresholds for clinically significant differences in Expanded Prostate Index Composite domain scores.

CONCLUSIONS

For men with low-risk prostate cancer, EBRT was associated with higher sexual function scores at 3 yr than RP; however, for men with high-risk prostate cancer, no clinically significant difference was noted. Men with high-risk prostate cancer should be counseled that EBRT and RP carry similar sexual function outcomes at 3 yr.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report, we studied the urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal functions of patients 3 yr after undergoing prostate cancer surgery or radiation. We found that for patients with high-risk disease, sexual function was similar between surgery and radiation. We conclude that high-risk patients undergoing radiation therapy should be counseled that sexual function may not be as good as low-risk patients undergoing radiation.

Comparison on efficacy of radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Since there was no consensus on treatment options of localized prostate cancer, a meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of radical prostatectomy (RP) versus external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) concluding three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The search of eligible studies was performed on PubMed and Embase databases. The overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) were compared by hazard ratio (HR) and odd ratios (OR). Twelve studies with 17137 patients were included. The pooled HR and 95% CI for OS, CSS and BDFS were 1.60 (1.44–1.79), 1.73 (1.34–2.24) and 0.65 (0.51–0.82), respectively. However, according to risk stratification, the HRs of CSS for low- to intermediate-risk patients were not significant. The 5-year and 10-year CSS reported significant OR and 95% CI of 1.96 (1.42–2.72) and 2.44 (1.33–4.48), except for 2-year CSS (P = 0.42). In conclusion, RP was generally associated with decreased risk of overall and cancer-specific mortality as well as better 5-year and 10-year OS and CSS. The EBRT was suggested to be a promising alternative option for low- to intermediate-risk patients. Large-scale prospective studies with risk stratification and adequate follow-up length were needed for further comprehensive comparison.

Comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy and curative radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: long-term follow-up

We sought to investigate the long-term outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) and external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in Japanese patients. RP and radiation therapy are curative treatments for localized prostate cancer. However, there is controversy around which treatment is superior in Japanese patients. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of each treatment. We retrospectively evaluated the overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and biochemical failure-free survival (BFS) for patients who had been diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and treated with RP (n = 248) or conventional 2D or 3D-CRT EBRT (n = 182) between 1995 and 2009. The median OS was superior in the RP group compared with that in EBRT group (P < 0.001), although CSS was comparable for both treatment groups; BFS was superior for the EBRT group compared with that for the RP group (P = 0.04). Univariate analysis identified a prostate-specific antigen count (PSA)of ≥20 vs <20 mg/ml, clinical T-stage of the tumor and Gleason score as predictors for CSS. However, multivariate analysis did not identify a factor for CSS. Subgroup analysis was also performed based on clinical T stage, PSA and Gleason score, but there was no difference in each subgroup between RP and EBRT. Both treatments provided satisfactory clinical outcomes in terms of disease control in localized prostate cancer.

Patient-perceived satisfaction after definitive treatment for men with high-risk prostate cancer: radical prostatectomy vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy with androgen deprivation therapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the change in disease-specific health-related quality of life and to evaluate patient-perceived satisfaction after radical prostatectomy (RP) or intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCA) that has been defined by the European Association of Urology guideline.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2010, 150 patients with high-risk PCA who underwent either RP (n = 97) or IMRT with ADT (n = 53) were enrolled in this prospective health-related quality of life study. Disease-specific health-related quality of life at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and patient-perceived satisfaction at 12 and 24 months after these treatments were estimated using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite.

RESULTS

Urinary bother and irritation and obstruction scores did not change significantly between both treatment groups throughout the 2-year follow-up. ADT greatly influenced sexual and hormonal functions and bothers in patients who received IMRT with ADT. The patient-perceived satisfaction at 12 months after the treatments was approximately 80% in both treatment groups, and there was no significant difference between the 2 groups. At 12 months after the treatments, urinary function (P = .001) was identified as the most significant predictor of patient-perceived satisfaction, although it was not associated with the treatment type.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with high-risk PCA who received RP or IMRT with ADT reported high patient-perceived satisfaction after the treatments. This study showed that improvement in urinary function might contribute to patient-perceived satisfaction after the treatments.

Younger patients have poorer biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic significance of patient age with respect to tumour aggressiveness in men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. In this study, we reviewed the records of 743 patients who received RP without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy at our institution and were followed up for >2 years postoperatively. For our analyses, the patients were divided into two groups according to age: younger (<60 years) and older (≥60 years). Through uni- and multivariate analyses, associations of various clinicopathological parameters, including biochemical recurrence-free survival, with patient age, were evaluated among all patients, and the patients were stratified according to their D'Amico risk classification. Among all subjects, younger (n=126) and older (n=617) patients showed no significant differences regarding pathological parameters and biochemical recurrence-free survival (P=0.288). For the high-risk group (n=206), younger patients had a lower rate of biochemical recurrence-free survival following surgery than older patients (P=0.017), despite the fact that no significant differences were observed regarding various known prognostic parameters between the two age groups. In addition, multivariate analysis revealed that age was an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence-free survival among the high-risk group (P=0.003). Our results showed that relatively younger patients have a comparable biochemical outcome compared with their older counterparts following RP performed for prostate cancer. However, among patients with high-risk disease, younger patients have a worse biochemical outcome following RP compared with older patients.

Measuring prostate-specific quality of life in prostate cancer patients scheduled for radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy and reference men in Germany and Canada using the Patient Oriented Prostate Utility Scale-Psychometric (PORPUS-P)

BACKGROUND

The PORPUS-P is a short questionnaire for measuring prostate-specific quality of life (QoL), which was designed in Canada for use in prostate cancer (PC) patients. We aimed to generate a German version and compare PORPUS-P scores of German reference men from the general population, and German and Canadian patients with newly diagnosed PC who were scheduled to receive radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS

The study sample consisted of 988 reference men, 121 German and 66 Canadian PC patients scheduled for RT, and 371 German and 68 Canadian PC patients scheduled for RP. All men completed the PORPUS-P (German postal questionnaire, Canada personal interview). Data were gathered from PC patients before the start of therapy.

RESULTS

Canadian patients were better educated than the German patients, and fewer were retired. Patients scheduled to receive RT were older and more were retired. German RT patients had lower D'Amico risk scores and pre-treatment Gleason scores than RP patients, and Canadian RT patients had higher pre-treatment PSA than RP patients. Urinary and sexual dysfunction were seen in PC patients (especially RT patients), but were also common in the German reference men. Crude mean PORPUS-P scores differed statistically significant between German RT and RP and Canadian RP and RT patients, with RT patients having higher QoL scores. The differences in age-adjusted mean PORPUS-P scores between reference men and RP patients were not clinically significant, while RT patients had (clinically) significantly lower scores than the reference men.

CONCLUSION

The German translation of the PORPUS-P appears to be a short and feasible tool for assessing prostate-specific QoL. Although we found a similar response pattern, Canadian and German PC patients scheduled to receive RT or RP rated their pre-treatment quality of life on different levels, which reveals the need for national reference data. Problems in several QoL domains exist before treatment, and differ between PC patients scheduled for RT and RP.