Validation and comparison of the two Kattan nomograms in patients with prostate cancer treated with 125iodine brachytherapy

Five-year effectiveness of low-dose-rate brachytherapy: comparisons with nomogram predictions in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer presenting significant control of intra- and periprostatic disease

PURPOSE

To assess the effectiveness of low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer and to compare the outcome with predictions from Kattan and Partin nomograms at 60 months after seed implantation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One thousand, one hundred and eighty-seven patients with localized prostate cancer at low-, intermediate-, or high-risk of progression received LDR brachytherapy using iodine-125 seeds with curative intent, applied as monotherapy or in combination with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), and/or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). At 60 months after seed implantation, data of 1,064 patients (1,058 alive + 6 who died of prostate cancer) were analyzed for biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels using the Phoenix definition. Five-year bPFS probabilities were determined for various risk group classifications (d'Amico, Mt. Sinai, MSKCC/Seattle, NCCN). Outcomes were also compared to patient-individualized nomogram predictions of 5-year bPFS (Kattan 2002) and probability of organ-confined disease (Kattan 2002, Partin 2007).

RESULTS

Overall, 93.3% (993/1,064) of the patients were free of biochemical progression within 5 years, while the average 5-year bPFS probability according to the Kattan nomogram was significantly lower (85%, p < 0.001). Outcomes were significantly better than Kattan nomogram predictions in the subgroup of patients with monotherapy as well as in patients additionally treated with EBRT. Comparison of the overall outcome with nomogram predictions for organ-confined disease (Kattan nomogram: 50%; Partin nomogram: 65%) revealed a significant probability of LDR brachytherapy to destroy periprostatic tumor spread (p < 0.001) in all risk group constellations, even in high-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate high effectiveness of LDR brachytherapy in all risk groups, significantly better than predicted with the Kattan nomogram in most subgroups. The significant superiority of LDR brachytherapy compared to nomogram predictions of organ-confined disease suggests that LDR brachytherapy effectively controls both intra- and periprostatic disease.

Nomograms are key decision-making tools in prostate cancer radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

The use of nomograms for predicting clinical endpoints has been well documented. Nomograms provide an individualized prognosis and help clinicians determine the effectiveness of treatment for a given patient. Early identification of potential treatment failure or toxicity allows alternative approaches to be considered, reducing unnecessary treatment, morbidity, and cost. This review aims to evaluate clinical potential of nomogram use for the management of prostate cancer radiotherapy patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched for literature published between 2006 and 2016. The reported correlation between measured and nomogram-predicted probabilities of biochemical control, disease progression, survival and toxicity was reviewed, through an analysis of concordance indexes and areas under the curves.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were reviewed. Outcomes predicted by the nomogram were very close to outcomes measured (concordance index of 0.7 and above) in the majority. But a combination of under and overestimation of outcome was also reported. The predictive accuracy of nomograms was very variable, however, most nomograms had accuracy greater than chance, indicated by a concordance index higher than 0.5.

CONCLUSION

Nomograms can be used as prognostic guides to aid clinical decision-making for prostate cancer patients until further research addresses the limitations presented in this review. Strict definitions of end points should be added to future models and perhaps models could be enhanced with the incorporation of genomic variables or tumor specific parameters.

Parameters predicting for prostate specific antigen response rates at one year post low-dose-rate intraoperative prostate brachytherapy

Purpose

To develop a model for prostate specific antigen (PSA) values at one year among patients treated with intraoperatively planned ¹²⁵I prostate brachytherapy (IOPB).

Material and methods

Four hundred and deven patients treated with IOPB for prostate adenocarcinoma were divided into four groups: those with PSA values ≥ 3 ng/ml; < 3 and ≥ 2; < 2 and ≥ 1 or PSA < 1 between 10.5 and 14.5 months post implantation (1yPSA). Ordinal regression analysis was then performed between patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics. 1yPSA values were also compared with toxicity outcomes.

Results

Median 1yPSA was 0.77 (0.04-17.36). Thirty-two patients (8%) had a PSA ≥ 3; 35 (9%) had PSA < 3, ≥ 2; 87 (21%) had PSA < 2, ≥ 1, and most patients 254 (62%) had PSA < 1. PSA response was independent of gland volume, Gleason score, clinical stage, seed activity, V₉₀, V₂₀₀, D₉₀, or number of needles and seeds used. Older patients had significantly lower 1yPSA; median ages 65.1 (46.5-81.0), 62.1 (50.4-79.5), 60.5 (47.1-80.3), and 58.1 (45.1-74.2) years for each of the 1yPSA groups respectively (p < 0.001). Also, both implant V₁₅₀ (p < 0.001) and initial PSA values (p = 0.04) were predictive of 1yPSA values. There was no correlation between 1yPSA values and toxicity encountered.

Conclusions

PSA response at 1 year post IOPB appears to be dependent on patient age, initial PSA, and implant V₁₅₀. Our results provide reassurance that parameters other than biochemical failure influence 1yPSA values.

An appraisal of analytical tools used in predicting clinical outcomes following radiation therapy treatment of men with prostate cancer: a systematic review

Background

Prostate cancer can be treated with several different modalities, including radiation treatment. Various prognostic tools have been developed to aid decision making by providing estimates of the probability of different outcomes. Such tools have been demonstrated to have better prognostic accuracy than clinical judgment alone.

Methods

A systematic review was undertaken to identify papers relating to the prediction of clinical outcomes (biochemical failure, metastasis, survival) in patients with prostate cancer who received radiation treatment, with the particular aim of identifying whether published tools are adequately developed, validated, and provide accurate predictions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched from July 2007. Title and abstract screening, full text review, and critical appraisal were conducted by two reviewers. A review protocol was published in advance of commencing literature searches.

Results

The search strategy resulted in 165 potential articles, of which 72 were selected for full text review and 47 ultimately included. These papers described 66 models which were newly developed and 31 which were external validations of already published predictive tools. The included studies represented a total of 60,457 patients, recruited between 1984 and 2009. Sixty five percent of models were not externally validated, 57% did not report accuracy and 31% included variables which are not readily accessible in existing datasets. Most models (72, 74%) related to external beam radiation therapy with the remainder relating to brachytherapy (alone or in combination with external beam radiation therapy).

Conclusions

A large number of prognostic models (97) have been described in the recent literature, representing a rapid increase since previous reviews (17 papers, 1966–2007). Most models described were not validated and a third utilised variables which are not readily accessible in existing data collections. Where validation had occurred, it was often limited to data taken from single institutes in the US. While validated and accurate models are available to predict prostate cancer specific mortality following external beam radiation therapy, there is a scarcity of such tools relating to brachytherapy. This review provides an accessible catalogue of predictive tools for current use and which should be prioritised for future validation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-017-0786-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.