Radical prostatectomy versus brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer on oncological and functional outcomes: a meta-analysis

Outcome comparison of radical prostatectomy versus seed brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer using two biochemical recurrence definitions

OBJECTIVE

We compared the outcome of radical prostatectomy (RP) with seed brachytherapy (BT) in clinically localized prostate cancer (LPCa) using two different biochemical recurrence (BCR) definitions.

METHODS

Clinical data of 1117 patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with either RP or BT as the basis of the multimodal therapy from a single tertiary hospital between 2007 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. 843 LPCa patients (RP = 737, BT = 106) with at least one prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test after treatment were finally included. The BCR survival was evaluated by direct comparison and one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis using surgical definition (PSA ≥ 0.2ng/ml) for RP and surgical/Phoenix definition (PSA nadir + 2ng/ml ) for BT. The propensity score (PS) was calculated by multivariable logistic regression based on the clinicopathological parameters.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 43 months for RP patients and 45 months for BT patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis did not show any statistically significant differences in terms of BCR-free survival (BFS) between the two groups when using Phoenix definition for BT (P > 0.05). Similar results were obtained in all D'Amico risk groups when stratified analyses were conducted. However, RP achieved improved BFS compared to BT in the whole cohort and all risk groups with the surgical definition for BT(P < 0.05). After adjusting PS, 192 patients were divided into RP and BT groups (96 each). RP presented a better BFS than BT when using the surgical definition (P < 0.001), but no significant difference was found when using the Phoenix definition (P = 0.609).

CONCLUSION

Inconsistent BCR-free survival outcomes were acquired using two different BCR definitions for BT patients. RP provided comparable BFS with BT using the Phoenix definition but better BFS using the surgical definition, regardless of whether the PSM was performed. Our findings indicated that an exact BCR definition was critical for prognostic assessment. The corresponding results will assist physicians in pretreatment consultation and treatment selection.

Long-Term Biochemical Control of a Prospective Cohort of Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Interstitial Brachytherapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy

AIMS

To report long-term oncological outcomes of men treated prospectively as part of the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group phase III Surgical Prostatectomy Versus Interstitial Radiation Intervention Trial (SPIRIT) at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2003-2004, patients eligible for SPRIT attended a multidisciplinary educational session, following which they could choose radical prostatectomy, low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) or randomisation to SPIRIT. Biochemical failure was determined by the accepted definitions of a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥0.2 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy and the Phoenix definition of PSA ≥2 ng/ml above the nadir after LDR-BT. A sensitivity analysis, using a PSA >0.5 ng/ml to define biochemical failure after LDR-BT and a threshold PSA ≥0.2 ng/ml, was carried out to test the robustness of the results. To account for the competing risk of death, Gray's test was used to test the equality of the cumulative incidence function of biochemical failure between treatment groups. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival and prostate cancer-specific survival. A P-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of 156 patients, 100 received LDR-BT (15 after randomisation) and 56 underwent radical prostatectomy (15 after randomisation). The median follow-up was 12.6 and 14.7 years for LDR-BT and radical prostatectomy, respectively. The median age was 60 years; the median pre-treatment PSA was 5.5 (interquartile range 4.3-7.1). No significant differences in patient characteristics were found between groups. Two patients received adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. The cumulative incidence function of biochemical failure was 0%, 1.1% and 2.4% at 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively, in the LDR-BT arm versus 8.5%, 15.8% and 15.8% in the radical prostatectomy arm (P < 0.001). These results were consistent when varying the definition of biochemical failure defined as PSA ≥0.5 ng/ml (P = 0.01). At 15 years, overall survival was higher in patients treated with radical prostatectomy compared with those treated with LDR-BT; however, no statistical difference was found in prostate cancer-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

In low-risk prostate cancer patients, LDR-BT offers excellent long-term oncological outcomes comparable with radical prostatectomy, in addition to the previously reported advantage for LDR-BT in urinary and sexual quality of life domains and patient satisfaction.

Long-term prognosis and prognostic factors of brachytherapy and propensity score matched comparisons of the outcomes between brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Background

To report outcomes of patients undergoing brachytherapy (BT), investigate factors associated with biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and to compare its long-term prognosis with that of radical prostatectomy (RP) in localized prostate cancer.

Methods

The clinical data of 87 elderly patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent BT at Huadong Hospital affiliated to Fudan University from January 2009 to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patient prognoses and associated factors were investigated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression models. The clinical data of the 142 patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent RP during the same period were also collected. By using propensity score matching (PSM), the 42 patients who underwent BT were matched to 42 patients who underwent RP, and the differences in the survival curves were investigated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

The median follow-up period of the patients who underwent BT was 101 months. The 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates of the patients who underwent BT were 82.8% and 64.0%, respectively, while the 5- and 10-year bPFS rates were 97.2% and 87.5%, respectively. The preoperative clinical Tumor (T) stage was identified as a prognostic factor of bPFS, as patients who underwent BT whose clinical stage was T3 had a worse prognosis than those whose clinical stage was T1-T2 (HR =0.097, P=0.049). After PSM, the average follow-up time of the BT group was 90 months and that of the RP group was 94 months. No significant differences in bPFS or cause-specific survival were observed between the 2 groups. The OS of the RP group was significantly higher than that of the BP group (P=0.030). Among the patients with a prostate volume >35 mL, those who underwent BT had significantly higher pPFS than those who underwent RP (P=0.041).

Conclusions

In the localized prostate cancer, BT and RP offered similar oncological control in the localized prostate cancer. Stage T3 prostate cancer who undergo BT was associated with worse biochemical failure and was the only variable significantly predictive of biochemical recurrence.

Mortality and biochemical recurrence after surgery, brachytherapy, or external radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a 10-year follow-up cohort study

To compare the effectiveness at ten years of follow-up of radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy, in terms of overall survival, prostate cancer-specific mortality and biochemical recurrence. Cohort of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (T1/T2 and low/intermediate risk) from ten Spanish hospitals, followed for 10 years. The treatment selection was decided jointly by patients and physicians. Of 704 participants, 192 were treated with open radical retropubic prostatectomy, 317 with ¹²⁵I brachytherapy alone, and 195 with 3D external beam radiation. We evaluated overall survival, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and biochemical recurrence. Kaplan–Meier estimators were plotted, and Cox proportional-hazards regression models were constructed to estimate hazard ratios (HR), adjusted by propensity scores. Of the 704 participants, 542 patients were alive ten years after treatment, and a total of 13 patients have been lost during follow-up. After adjusting by propensity score and Gleason score, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy were not associated with decreased 10-year overall survival (aHR = 1.36, p = 0.292 and aHR = 1.44, p = 0.222), but presented higher biochemical recurrence (aHR = 1.93, p = 0.004 and aHR = 2.56, p < 0.001) than radical prostatectomy at ten years of follow-up. Higher prostate cancer-specific mortality was also observed in external radiotherapy (aHR = 9.37, p = 0.015). Novel long-term results are provided on the effectiveness of brachytherapy to control localized prostate cancer ten years after treatment, compared to radical prostatectomy and external radiotherapy, presenting high overall survival, similarly to radical prostatectomy, but higher risk of biochemical progression. These findings provide valuable information to facilitate shared clinical decision-making.

Study identifier at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01492751.

Oncological and urinary outcomes following low-dose-rate brachytherapy with a median follow-up of 11.8 years

OBJECTIVES

To examine the long-term oncological outcomes and urological morbidity of low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDRBT) monotherapy using live intraoperative dosimetry planning and an automated needle navigation delivery system for the treatment of men with low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective database of 400 consecutive patients who underwent LDRBT between July 2003 and June 2015 was retrospectively reviewed to assess urinary side-effects and biochemical progression, based on the Phoenix definition and also a definition of a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≥0.2 μg/L.

RESULTS

Minimum patient follow-up was 5.5 years. The median follow-up of the entire cohort was 11.8 years. The median (range) PSA level was 6.1 (0.9-17) μg/L and the median Gleason score was 3 + 4. The biochemical relapse-free survival (RFS; freedom from biochemical recurrence) based on the Phoenix definition was 85.8% (343/400). The RFS using a 'surgical' definition of a PSA level of <0.2 μg/L was 71% (284/400). Of the 297 men followed for ≥10 years, prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) was 98% (291/297). Post-LDRBT urethral stricture developed in 11 men (2.8%, 11/400). For men with ≥10 years of follow-up, 22 men (7.4%, 22/297) required a pad for either stress or urge urinary incontinence (UI). UI was identified in only 2.2% (one of 46) of men who had a bladder neck incision (BNI) before LDRBT.

CONCLUSION

LDRBT is associated with excellent PCSS, with a median follow-up of 11.8 years. The risk of post-implantation urethral stricture and UI is low and a pre-implantation BNI for management of bladder outflow obstruction does not increase the risk of UI or urethral stricture.

Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Background and Objectives: To compare the oncological and functional outcomes of brachytherapy (BT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 557 patients with localized PCa who were treated with BT (n = 245) or RP (n = 312) at Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital between January 2012 and December 2017. Biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared by treatment modality. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate bRFS. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was measured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire. Results: The BT group was older and had a higher initial PSA (iPSA). The 5-year bRFS was 82.9% in the BT group versus 80.1% in the RP group (p = 0.570). The 5-year CSS was 96.4% in the BT group versus 96.8% in the RP group (p = 0.967). Based on multivariate Cox regression analysis, Gleason score ≥ 8 was the main independent prognostic factor for bRFS. Regarding the HRQoL, compared with the baseline, both treatments produced a significant decrease in different aspects of HRQoL at 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. Patients in the BT group had lower HRQoL with regard to urinary irritation/obstruction and bowel function or bother, while patients in the RP group had lower HRQoL concerning urinary incontinence and sexual function or bother. There was no significant difference in HRQoL aspects between the two groups after follow-up for 2 years compared with the baseline. Conclusions: BT provides equivalent oncological control outcomes in terms of bRFS and CSS for patients with localized PCa compared with RP. Gleason score ≥ 8 was the main independent prognostic factor for bRFS. BT had better HRQoL compared with RP, except for urinary irritation/obstruction and bowel function or bother, but returned to baseline after 2 years.

Can patients with low-risk prostate cancer really benefit from radical treatment?: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy and active surveillance are three widely used treatment options for patients with low-risk prostate cancer, but the relative effects are controversial. We searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science until June 2020, focusing on the studies comparing the effect of radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy and active surveillance in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Through the random-effects model, dichotomous data were extracted and summarised by odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval. Twenty-two studies containing 185,363 participants were pooled for the comprehensive comparison. The Bayesian mixed network estimate demonstrated the cancer-specific mortality of radical prostatectomy was significantly lower than active surveillance (OR, 0.46; 95% CI 0.34-0.64) and external beam radiation therapy (OR, 0.66; 95% CI 0.46-0.96), but not brachytherapy (OR, 0.63; 95% CI 0.41-1.03). The brachytherapy demonstrated the best treatment ranking probability results in terms of all-cause mortality, while no significant difference was observed when compared with other three treatment modalities. Brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy were associated with a similar risk of cancer-specific mortality, and both of them were significantly superior to active surveillance and external beam radiation therapy; nevertheless, there was no significant difference among the aforementioned treatment methods in all-cause mortality.

Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Complications and Their Treatment

Focal therapy is a modern alternative to selectively treat a specific part of the prostate harboring clinically significant disease while preserving the rest of the gland. The aim of this therapeutic approach is to retain the oncological benefit of active treatment and to minimize the side-effects of common radical treatments. The oncological effectiveness of focal therapy is yet to be proven in long-term robust trials. In contrast, the toxicity profile is well-established in randomized controlled trials and multiple robust prospective cohort studies. This narrative review summarizes the relevant evidence on complications and their management after focal therapy. When compared to whole gland treatments, focal therapy provides a substantial benefit in terms of adverse events reduction and preservation of genito-urinary function. The most common complications occur in the peri-operative period. Urinary tract infection and acute urinary retention can occur in up to 17% of patients, while dysuria and haematuria are more common. Urinary incontinence following focal therapy is very rare (0-5%), and the vast majority of patients recover in few weeks. Erectile dysfunction can occur after focal therapy in 0-46%: the baseline function and the ablation template are the most important factors predicting post-operative erectile dysfunction. Focal therapy in the salvage setting after external beam radiotherapy has a significantly higher rate of complications. Up to one man in 10 will present a severe complication.