Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone for metastatic patients starting hormone therapy: 5-year follow-up results from the STAMPEDE randomised trial (NCT00268476)

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (AAP) previously demonstrated improved survival in STAMPEDE, a multiarm, multistage platform trial in men starting long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer. This long-term analysis in metastatic patients was planned for 3 years after the first results. Standard-of-care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy. The comparison randomised patients 1:1 to SOC-alone with or without daily abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + prednisolone 5 mg (SOC + AAP), continued until disease progression. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Metastatic disease risk group was classified retrospectively using baseline CT and bone scans by central radiological review and pathology reports. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, accounting for baseline stratification factors. One thousand and three patients were contemporaneously randomised (November 2011 to January 2014): median age 67 years; 94% newly-diagnosed; metastatic disease risk group: 48% high, 44% low, 8% unassessable; median PSA 97 ng/mL. At 6.1 years median follow-up, 329 SOC-alone deaths (118 low-risk, 178 high-risk) and 244 SOC + AAP deaths (75 low-risk, 145 high-risk) were reported. Adjusted HR = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.71; P = 0.31 × 10^-9 ) favoured SOC + AAP, with 5-years survival improved from 41% SOC-alone to 60% SOC + AAP. This was similar in low-risk (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.76) and high-risk (HR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.43-0.69) patients. Median and current maximum time on SOC + AAP was 2.4 and 8.1 years. Toxicity at 4 years postrandomisation was similar, with 16% patients in each group reporting grade 3 or higher toxicity. A sustained and substantial improvement in overall survival of all metastatic prostate cancer patients was achieved with SOC + abiraterone acetate + prednisolone, irrespective of metastatic disease risk group.

Docetaxel for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Outcomes in the STAMPEDE Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

STAMPEDE previously reported adding upfront docetaxel improved overall survival for prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report long-term results for non-metastatic patients using, as primary outcome, metastatic progression-free survival (mPFS), an externally demonstrated surrogate for overall survival.

METHODS

Standard of care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy with or without radical prostate radiotherapy. A total of 460 SOC and 230 SOC plus docetaxel were randomly assigned 2:1. Standard survival methods and intention to treat were used. Treatment effect estimates were summarized from adjusted Cox regression models, switching to restricted mean survival time if non-proportional hazards. mPFS (new metastases, skeletal-related events, or prostate cancer death) had 70% power (α = 0.05) for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.70. Secondary outcome measures included overall survival, failure-free survival (FFS), and progression-free survival (PFS: mPFS, locoregional progression).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 6.5 years with 142 mPFS events on SOC (3 year and 54% increases over previous report). There was no good evidence of an advantage to SOC plus docetaxel on mPFS (HR = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.19; P = .43); with 5-year mPFS 82% (95% CI = 78% to 87%) SOC plus docetaxel vs 77% (95% CI = 73% to 81%) SOC. Secondary outcomes showed evidence SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.88; P = .002) and PFS (nonproportional P = .03, restricted mean survival time difference = 5.8 months, 95% CI = 0.5 to 11.2; P = .03) but no good evidence of overall survival benefit (125 SOC deaths; HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.21; P = .44). There was no evidence SOC plus docetaxel increased late toxicity: post 1 year, 29% SOC and 30% SOC plus docetaxel grade 3-5 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is robust evidence that SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS and PFS (previously shown to increase quality-adjusted life-years), without excess late toxicity, which did not translate into benefit for longer-term outcomes. This may influence patient management in individual cases.

External Validation of the 2003 Leibovich Prognostic Score in Patients Randomly Assigned to SORCE, an International Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Sorafenib in Renal Cell Cancer

The 2003 Leibovich score guides prognostication and selection to adjuvant clinical trials for patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after nephrectomy. We provide a robust external validation of the 2003 Leibovich score using contemporary data from SORCE, an international, randomized trial of sorafenib after excision of primary RCC.

Read how we have shown that the 2003 Leibovich score demonstrates discriminative accuracy in contemporary clear-cell and non–clear-cell RCC patient cohorts, supporting its continued use to guide discussions on patient prognosis and risk-stratification in clinical trials.

Individualised Predictions of the Survival Benefit Due to Adjuvant Therapy in a Randomised Trial of Sorafenib after Nephrectomy for Localised Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Little has been published regarding how doctors think and talk about prognosis and the potential benefits of adjuvant therapy. OBJECTIVE: We sought predictions of survival rates and survival times, for patients with and without adjuvant therapy, from the clinicians of patients participating in a randomised trial of adjuvant sorafenib after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: A subset of medical oncologists and urologists in the SORCE trial completed questionnaires eliciting their predictions of survival rates and survival times, with and without adjuvant sorafenib, for each of their participating patients. To compare predictions elicited as survival times versus survival rates, we transformed survival times to survival rates. To compare predicted benefits elicited as absolute improvements in rates and times, we transformed them into hazard ratios (HR), a measure of relative benefit.We postulated that a plausible benefit in overall survival (OS) should be smaller than that hypothesized for disease–free survival (DFS) in the trials original sample size justification (i.e. HR for OS should be ≥ 0.75). RESULTS: Sixty–one medical oncologists and 17 urologists completed questionnaires on 216 patients between 2007 and 2013. Predictions of survival without adjuvant sorafenib were similar whether elicited as survival rates or survival times (median 5–year survival rate of 61% vs 60%, p = 0.6). Predicted benefits of sorafenib were larger when elicited as improvements in survival rates than survival times (median HR 0.76 vs 0.83, p < 0.0001). The proportion of HR for predicted OS with sorafenib that reflected a plausible benefit (smaller effect of sorafenib on OS than hypothesized on DFS, i.e. HR ≥ 0.75) was 51% for survival rates, and 65% for survival times. CONCLUSIONS: The predicted benefits of adjuvant sorafenib were larger when elicited as improvements in survival rates than as survival times, and were often larger than the sample size justification for the trial. These potential biases should be considered when thinking and talking about individual patients in clinical practice, and when designing clinical trials.

Adjuvant Sorafenib for Renal Cell Carcinoma at Intermediate or High Risk of Relapse: Results From the SORCE Randomized Phase III Intergroup Trial

PURPOSE

SORCE is an international, randomized, double-blind, three-arm trial of sorafenib after surgical excision of primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) found to be at intermediate or high risk of recurrence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We randomly assigned participants (2:3:3) to 3 years of placebo (arm A), 1 year of sorafenib followed by 2 years of placebo (arm B), or 3 years of sorafenib (arm C). The initial sorafenib dose was 400 mg twice per day orally, amended to 400 mg daily. The primary outcome analysis, which was revised as a result of external results, was investigator-reported disease-free survival (DFS) comparing 3 years of sorafenib versus placebo.

RESULTS

Between July 2007 and April 2013, we randomly assigned 1,711 participants (430, 642, and 639 participants in arms A, B, and C, respectively). Median age was 58 years, 71% of patients were men, 84% had clear cell histology, 53% were at intermediate risk of recurrence, and 47% were at high risk of recurrence. We observed no differences in DFS or overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, patients with high risk of recurrence, or patients with clear cell RCC only. Median DFS was not reached for 3 years of sorafenib or for placebo (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.23; P = .95). We observed nonproportional hazards; the restricted mean survival time (RMST) was 6.81 years for 3 years of sorafenib and 6.82 years for placebo (RMST difference, 0.01 year; 95% CI, -0.49 to 0.48 year; P = .99). Despite offering treatment adaptations, more than half of participants stopped treatment by 12 months. Grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction was reported in 24% of participants on sorafenib.

CONCLUSION

Sorafenib should not be used as adjuvant therapy for RCC. Active surveillance remains the standard of care for patients at intermediate or high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy and is the appropriate control of our current international adjuvant RCC trial, RAMPART.

Abiraterone in "High-" and "Low-risk" Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Abiraterone acetate received licencing for use in only "high-risk" metastatic hormone-naïve prostate cancer (mHNPC) following the LATITUDE trial findings. However, a "risk"-related effect was not seen in the STAMPEDE trial. There remains uncertainty as to whether men with LATITUDE "low-risk" M1 disease benefit from androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with abiraterone acetate and prednisolone (AAP).

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of heterogeneity of effect between LATITUDE high- and low-risk M1 prostate cancer patients receiving ADT + AAP in the STAMPEDE trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A post hoc subgroup analysis of the 2017 STAMPEDE "abiraterone comparison". Staging scans for M1 patients contemporaneously randomised to ADT or ADT + AAP within the STAMPEDE trial were evaluated centrally and blind to treatment assignment. Stratification was by risk according to the criteria set out in the LATITUDE trial. Exploratory subgroup stratification incorporated the CHAARTED criteria.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS) and the secondary outcome measure was failure-free survival (FFS). Further exploratory analysis evaluated clinical skeletal-related events, progression-free survival (PFS), and prostate cancer-specific death. Standard Cox-regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were employed for analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 901 M1 STAMPEDE patients were evaluated after exclusions. Of the patients, 428 (48%) were identified as having a low risk and 473 (52%) a high risk. Patients receiving ADT + AAP had significantly improved OS (low-risk hazard ratio [HR]: 0.66, 95% confidence interval or CI [0.44-0.98]) and FFS (low-risk HR: 0.24, 95% CI [0.17-0.33]) compared with ADT alone. Heterogeneity of effect was not seen between low- and high-risk groups for OS or FFS. For OS benefit in low risk, the number needed to treat was four times greater than that for high risk. However, this was not observed for the other measured endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Men with mHNPC gain treatment benefit from ADT + AAP irrespective of risk stratification for "risk" or "volume".

PATIENT SUMMARY

Coadministration of abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with prolonged overall survival and disease control, compared with ADT alone, in all men with metastatic disease starting hormone therapy for the first time.

Addition of docetaxel to hormonal therapy in low- and high-burden metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer: long-term survival results from the STAMPEDE trial

BACKGROUND

STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients.

METHODS

We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional.

RESULTS

Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.76, P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.81, P < 0.001) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P > 0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden.

Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Based on previous findings, we hypothesised that radiotherapy to the prostate would improve overall survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer, and that the benefit would be greatest in patients with a low metastatic burden. We aimed to compare standard of care for metastatic prostate cancer, with and without radiotherapy.

METHODS

We did a randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 117 hospitals in Switzerland and the UK. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. We randomly allocated patients open-label in a 1:1 ratio to standard of care (control group) or standard of care and radiotherapy (radiotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by hospital, age at randomisation, nodal involvement, WHO performance status, planned androgen deprivation therapy, planned docetaxel use (from December, 2015), and regular aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Standard of care was lifelong androgen deprivation therapy, with up-front docetaxel permitted from December, 2015. Men allocated radiotherapy received either a daily (55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks) or weekly (36 Gy in six fractions over 6 weeks) schedule that was nominated before randomisation. The primary outcome was overall survival, measured as the number of deaths; this analysis had 90% power with a one-sided α of 2·5% for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·75. Secondary outcomes were failure-free survival, progression-free survival, metastatic progression-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and symptomatic local event-free survival. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. The primary outcome analysis was by intention to treat. Two prespecified subgroup analyses tested the effects of prostate radiotherapy by baseline metastatic burden and radiotherapy schedule. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 22, 2013, and Sept 2, 2016, 2061 men underwent randomisation, 1029 were allocated the control and 1032 radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced, with a median age of 68 years (IQR 63-73) and median amount of prostate-specific antigen of 97 ng/mL (33-315). 367 (18%) patients received early docetaxel. 1082 (52%) participants nominated the daily radiotherapy schedule before randomisation and 979 (48%) the weekly schedule. 819 (40%) men had a low metastatic burden, 1120 (54%) had a high metastatic burden, and the metastatic burden was unknown for 122 (6%). Radiotherapy improved failure-free survival (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·68-0·84; p<0·0001) but not overall survival (0·92, 0·80-1·06; p=0·266). Radiotherapy was well tolerated, with 48 (5%) adverse events (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3-4) reported during radiotherapy and 37 (4%) after radiotherapy. The proportion reporting at least one severe adverse event (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or worse) was similar by treatment group in the safety population (398 [38%] with control and 380 [39%] with radiotherapy).

INTERPRETATION

Radiotherapy to the prostate did not improve overall survival for unselected patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Addition of Docetaxel to First-line Long-term Hormone Therapy in Prostate Cancer (STAMPEDE): Modelling to Estimate Long-term Survival, Quality-adjusted Survival, and Cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Results from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy.

INTERVENTION

SOC was hormone therapy for ≥2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75mg/m2) was administered alongside SOC for six three-weekly cycles.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER £5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled.

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body.

Adding abiraterone or docetaxel to long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer: directly randomised data from the STAMPEDE multi-arm, multi-stage platform protocol

Background

Adding abiraterone acetate with prednisolone (AAP) or docetaxel with prednisolone (DocP) to standard-of-care (SOC) each improved survival in systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic prostate cancer: evaluation of drug efficacy: a multi-arm multi-stage platform randomised controlled protocol recruiting patients with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The protocol provides the only direct, randomised comparative data of SOC + AAP versus SOC + DocP.

Method

Recruitment to SOC + DocP and SOC + AAP overlapped November 2011 to March 2013. SOC was long-term ADT or, for most non-metastatic cases, ADT for ≥2 years and RT to the primary tumour. Stratified randomisation allocated pts 2 : 1 : 2 to SOC; SOC + docetaxel 75 mg/m2 3-weekly×6 + prednisolone 10 mg daily; or SOC + abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + prednisolone 5 mg daily. AAP duration depended on stage and intent to give radical RT. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. This was not a formally powered comparison. A hazard ratio (HR) <1 favours SOC + AAP, and HR > 1 favours SOC + DocP.

Results

A total of 566 consenting patients were contemporaneously randomised: 189 SOC + DocP and 377 SOC + AAP. The patients, balanced by allocated treatment were: 342 (60%) M1; 429 (76%) Gleason 8-10; 449 (79%) WHO performance status 0; median age 66 years and median PSA 56 ng/ml. With median follow-up 4 years, 149 deaths were reported. For overall survival, HR = 1.16 (95% CI 0.82-1.65); failure-free survival HR = 0.51 (95% CI 0.39-0.67); progression-free survival HR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.48-0.88); metastasis-free survival HR = 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.03); prostate cancer-specific survival HR = 1.02 (0.70-1.49); and symptomatic skeletal events HR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.55-1.25). In the safety population, the proportion reporting ≥1 grade 3, 4 or 5 adverse events ever was 36%, 13% and 1% SOC + DocP, and 40%, 7% and 1% SOC + AAP; prevalence 11% at 1 and 2 years on both arms. Relapse treatment patterns varied by arm.

Conclusions

This direct, randomised comparative analysis of two new treatment standards for hormone-naïve prostate cancer showed no evidence of a difference in overall or prostate cancer-specific survival, nor in other important outcomes such as symptomatic skeletal events. Worst toxicity grade over entire time on trial was similar but comprised different toxicities in line with the known properties of the drugs.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00268476.

Improving outcomes in high-risk, nonmetastatic renal cancer: new data and ongoing trials

High-risk, localized renal cancer is associated with recurrence rates of up to 75% at 10 years. The outcomes of patients at this disease stage depend on optimal patient stratification, surgical management and systemic therapy selection. Current evidence does not support the use of adjuvant therapy in patients with high-risk, localized disease. During the past 12 months, the results of large, randomized-controlled trials of adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment, such as ASSURE and S-TRAC, have been published, but their findings are conflicting. Whether TKIs will become standard of care in the adjuvant setting depends on the long-term data from ongoing trials. In addition, several new trials that evaluate the utility of novel immune checkpoint inhibitors in this patient group are currently recruiting. The management of renal cancer is likely to evolve at a rapid pace over the next few years and matching patients with the appropriate therapeutic regimen is likely to be a focus of future research.

Abiraterone for Prostate Cancer Not Previously Treated with Hormone Therapy

BACKGROUND

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone improves survival in men with relapsed prostate cancer. We assessed the effect of this combination in men starting long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), using a multigroup, multistage trial design.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive ADT alone or ADT plus abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and prednisolone (5 mg daily) (combination therapy). Local radiotherapy was mandated for patients with node-negative, nonmetastatic disease and encouraged for those with positive nodes. For patients with nonmetastatic disease with no radiotherapy planned and for patients with metastatic disease, treatment continued until radiologic, clinical, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression; otherwise, treatment was to continue for 2 years or until any type of progression, whichever came first. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. The intermediate primary outcome was failure-free survival (treatment failure was defined as radiologic, clinical, or PSA progression or death from prostate cancer).

RESULTS

A total of 1917 patients underwent randomization from November 2011 through January 2014. The median age was 67 years, and the median PSA level was 53 ng per milliliter. A total of 52% of the patients had metastatic disease, 20% had node-positive or node-indeterminate nonmetastatic disease, and 28% had node-negative, nonmetastatic disease; 95% had newly diagnosed disease. The median follow-up was 40 months. There were 184 deaths in the combination group as compared with 262 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.76; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.75 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.61 in those with metastatic disease. There were 248 treatment-failure events in the combination group as compared with 535 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.34; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.21 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.31 in those with metastatic disease. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 47% of the patients in the combination group (with nine grade 5 events) and in 33% of the patients in the ADT-alone group (with three grade 5 events).

CONCLUSIONS

Among men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, ADT plus abiraterone and prednisolone was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and failure-free survival than ADT alone. (Funded by Cancer Research U.K. and others; STAMPEDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00268476 , and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN78818544 .).

Adding abiraterone for men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): Survival results from STAMPEDE (NCT00268476)

LBA5003

Background: Abiraterone showed a survival advantage in men with castration-refractory prostate cancer. We assessed whether abiraterone would work earlier in the disease. STAMPEDE is a randomized controlled trial using a multi-arm multi-stage platform design. It recruits patients (pts) with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term ADT. We report the first comparative survival data. Methods: The standard-of-care (SOC) was ADT for 2+yrs; radiotherapy (RT) was mandated for men with N0M0 disease & encouraged for N+M0. Stratified randomization allocated pts 1:1 to SOC or SOC+abiraterone 1000mg + prednisolone 5mg daily. Treatment duration depended on stage & intent to give radical RT: pts not having RT or M1 disease, treatment continued until PSA, radiological & clinical progression; otherwise treatment continued until the earlier of 2 years or all types of progression. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Comparison to control for survival had 90% power at 2.5% 1-sided alpha for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, requiring ~267 control arm deaths, accounting for 3 intermediate lack-of-benefit analyses on failure-free survival (FFS). Analyses used Cox proportional hazards & flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. Results: 1,917 pts were contemporaneously randomized to these arms (Nov 2011- Jan 2014). Groups were balanced: median age 67yrs; 52% metastatic, 20% N+/X M0, 28% N0M0; 95% newly-diagnosed; median PSA 53ng/ml. Median follow-up was 40m. There were 262 control arm deaths (82% PCa). The adjusted HR = 0.63 (95% CI 0.52-0.76; p=0.115x10-7; 184 deaths) for SOC+Abi vs SOC, with 3yr OS improved from 76% to 83%. There were 535 control arm FFS events; the adjusted HR = 0.29 (95% CI 0.25-0.34; p = 0.377x10-63, 248 FFS events) for SOC+Abi vs SOC. Grade 3 & 4 adverse events were seen in 29% & 3% SOC, 41% & 5% SOC+Abi; Grade 5: 3 & 9 (1 & 2 related). Conclusions: The results show a clinically & statistically significant effect on overall survival & failure-free survival from adding abiraterone at start of ADT with a manageable increase in toxicity. ADT (+/- RT) + abiraterone is a new standard of care for this group. Clinical trial information: NCT00268476.

Adding abiraterone for men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): Survival results from STAMPEDE (NCT00268476)

LBA5003

The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Saturday, June 3, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Saturday edition of ASCO Daily News.

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone.

METHODS

Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544).

FINDINGS

2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc.

INTERPRETATION

Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Failure-Free Survival and Radiotherapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Data From Patients in the Control Arm of the STAMPEDE Trial

IMPORTANCE

The natural history of patients with newly diagnosed high-risk nonmetastatic (M0) prostate cancer receiving hormone therapy (HT) either alone or with standard-of-care radiotherapy (RT) is not well documented. Furthermore, no clinical trial has assessed the role of RT in patients with node-positive (N+) M0 disease. The STAMPEDE Trial includes such individuals, allowing an exploratory multivariate analysis of the impact of radical RT.

OBJECTIVE

To describe survival and the impact on failure-free survival of RT by nodal involvement in these patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cohort study using data collected for patients allocated to the control arm (standard-of-care only) of the STAMPEDE Trial between October 5, 2005, and May 1, 2014. Outcomes are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models; survival estimates are reported at 2 and 5 years. Participants were high-risk, hormone-naive patients with newly diagnosed M0 prostate cancer starting long-term HT for the first time. Radiotherapy is encouraged in this group, but mandated for patients with node-negative (N0) M0 disease only since November 2011.

EXPOSURES

Long-term HT either alone or with RT, as per local standard. Planned RT use was recorded at entry.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 721 men with newly diagnosed M0 disease were included: median age at entry, 66 (interquartile range [IQR], 61-72) years, median (IQR) prostate-specific antigen level of 43 (18-88) ng/mL. There were 40 deaths (31 owing to prostate cancer) with 17 months' median follow-up. Two-year survival was 96% (95% CI, 93%-97%) and 2-year FFS, 77% (95% CI, 73%-81%). Median (IQR) FFS was 63 (26 to not reached) months. Time to FFS was worse in patients with N+ disease (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.46-2.81]) than in those with N0 disease. Failure-free survival outcomes favored planned use of RT for patients with both N0M0 (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.18-0.61]) and N+M0 disease (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.29-0.79]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Survival for men entering the cohort with high-risk M0 disease was higher than anticipated at study inception. These nonrandomized data were consistent with previous trials that support routine use of RT with HT in patients with N0M0 disease. Additionally, the data suggest that the benefits of RT extend to men with N+M0 disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00268476; ISRCTN78818544.

Celecoxib with or without zoledronic acid for hormone-naïve prostate cancer: Survival results from STAMPEDE (NCT00268476)

162

Background: STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multi-arm multi-stage design. It recruits men (pts) with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) starting long-term hormone therapy (HT) for the first time. The trial initially assessed adding one or two of three treatment approaches to standard-of-care (SOC). We report comparative survival data for the two original comparisons that stopped accrual early at pre-planned lack-of-activity analysis based on failure-free survival (FFS): celecoxib (Cox) and celecoxib + zoledronic acid (Cox+ZA). Methods: SOC was HT for at least 2yrs; RT was encouraged for men with M0 disease. Stratified randomisation allocated pts 2:1:1 to SOC (control), SOC+Cox or SOC+Cox+ZA. Celecoxib (400mg) was given twice daily until 1yr. Zoledronic acid (4mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles then 4-weekly until 2yrs. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. This pre-planned analysis is triggered by analysis of the “original comparisons” that continued accrual through all activity stages. Analyses use Cox proportional hazards model and flexible parametric models, all adjusted for stratification factors. Results: 1,245 men were contemporaneously randomised to these 3 arms (Oct2005-Apr2011). Groups were well balanced: median age 65yrs; 61% metastatic, 14% N+/X M0, 25% N0M0; 94% newly-diagnosed; median PSA 66ng/ml. Median follow-up was 62m. Grade 3-5 adverse events were seen in 35% SOC, 32% SOC+Cox, 32% SOC+Cox+ZA. There were 295 control arm deaths (82% PCa); median survival 68m. The adjusted HR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.82-1.22; p=0.99; median OS 69m) for SOC+Cox vs SOC; and 0.86 (95%CI 0.70-1.06; p=0.16; median OS 74m) for SOC+Cox+ZA vs SOC. Pre-planned analyses in men with metastatic disease showed HR 0.78 (95%CI 0.62-0.99) for SOC+Cox+ZA vs SOC. Further data will be shown. Conclusions: These data show no survival advantage for the addition of celecoxib alone for men starting long-term HT for the 1st time. However, the addition of celecoxib combined with ZA demonstrated a survival advantage for men with metastatic disease, in a pre-planned analysis, and requires further investigation. Clinical trial information: NCT00268476.

Patients' preferences for adjuvant sorafenib after resection of intermediate or high-risk renal cell carcinoma in the SORCE trial: What makes it worthwhile?

415

Background: SORCE is an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial comparing adjuvant sorafenib for 1 year, for 3 years, or observation after resection of intermediate or high risk (as per the Leibovich score), localised renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We determined the survival benefits that SORCE participants judged necessary to make adjuvant sorafenib worthwhile 3 months after starting study treatment. Methods: Participants recruited to SORCE from Australia and selected UK sites completed a validated, self-administered questionnaire 3 months after starting study treatment to determine the minimum survival benefits they judged necessary to make adjuvant sorafenib worthwhile. Scenarios used baseline survival times (without adjuvant sorafenib) of 5 and 15 years; and baseline survival rates (without adjuvant sorafenib) of 65% and 85% at 5 years. Preferences were determined for 1 year of adjuvant sorafenib (versus none) and for 3 years of adjuvant sorafenib (versus 1 year). All tests were 2-sided and non-parametric. This substudy of SORCE was conducted by the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group (ANZUP). Results: The 179 participants were mostly male (72%) with a median age of 57 years (range 29 to 78). Participants allocated sorafenib judged larger benefits necessary to make 1 year of adjuvant sorafenib worthwhile than those allocated placebo: median benefit of an extra 1 year versus an extra 1 month for baselines of 5 years (p=0.004) and 15 years (p=0.02); median benefit of an extra 5% versus an extra 1% for baseline of 65% (p=0.03), and an extra 3% versus an extra 1% for a baseline of 85% (p=0.07). Larger survival benefits were judged necessary to make 3 years of adjuvant sorafenib worthwhile (versus 1 year) regardless of treatment allocation: median benefit of an extra 2 months to 1 year for baselines of 5 years (p=0.02) and 15 years (0.02). Conclusions: Experienced toxicity and duration of treatment are important determinants of patients’ preferences for adjuvant sorafenib in RCC.

Survival with Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer in the "Docetaxel Era": Data from 917 Patients in the Control Arm of the STAMPEDE Trial (MRC PR08, CRUK/06/019)

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common disease among men worldwide. It is important to know survival outcomes and prognostic factors for this disease. Recruitment for the largest therapeutic randomised controlled trial in PCa--the Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy: A Multi-Stage Multi-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial (STAMPEDE)--includes men with newly diagnosed metastatic PCa who are commencing long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT); the control arm provides valuable data for a prospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Describe survival outcomes, along with current treatment standards and factors associated with prognosis, to inform future trial design in this patient group.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

STAMPEDE trial control arm comprising men newly diagnosed with M1 disease who were recruited between October 2005 and January 2014.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival (FFS) were reported by primary disease characteristics using Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived from multivariate Cox models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A cohort of 917 men with newly diagnosed M1 disease was recruited to the control arm in the specified interval. Median follow-up was 20 mo. Median age at randomisation was 66 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 61-71), and median prostate-specific antigen level was 112 ng/ml (IQR: 34-373). Most men (n=574; 62%) had bone-only metastases, whereas 237 (26%) had both bone and soft tissue metastases; soft tissue metastasis was found mainly in distant lymph nodes. There were 238 deaths, 202 (85%) from PCa. Median FFS was 11 mo; 2-yr FFS was 29% (95% CI, 25-33). Median OS was 42 mo; 2-yr OS was 72% (95% CI, 68-76). Survival time was influenced by performance status, age, Gleason score, and metastases distribution. Median survival after FFS event was 22 mo. Trial eligibility criteria meant men were younger and fitter than general PCa population.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival remains disappointing in men presenting with M1 disease who are started on only long-term ADT, despite active treatments being available at first failure of ADT. Importantly, men with M1 disease now spend the majority of their remaining life in a state of castration-resistant relapse.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Results from this control arm cohort found survival is relatively short and highly influenced by patient age, fitness, and where prostate cancer has spread in the body.

MRC SORCE trial: Analysis of patients' presenting characteristics, tumor staging, and surgical approach

496

Background: SORCE is a randomised double blind trial of sorafenib, given for one or three years, versus placebo for patients at moderate or high risk of disease recurrence after surgical excision of primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: Between July 2007 and April 2013, 1,711 patients were recruited from the UK (78%), Australia, France, Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands and Spain. We describe the presenting characteristics, staging and surgical details of the randomised population. The surgical approach was at the surgeon’s discretion. Results: Baseline information is available for 1,681 patients (98%). Median age was 59 years (range 19 to 86): 1,195 (71%) were male. Histology was conventional/clear cell in 86%. T category was pT1a (<1%), pT1b (11%), pT2 (23%), pT3a-4 (65%). 47% were at high risk of recurrence with Leibovich scores of ≥6. Surgical data are available for 1,528 patients (89%). Total (radical) nephrectomy was performed for 97% of patients with 44% having laparoscopic surgery, of which 60% had a transperitoneal approach and 10% required conversion to open surgery. Some form of lymph node dissection was performed in 25% of patients (33% of open procedures and 15% of lap. procedures). The ipsi-lateral adrenal was removed in 47% and 11% had simultaneous resection of other structures/organs. Excision of venous extension was required in 19%. Laparoscopic procedures were performed for 58% of patients with maximum tumour diameter (MTD) <10cm and 17% of those with MTD ≥ 10 cm. Intra-operative complications were reported in 6% and post-operative complications reported in 12%. Hospital stay was median (IQR) 4 days (3-5) for patients having laparoscopic procedures and 7 days (5-8) for open surgery. Hospital stay was median (IQR) 8 days (6-11) for those having post-operative complications compared to 5 days (4-7) for uncomplicated recovery. Conclusions: These data reveal the varied surgical approaches to excision of primary RCC and will inform future adjuvant trials. The use of lymph node dissection appears arbitrary and evidence of benefit from randomised controlled trials is required. Analysis of the effect of sorafenib on disease free survival is likely to be performed in 2016. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN38934710.

Celecoxib plus hormone therapy versus hormone therapy alone for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: first results from the STAMPEDE multiarm, multistage, randomised controlled trial

Background

Long-term hormone therapy alone is standard care for metastatic or high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer. STAMPEDE—an international, open-label, randomised controlled trial—uses a novel multiarm, multistage design to assess whether the early additional use of one or two drugs (docetaxel, zoledronic acid, celecoxib, zoledronic acid and docetaxel, or zoledronic acid and celecoxib) improves survival in men starting first-line, long-term hormone therapy. Here, we report the preplanned, second intermediate analysis comparing hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D) with hormone therapy alone (control arm A).

Methods

Eligible patients were men with newly diagnosed or rapidly relapsing prostate cancer who were starting long-term hormone therapy for the first time. Hormone therapy was given as standard care in all trial arms, with local radiotherapy encouraged for newly diagnosed patients without distant metastasis. Randomisation was done using minimisation with a random element across seven stratification factors. Patients randomly allocated to arm D received celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, given orally, until 1 year or disease progression (including prostate-specific antigen [PSA] failure). The intermediate outcome was failure-free survival (FFS) in three activity stages; the primary outcome was overall survival in a subsequent efficacy stage. Research arms were compared pairwise against the control arm on an intention-to-treat basis. Accrual of further patients was discontinued in any research arm showing safety concerns or insufficient evidence of activity (lack of benefit) compared with the control arm. The minimum targeted activity at the second intermediate activity stage was a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·92. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476, and with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN78818544.

Findings

2043 patients were enrolled in the trial from Oct 17, 2005, to Jan 31, 2011, of whom 584 were randomly allocated to receive hormone therapy alone (control group; arm A) and 291 to receive hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D). At the preplanned analysis of the second intermediate activity stage, with 305 FFS events (209 in arm A, 96 in arm D), there was no evidence of an advantage for hormone therapy plus celecoxib over hormone therapy alone: HR 0·98 (95% CI 0·90–1·06). 2-year FFS was 51% (95% CI 46–56) in arm A and 51% (95% CI 43–58) in arm D. There was no evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse events between groups (events of grade 3 or higher were noted at any time in 123 [23%, 95% CI 20–27] patients in arm A and 64 [25%, 19–30] in arm D). The most common grade 3–5 events adverse effects in both groups were endocrine disorders (55 [11%] of patients in arm A vs 19 [7%] in arm D) and musculoskeletal disorders (30 [6%] of patients in arm A vs 15 [6%] in arm D). The independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping accrual to both celecoxib-containing arms on grounds of lack of benefit and discontinuing celecoxib for patients currently on treatment, which was endorsed by the trial steering committee.

Interpretation

Celecoxib 400 mg twice daily for up to 1 year is insufficiently active in patients starting hormone therapy for high-risk prostate cancer, and we do not recommend its use in this setting. Accrual continues seamlessly to the other research arms and follow-up of all arms will continue to assess effects on overall survival.

Funding

Cancer Research UK, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Medical Research Council (London, UK).

Prospective analysis of scrotal pathology referrals - are referrals appropriate and accurate?

INTRODUCTION

Testicular cancer is a relatively uncommon, treatable condition. A general practitioner would expect to see, on average, one case of testicular cancer in the whole of their career. Benign scrotal conditions are extremely common and the source of many primary care consultations. The main patient expectations of these attendances are accurate diagnosis and adequate re-assurance as often they are the source of much anxiety and perceived embarrassment. The aim of this study was to examine the content and referral practice of primary care referral of testicular pathology and the resultant findings of the specialist practitioner.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 201 patients referred with scrotal pathology were prospectively analysed at the time of specialist practitioner assessment by means of data recording in a urological surgery unit and regional peripheral community clinics.

RESULTS

In the study group, 53 patients were referred under the 2-week rule. Of these, 9 (17%) were found to have testicular cancer. Five (36%) cancers were referred outside the 2-week rule referrals; 1 cancer was missed and 2 diagnoses delayed. In total, 44% of final clinical diagnoses differed between the referring primary care physician and the specialist practitioner. Of the 71 (35%) patients referred with a suspicion of cancer, 62 (87%) were subsequently found to be of clinically benign pathology. Overall, 80% of patients were referred more urgently than the opinion of the specialist practitioner.

CONCLUSIONS

Scrotal examination in the primary care setting appears to be of variable accuracy. Many patients referred with a high suspicion of cancer are found to have benign pathology. Two-week rule referrals have an acceptable positive predictive value for testicular cancer (17%). Disagreements exist in the referral priority of patients.

Penile cancer in the UK: clinical presentation and outcome in 1998/99

OBJECTIVE

To use the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Cancer Registry data to audit a cohort of patients with penile cancer, and thus evaluate current management practices in the UK.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 243 patients were registered over an 18-month period shortly before the publication of the UK National Institute of Clinical Excellence cancer guidelines. Clinical data, including preceding skin disorders, the clinical presentation, management, treatment-related complications and the outcome in terms of local, nodal or distant disease recurrence, survival and cause of death, were sought from the originating clinician.

RESULTS

Data were obtained on 193 patients (79% of the initial population). One consultant reported five patients and the most from one centre was eight. A painless lump or ulcer was the commonest presentation; 45 patients had pre-existing skin disorders. The median age was 65.5 years and 67 patients were aged < 60 years. Squamous cell carcinoma accounted for 94% of the pathology. There were wide variations in treatment for patients of similar disease stage. Twenty-six patients had palpable regional nodes and 44 had a lymph node dissection; complications were reported in 43, including 18 of 44 having node dissection. The median follow-up was 27.7 months from the date of diagnosis. Death from penile cancer was recorded in one of 22 patients with stage 0 disease and seven of nine with stage IV disease. Positive lymph nodes had a detrimental effect on survival.

CONCLUSION

Experience in the management of penile cancer is shared by many urological surgeons in the UK. These data provide a 'baseline' against which to measure the outcome of specialist multidisciplinary team activity.

National and international variation in the registration of bladder cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether variations exist in the methods by which different cancer registries record information on bladder cancers.

METHODS

The registration practices of the various cancer registries within the UK, Europe and the USA were investigated by consulting the available publications and by correspondence with registry staff. In addition, a telephone survey was carried out within the UK to determine whether the national guidelines on bladder cancer coding were being followed.

RESULTS

There is variation in the registration of bladder cancers both among regions within the UK and between the UK and other regions. The telephone survey showed that only four of the 11 UK regional registries were correctly following the national bladder cancer coding guidelines. Bladder cancer registration also varies between the cancer registries within mainland Europe. When comparing registration practices in the UK and the USA the major difference is that cases of bladder carcinoma in situ and pTa transitional cell carcinoma are included in the North American cancer statistics but not in the British cancer statistics.

CONCLUSION

Much needs to be done before it can be claimed that the registration of bladder cancers has been standardized either nationally or internationally. In particular, the differences in registration practices between the UK and the USA will tend to give a falsely low impression of British incidence and survival rates compared with the equivalent North American figures. This confounding factor must be considered if these incidence and survival values are to be compared.

The influence of histological diagnosis on the postoperative complication rate following trans-urethral resection of prostate (TURP)

BACKGROUND

A number of studies have shown that the early mortality following TURP is higher for patients with prostate cancer than those with benign disease. This study examines the effect of the histological diagnosis on the predischarge complication rate following TURP.

METHODS

Information on the postoperative, predischarge complications of 3036 patients, who underwent TURP over the last decade at our institution, was collated from the urology department database (AuditBase for Windows). The information on this database is collected prospectively, at the point of care and validated at monthly audit meetings. Statistical analyses were performed using chi2 and difference of proportion where n > 60. Statistical significance was taken as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The postoperative, predischarge major complication rate for patients with benign disease was 2.1%. This was not statistically different from the 2.3% complication rate seen in patients with malignant disease. Patients suffering a postoperative complication stayed in hospital significantly longer than those who had a straightforward postoperative course (P < 0.001); however, patients with malignant histology suffering a postoperative complication did not stay statistically significantly longer than those with benign histology suffering a postoperative complication (P < 0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing TURP for prostate cancer do not suffer more postoperative, predischarge complications or stay in hospital longer than patients undergoing TURP for benign disease.