Comparison of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy.

Korean Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2015-10-01 Epub Date: 2015-10-02 DOI:10.4111/kju.2015.56.10.703
Dong Soo Kim, Seung Hyun Jeon, Sung-Goo Chang, Sang Hyub Lee
{"title":"Comparison of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy.","authors":"Dong Soo Kim,&nbsp;Seung Hyun Jeon,&nbsp;Sung-Goo Chang,&nbsp;Sang Hyub Lee","doi":"10.4111/kju.2015.56.10.703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We evaluated the biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer patients treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients who underwent RP or RT as primary definitive treatment from 2007 were enrolled for this study. They were divided into two groups; the low-intermediate risk group and the high risk group according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We compared differences such as age, prostate specific antigen, Gleason score, follow-up duration, clinical T staging, and BCR. Their BCR-free survival rates were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 165 patients were enrolled. There were 115 patients in the low-intermediate risk. Among them, 88 received RP and 27 underwent RT. BCR occurred in 9 of the RP patients (10.2%) and 3 of the RT patients (11.1%). For the high risk group, 50 patients were included. RP was performed in 25 patients and RT in 25 patients. BCR was observed in 4 of the RP patients (16%) and 12 of the RT patients (48%). There were no differences in BCR-free survival for the low-intermediate group (p=0.765). For the high risk group, the RP group had a higher BCR free survival rate (p=0.032).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No difference of BCR and BCR-free survival was seen in the low-intermediate risk group but lower BCR and better BCR-free survival were observed for patients that received RP in the high risk group. RP should be a more strongly considered option when deciding the treatment method for selected high risk patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":17819,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Urology","volume":"56 10","pages":"703-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4111/kju.2015.56.10.703","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.10.703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer patients treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT).

Materials and methods: Patients who underwent RP or RT as primary definitive treatment from 2007 were enrolled for this study. They were divided into two groups; the low-intermediate risk group and the high risk group according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We compared differences such as age, prostate specific antigen, Gleason score, follow-up duration, clinical T staging, and BCR. Their BCR-free survival rates were analyzed.

Results: A total of 165 patients were enrolled. There were 115 patients in the low-intermediate risk. Among them, 88 received RP and 27 underwent RT. BCR occurred in 9 of the RP patients (10.2%) and 3 of the RT patients (11.1%). For the high risk group, 50 patients were included. RP was performed in 25 patients and RT in 25 patients. BCR was observed in 4 of the RP patients (16%) and 12 of the RT patients (48%). There were no differences in BCR-free survival for the low-intermediate group (p=0.765). For the high risk group, the RP group had a higher BCR free survival rate (p=0.032).

Conclusions: No difference of BCR and BCR-free survival was seen in the low-intermediate risk group but lower BCR and better BCR-free survival were observed for patients that received RP in the high risk group. RP should be a more strongly considered option when deciding the treatment method for selected high risk patients.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术与放射治疗的生化复发比较。
目的:探讨前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术(RP)与放射治疗(RT)的生化复发率(BCR)。材料和方法:本研究纳入了2007年以来接受RP或RT作为主要最终治疗的患者。他们被分为两组;中低风险组和高风险组根据国家综合癌症网络指南我们比较了年龄、前列腺特异性抗原、Gleason评分、随访时间、临床T分期和BCR等差异。分析各组无bcr生存率。结果:共纳入165例患者。115例患者为中低危。其中88例接受RP治疗,27例接受RT治疗。RP患者中有9例(10.2%)发生BCR, RT患者中有3例(11.1%)发生BCR。对于高风险组,纳入了50例患者。25例患者行RP, 25例患者行RT。4例RP患者(16%)和12例RT患者(48%)出现BCR。低中级组无bcr生存率无差异(p=0.765)。对于高危组,RP组无BCR生存率更高(p=0.032)。结论:中低危组患者BCR和无BCR生存期无差异,高危组患者接受RP后BCR降低,无BCR生存期提高。在为选定的高风险患者决定治疗方法时,RP应该是一个更强烈考虑的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信