A meta-analysis on the use of radiotherapy after prostatectomy: adjuvant versus early salvage radiation

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Joseph F. Renzulli II , Joseph Brito III , Isaac Y. Kim , Isabella Broccoli
{"title":"A meta-analysis on the use of radiotherapy after prostatectomy: adjuvant versus early salvage radiation","authors":"Joseph F. Renzulli II ,&nbsp;Joseph Brito III ,&nbsp;Isaac Y. Kim ,&nbsp;Isabella Broccoli","doi":"10.1016/j.prnil.2022.01.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>To determine which method of radiotherapy proves more effective after prostatectomy: Adjuvant (ART) or early salvage (ESRT), we observed the pathologic and adverse risk factors of patients and their results from both treatments, looking specifically at biochemical-free survival rates, metastasis-free survival rates, and overall survival rates. Peer review articles containing their own data collected between 1986 and 2022 were reviewed. We reviewed 67 peer review articles and included 33 that met criteria. Studies focused on the adverse risk factors and the results of patients either before/after receiving adjuvant or early salvage/salvage radiotherapy were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics had an effect on what treatment a patient would receive; if a patient had more than one adverse risk factor such as a high Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, T-stage, or positive margins, they would receive immediate radiation after prostatectomy, which would classify as ART. If the patient had no adverse risk factors after surgery, they would be placed in an observation period to follow their PSA and overall health, and only if necessary, undergo ESRT. Of the 33 studies, ART was proven to be only slightly more beneficial when relating to biochemical recurrence-free survival while ART and ESRT results were similar in metastasis-free survival and overall survival. ART and ESRT are overall comparable in their patient outcomes, despite their own unique pros and cons. The use of ESRT reduces overtreatment in men who may not experience biochemical recurrence. However, in those with very high-risk pathologic features, a multi-disciplinary approach should be utilized to best determine which mode of radiation therapy after surgery is recommended.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20845,"journal":{"name":"Prostate International","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/da/bf/main.PMC9043851.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prostate International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888222000034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

To determine which method of radiotherapy proves more effective after prostatectomy: Adjuvant (ART) or early salvage (ESRT), we observed the pathologic and adverse risk factors of patients and their results from both treatments, looking specifically at biochemical-free survival rates, metastasis-free survival rates, and overall survival rates. Peer review articles containing their own data collected between 1986 and 2022 were reviewed. We reviewed 67 peer review articles and included 33 that met criteria. Studies focused on the adverse risk factors and the results of patients either before/after receiving adjuvant or early salvage/salvage radiotherapy were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics had an effect on what treatment a patient would receive; if a patient had more than one adverse risk factor such as a high Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, T-stage, or positive margins, they would receive immediate radiation after prostatectomy, which would classify as ART. If the patient had no adverse risk factors after surgery, they would be placed in an observation period to follow their PSA and overall health, and only if necessary, undergo ESRT. Of the 33 studies, ART was proven to be only slightly more beneficial when relating to biochemical recurrence-free survival while ART and ESRT results were similar in metastasis-free survival and overall survival. ART and ESRT are overall comparable in their patient outcomes, despite their own unique pros and cons. The use of ESRT reduces overtreatment in men who may not experience biochemical recurrence. However, in those with very high-risk pathologic features, a multi-disciplinary approach should be utilized to best determine which mode of radiation therapy after surgery is recommended.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

前列腺切除术后放疗使用的荟萃分析:辅助放疗与早期补救性放疗
为了确定哪种放疗方法在前列腺切除术后更有效:辅助治疗(ART)或早期挽救治疗(ESRT),我们观察了患者的病理和不良危险因素及其两种治疗的结果,特别关注无生化生存率、无转移生存率和总生存率。同行评议的文章包含他们自己在1986年至2022年间收集的数据。我们审查了67篇同行评议文章,其中包括33篇符合标准的文章。对患者接受辅助放疗前后或早期抢救/抢救放疗的不良危险因素及结果的研究纳入分析。病人的特征对病人接受的治疗有影响;如果患者有一个以上的不良危险因素,如高格里森评分、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平、t期或阳性边缘,他们将在前列腺切除术后立即接受放疗,这将被归类为ART。如果患者术后无不良危险因素,将对其PSA和整体健康状况进行观察,必要时才进行ESRT。在这33项研究中,ART被证明在生化无复发生存方面仅略微有利,而ART和ESRT在无转移生存和总生存方面的结果相似。ART和ESRT在患者结果上总体上是可比较的,尽管它们有各自独特的优缺点。ESRT的使用减少了可能不会经历生化复发的男性的过度治疗。然而,对于那些具有高危病理特征的患者,应采用多学科方法来确定手术后推荐哪种放射治疗模式。
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
Prostate International
Prostate International Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
26.70%
发文量
40
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: Prostate International (Prostate Int, PI), the official English-language journal of Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS), is an international peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to basic and clinical studies on prostate cancer, benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatitis, and ...
×
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