Marco Finati , Nicholas James Corsi , Alex Stephens , Giuseppe Chiarelli , Giuseppe Ottone Cirulli , Matthew Davis , Shane Tinsley , Akshay Sood , Nicolò Buffi , Giovanni Lughezzani , Andrea Salonia , Alberto Briganti , Francesco Montorsi , Carlo Bettocchi , Giuseppe Carrieri , Craig Rogers , Firas Abdollah
{"title":"根治性前列腺切除术与放射治疗对非转移性前列腺癌特异性死亡率的影响:其他原因死亡率匹配队列分析》。","authors":"Marco Finati , Nicholas James Corsi , Alex Stephens , Giuseppe Chiarelli , Giuseppe Ottone Cirulli , Matthew Davis , Shane Tinsley , Akshay Sood , Nicolò Buffi , Giovanni Lughezzani , Andrea Salonia , Alberto Briganti , Francesco Montorsi , Carlo Bettocchi , Giuseppe Carrieri , Craig Rogers , Firas Abdollah","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Studies comparing radical prostatectomy (RP) to radiation therapy (RT) have consistently shown that patients undergoing RT have a higher risk of other-cause mortality (OCM) compared to RP, signifying poor health status of the former patients. We aimed to evaluate the impact of RP versus RT on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) over a cohort with equivalent OCM risk.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>The SEER database was queried to identify patients with nonmetastatic PCa between 2004 and 2009. Patients were matched based on their calculated 10-year OCM risk and further stratified for D'Amico Risk Score and Gleason Grade. A Cox-regression model was used to calculate the 10-year OCM risk. Propensity-score based on the calculated OCM risk were used to match RP and RT patients. Cumulative incidence curves and Competing-risk regression analyses were used to examine the impact of treatment on CSM in the matched cohort.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We identified 55,106 PCa patients treated with RP and 36,674 treated with RT. After match, 6,506 patients were equally distributed for RT versus RP, with no difference in OCM rates (<em>P</em> = .2). The 10-year CSM rates were 8.8% versus 0.6% (<em>P</em> = .01) for RT versus RP in patients with unfavorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 4 + 3) and 7.9% versus 3.9% (<em>P</em> = .003) for high-risk disease. There was no difference in CSM among RT and RP patients for favorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 3 + 4) and low-risk disease.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In a matched cohort of PCa patients with comparable OCM between the 2 arms, RP yielded a more favorable CSM rate compared to RT only for unfavorable-intermediate- and high-risk groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10380,"journal":{"name":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","volume":"22 6","pages":"Article 102201"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiation Therapy on Cancer-Specific Mortality for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Analysis of an Other-Cause Mortality Matched Cohort\",\"authors\":\"Marco Finati , Nicholas James Corsi , Alex Stephens , Giuseppe Chiarelli , Giuseppe Ottone Cirulli , Matthew Davis , Shane Tinsley , Akshay Sood , Nicolò Buffi , Giovanni Lughezzani , Andrea Salonia , Alberto Briganti , Francesco Montorsi , Carlo Bettocchi , Giuseppe Carrieri , Craig Rogers , Firas Abdollah\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Studies comparing radical prostatectomy (RP) to radiation therapy (RT) have consistently shown that patients undergoing RT have a higher risk of other-cause mortality (OCM) compared to RP, signifying poor health status of the former patients. We aimed to evaluate the impact of RP versus RT on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) over a cohort with equivalent OCM risk.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>The SEER database was queried to identify patients with nonmetastatic PCa between 2004 and 2009. Patients were matched based on their calculated 10-year OCM risk and further stratified for D'Amico Risk Score and Gleason Grade. A Cox-regression model was used to calculate the 10-year OCM risk. Propensity-score based on the calculated OCM risk were used to match RP and RT patients. Cumulative incidence curves and Competing-risk regression analyses were used to examine the impact of treatment on CSM in the matched cohort.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We identified 55,106 PCa patients treated with RP and 36,674 treated with RT. After match, 6,506 patients were equally distributed for RT versus RP, with no difference in OCM rates (<em>P</em> = .2). The 10-year CSM rates were 8.8% versus 0.6% (<em>P</em> = .01) for RT versus RP in patients with unfavorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 4 + 3) and 7.9% versus 3.9% (<em>P</em> = .003) for high-risk disease. There was no difference in CSM among RT and RP patients for favorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 3 + 4) and low-risk disease.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In a matched cohort of PCa patients with comparable OCM between the 2 arms, RP yielded a more favorable CSM rate compared to RT only for unfavorable-intermediate- and high-risk groups.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"volume\":\"22 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 102201\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155876732400171X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155876732400171X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiation Therapy on Cancer-Specific Mortality for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Analysis of an Other-Cause Mortality Matched Cohort
Introduction
Studies comparing radical prostatectomy (RP) to radiation therapy (RT) have consistently shown that patients undergoing RT have a higher risk of other-cause mortality (OCM) compared to RP, signifying poor health status of the former patients. We aimed to evaluate the impact of RP versus RT on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) over a cohort with equivalent OCM risk.
Patients and Methods
The SEER database was queried to identify patients with nonmetastatic PCa between 2004 and 2009. Patients were matched based on their calculated 10-year OCM risk and further stratified for D'Amico Risk Score and Gleason Grade. A Cox-regression model was used to calculate the 10-year OCM risk. Propensity-score based on the calculated OCM risk were used to match RP and RT patients. Cumulative incidence curves and Competing-risk regression analyses were used to examine the impact of treatment on CSM in the matched cohort.
Results
We identified 55,106 PCa patients treated with RP and 36,674 treated with RT. After match, 6,506 patients were equally distributed for RT versus RP, with no difference in OCM rates (P = .2). The 10-year CSM rates were 8.8% versus 0.6% (P = .01) for RT versus RP in patients with unfavorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 4 + 3) and 7.9% versus 3.9% (P = .003) for high-risk disease. There was no difference in CSM among RT and RP patients for favorable-intermediate-risk (Gleason Score 3 + 4) and low-risk disease.
Conclusions
In a matched cohort of PCa patients with comparable OCM between the 2 arms, RP yielded a more favorable CSM rate compared to RT only for unfavorable-intermediate- and high-risk groups.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research in genitourinary cancers. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of genitourinary cancers. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to genitourinary malignancies. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.