Francesco Alessandro Mistretta, Stefano Luzzago, Giulia Marvaso, Giulia Corrao, Ilaria Sabatini, Matteo Fontana, Federico Mastroleo, Mattia Zaffaroni, Maria Giulia Vincini, Ettore Di Trapani, Gabriele Cozzi, Roberto Bianchi, Matteo Ferro, Ottavio de Cobelli, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Gennaro Musi
{"title":"pN1前列腺癌术后放射治疗的最佳时机是什么?","authors":"Francesco Alessandro Mistretta, Stefano Luzzago, Giulia Marvaso, Giulia Corrao, Ilaria Sabatini, Matteo Fontana, Federico Mastroleo, Mattia Zaffaroni, Maria Giulia Vincini, Ettore Di Trapani, Gabriele Cozzi, Roberto Bianchi, Matteo Ferro, Ottavio de Cobelli, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Gennaro Musi","doi":"10.4149/neo_2023_230403N182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We retrospectively compared long-term biochemical recurrence rates (BCR) in pN1 PCa patients that underwent adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) vs. no aRT/early salvage (esRT) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. All PCa pN1 M0 patients treated at a single high-volume center between 2010 and 2020 were analyzed. Patients with <10 LNs yield, or >10 positive LNs, or persistently detectable PSA after RARP were excluded. Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots depicted BCR rates. Multivariable Cox regression models (MCRMs) focused on predictors of BCR. The cumulative incidence plot depicted BCR rates after propensity score (PS) matching (ratio 1:1). 220 pN1 patients were enrolled, 133 (60.4%) treated with aRT and 87 (39.6%) with no-aRT/esRT. aRT patients were older, with higher rates of postoperative ISUP grade group 4-5, and higher rates of pT3b stage. The actuarial BCR was similar (aRT 39.8% vs. no-aRT/esRT 40.2%; p=1). Median time to BCR was 62 vs. 38 months in aRT vs. no-aRT/esRT patients (p=0.001). In MCRMs, patients managed with no-aRT/esRT were associated with higher rates of BCR over time (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.27, p<0.001). ISUP grade group 5 (HR: 2.18, p<0.01) was an independent predictor of BCR. In PS-matched cumulative incidence plots, the BCR rate was significantly higher in the aRT group (76.4 vs. 40.4%; p<0.01). Patients managed with no-aRT/esRT experienced BCR approximately two years before the aRT group. Despite, the important BCR benefit after aRT, this treatment strategy is underused in daily practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19266,"journal":{"name":"Neoplasma","volume":"70 3","pages":"458-467"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is the best time for postoperative radiation therapy in pN1 prostate cancer?\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Alessandro Mistretta, Stefano Luzzago, Giulia Marvaso, Giulia Corrao, Ilaria Sabatini, Matteo Fontana, Federico Mastroleo, Mattia Zaffaroni, Maria Giulia Vincini, Ettore Di Trapani, Gabriele Cozzi, Roberto Bianchi, Matteo Ferro, Ottavio de Cobelli, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Gennaro Musi\",\"doi\":\"10.4149/neo_2023_230403N182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We retrospectively compared long-term biochemical recurrence rates (BCR) in pN1 PCa patients that underwent adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) vs. no aRT/early salvage (esRT) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. All PCa pN1 M0 patients treated at a single high-volume center between 2010 and 2020 were analyzed. Patients with <10 LNs yield, or >10 positive LNs, or persistently detectable PSA after RARP were excluded. Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots depicted BCR rates. Multivariable Cox regression models (MCRMs) focused on predictors of BCR. The cumulative incidence plot depicted BCR rates after propensity score (PS) matching (ratio 1:1). 220 pN1 patients were enrolled, 133 (60.4%) treated with aRT and 87 (39.6%) with no-aRT/esRT. aRT patients were older, with higher rates of postoperative ISUP grade group 4-5, and higher rates of pT3b stage. The actuarial BCR was similar (aRT 39.8% vs. no-aRT/esRT 40.2%; p=1). Median time to BCR was 62 vs. 38 months in aRT vs. no-aRT/esRT patients (p=0.001). In MCRMs, patients managed with no-aRT/esRT were associated with higher rates of BCR over time (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.27, p<0.001). ISUP grade group 5 (HR: 2.18, p<0.01) was an independent predictor of BCR. In PS-matched cumulative incidence plots, the BCR rate was significantly higher in the aRT group (76.4 vs. 40.4%; p<0.01). Patients managed with no-aRT/esRT experienced BCR approximately two years before the aRT group. Despite, the important BCR benefit after aRT, this treatment strategy is underused in daily practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neoplasma\",\"volume\":\"70 3\",\"pages\":\"458-467\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neoplasma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4149/neo_2023_230403N182\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"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":"Neoplasma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4149/neo_2023_230403N182","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
我们回顾性比较了机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术和盆腔淋巴结切除术后,接受辅助放疗(aRT)与未接受aRT/早期挽救(esRT)的pN1型前列腺癌患者的长期生化复发率(BCR)。分析2010年至2020年间在单一大容量中心治疗的所有PCa pN1 M0患者。排除了10例LNs阳性或RARP后PSA持续检测的患者。Kaplan-Meier (KM)图描述了BCR率。多变量Cox回归模型(MCRMs)侧重于BCR的预测因子。累积发生率图描述了倾向评分(PS)匹配后的BCR发生率(比例为1:1)。纳入220例pN1患者,133例(60.4%)接受aRT治疗,87例(39.6%)接受无aRT/esRT治疗。aRT患者年龄较大,术后ISUP分级4-5组发生率较高,pT3b期发生率较高。精算BCR相似(aRT 39.8% vs. no-aRT/esRT 40.2%;p = 1)。aRT和no-aRT/esRT患者达到BCR的中位时间分别为62个月和38个月(p=0.001)。在MCRMs中,无art /esRT治疗的患者随着时间的推移BCR率更高(风险比[HR]: 3.27, p
What is the best time for postoperative radiation therapy in pN1 prostate cancer?
We retrospectively compared long-term biochemical recurrence rates (BCR) in pN1 PCa patients that underwent adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) vs. no aRT/early salvage (esRT) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. All PCa pN1 M0 patients treated at a single high-volume center between 2010 and 2020 were analyzed. Patients with <10 LNs yield, or >10 positive LNs, or persistently detectable PSA after RARP were excluded. Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots depicted BCR rates. Multivariable Cox regression models (MCRMs) focused on predictors of BCR. The cumulative incidence plot depicted BCR rates after propensity score (PS) matching (ratio 1:1). 220 pN1 patients were enrolled, 133 (60.4%) treated with aRT and 87 (39.6%) with no-aRT/esRT. aRT patients were older, with higher rates of postoperative ISUP grade group 4-5, and higher rates of pT3b stage. The actuarial BCR was similar (aRT 39.8% vs. no-aRT/esRT 40.2%; p=1). Median time to BCR was 62 vs. 38 months in aRT vs. no-aRT/esRT patients (p=0.001). In MCRMs, patients managed with no-aRT/esRT were associated with higher rates of BCR over time (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.27, p<0.001). ISUP grade group 5 (HR: 2.18, p<0.01) was an independent predictor of BCR. In PS-matched cumulative incidence plots, the BCR rate was significantly higher in the aRT group (76.4 vs. 40.4%; p<0.01). Patients managed with no-aRT/esRT experienced BCR approximately two years before the aRT group. Despite, the important BCR benefit after aRT, this treatment strategy is underused in daily practice.