RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To retrospectively assess outcomes and to identify prognostic factors in patients diagnosed with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) treated with primary external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the multi-institutional Spanish RECAP database, a population-based prostate cancer registry in Spain. All IR patients (NCCN criteria) who underwent primary EBRT were included. The following variables were assessed: age; prostate-specific antigen (PSA); Gleason score; clinical T stage; percentage of positive biopsy cores (PPBC); androgen deprivation therapy (ADT); and radiotherapy dose. The patients were stratified into one of three risk subcategories: (1) favourable IR (FIR; GS 6, ≤ T2b or GS 3 + 4, ≤ T1c), (2) marginal IR (MIR; GS 3 + 4, T2a-b), and (3) unfavourable IR (UIR; GS 4 + 3 or T2c). Biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1754 patients from the RECAP database were included and stratified by risk group: FIR, n = 781 (44.5%); MIR, n = 252 (14.4%); and UIR, n = 721 (41.1%). Mean age was 71 years (range 47-86). Mean PSA was 10.4 ng/ml (range 6-20). The median radiotherapy dose was 74 Gy, with mean doses of 72.5 Gy (FIR), 73.4 Gy (MIR), and 72.8 Gy (UIR). Most patients (88%) received ADT for a median of 7.1 months. By risk group (FIR, MIR, UIR), ADT rates were, respectively, 88.9, 86.5, and 86.9%. Only patients with ≥ 24 months of follow-up post-EBRT were included in the survival analysis (n = 1294). At a median follow-up of 52 months (range 24-173), respective 5- and 10-year outcomes were: OS 93.6% and 79%; BRFS 88.9% and 71.4%; DFS 96.1% and 89%; CSS 98.9% and 94.6%. Complication rates (≥ grade 3) were: acute genitourinary (GU) 2%; late GU 1%; acute gastrointestinal (GI) 2%; late GI 1%. There was no significant association between risk group and BRFS or OS. However, patients with favourable-risk disease had significantly better 5- and 10-year DFS than patients with UIR: 98.7% vs. 92.4% and 92% vs. 85.8% (p = 0.0005). CSS was significantly higher (p = 0.0057) in the FIR group at 5 (99.7% vs. 97.3%) and 10 years (96.1% vs. 93.4%). On the multivariate analyses, the following were significant predictors of survival: ADT (BRFS and DFS); dose ≥ 74 Gy (BRFS); age (OS). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first nationwide study in Spain to report long-term outcomes of patients with intermediate-risk PCa treated with EBRT. Survival outcomes were good, with a low incidence of both acute and late toxicity. Patients with unfavourable risk characteristics had significantly lower 5- and 10-year disease-free survival rates. ADT and radiotherapy dose ≥ 74 Gy were both significant predictors of treatment outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Bases de Datos Factuales , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Radioterapia de Intensidad Modulada/mortalidad , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Terapia Combinada , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , España , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) to salvage radiotherapy (SRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in a cohort of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. The primary aim was to comparatively assess 2- and 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS). A secondary aim was to identify predictors of survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were acquired from the RECAP database, a population-based prostate cancer registry in Spain. Inclusion criteria included RP (with or without lymphadenectomy) followed by ART or SRT. A total of 702 patients were analyzed. Pre-RT PSA values (>0.5 vs. ≤0.5 ng/ml), pathological stage (T1-2 vs. T3-4), post-surgical Gleason score (≤7 vs. 8-10), margin status (positive vs. negative), hormonal treatment (yes vs. no), and RT dose (≤66 Gy vs. >66 Gy) were evaluated to assess their impact on BRFS. RESULTS: The mean patient age in the ART and SRT groups, respectively, was 64 years (range 42-82) and 64.8 years (range 42-82). Median follow-up after RT in the whole sample was 34 months (range 3-141). A total of 702 patients were included: 223 (31.8%) received ART and 479 (68.2%) SRT. BRFS rates (95% CI) in the ART and SRT groups at months 24 and 60 were, respectively: 98.1% (95.9-100.0%) vs. 91.2% (88.2-94.2%) and 84.5% (76.4-92.6%) vs. 74.0% (67.4-80.7%) (p = 0.004). No significant differences in OS were observed (p = 0.053). The following variables were significant predictors of biochemical recurrence in the SRT group: (1) positive surgical margin status (p = 0.049); (2) no hormonotherapy (p = 0.03); (3) total prostate dose ≤66 Gy (p = 0.004); and pre-RT PSA ≥0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first nationwide study in Spain to evaluate a large cohort of PCa patients treated with RP followed by postoperative RT. ART yielded better 2- and 5-year BRFS rates, although OS was equivalent. These findings are consistent with most other published studies and support ART in patients with adverse prognostic characteristics after radical prostatectomy. Prospective trials are needed to compare immediate ART to early SRT to better determine their relative benefits.
Asunto(s)
Bases de Datos Factuales , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Radioterapia Adyuvante , Sistema de Registros , Terapia Recuperativa , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Estudios Retrospectivos , España , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We compared biochemical control and quality of life with intermittent (6 months) versus continuous (36 months) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a non-inferiority randomized phase 3 trial in patients with biochemical failure (BF) after external beam radical radiotherapy (EBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were stratified according to the Gleason score (GS) and were classified as low risk with a GS < 6 and 7 (3 + 4) and high risk with a GS of 7 (4 + 3) and >7. Patients were followed with PSA determinations and quality-of-life assessments (QLQ C-30 and QLQ PR-25) every 6 months for a period of 3 years. BF after radiation was defined as a PSA level of nadir +2 ng/ml. Disease progression (DP) after ADT was defined as PSA ≥4 ng/ml (BF) and/or metastases. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were included in this multicenter phase 3 trial from 2005 to 2009. Thirty-eight and 39 patients were included in the intermittent and continuous groups, respectively. The median follow-up for both groups was 48 months (40-68). DP after ADT in the intermittent group was seen in three patients (distant metastases in one patient) versus 0 in the continuous group. The QLQ-C30 and QLQ PR-25 scores did not show any statistically difference between the two ADT groups. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were seen in DP and QLQ between intermittent (6 months) and continuous (36 months) ADT in patients with BF after EBRT.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Braquiterapia , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Calidad de Vida , Anciano , Terapia Combinada , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Clasificación del Tumor , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/sangre , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Pronóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To report treatment outcomes in a cohort of extreme-risk prostate cancer patients and identify a subgroup of patients with worse prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Extreme-risk prostate cancer patients were defined as patients with at least one extreme-risk factor: stage cT3b-cT4, Gleason score 9-10 or PSA > 50 ng/ml; or patients with 2 or more high-risk factors: stage cT2c-cT3a, Gleason 8 and PSA > 20 ng/ml. Overall survival (OS), cause-specific survival (CSS), clinical-free survival (CFS), and biochemical non-evidence of disease (bNED) survival are the four outcomes of interest in a population of 1341 patients. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 71.5 months, 5- and 10-year bNED survival, CFS, CSS and OS for the entire cohort were 77.1 % and 57.0, 89.2 and 78.9 %, 97.4 and 93.6 %, and 92.0 and 71.3 %, respectively. On multivariate analysis, PSA and clinical stage were associated with bNED survival. PSA and Gleason score predicted for CFS, whereas only Gleason score predicted for OS. When a simplified model was performed using the "number of risk factors" variable, this model provided the best distinction between patients with ≥2 extreme-risk factors and patients with 2 high-risk factors, showing a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.737 (p = 0.0003) for bNED survival, HR 1.743 (p = 0.0448) for OS and an HR of 3.963 (p = 0.0039) for the CSS endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting at diagnosis with two extreme-risk criteria have almost fourfold higher risk for prostate cancer mortality. Such patients should be considered for more aggressive multimodal treatments.
Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/análisis , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Pronóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
AIM: The purpose of the study was to describe infrastructures, treatment modalities, and workload in radiation oncology (RO) in Spain, referred particularly to prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: An epidemiologic, cross-sectional study was performed during 2008-2009. A study-specific questionnaire was sent to the 108 RO-registered departments. RESULTS: One hundred and two departments answered the survey, and six were contacted by telephone. Centers operated 236 treatment units: 23 (9.7 %) cobalt machines, 37 (15.7 %) mono-energetic linear accelerators, and 176 (74.6 %) multi-energy linear accelerators. Sixty-one (56.4 %) and 33 (30.5 %) departments, respectively, reported intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and image-guided RT (IGRT) capabilities; three-dimensional-conformal RT was used in 75.8 % of patients. Virtual simulators were present in 95 departments (88.0 %), 35 use conventional simulators. Fifty-one departments (47.2 %) have brachytherapy units, 38 (35.2 %) perform prostatic implants. Departments saw a mean of 24.9 new patients/week; the number of patients treated annually was 102,054, corresponding to 88.4 % of patients with a RT indication. In 56.5 % of the hospitals, multidisciplinary teams were available to treat PC. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide an accurate picture of current situation of RO in Spain, showing a trend toward the progressive introduction of new technologies (IMRT, IGRT, brachytherapy).
Asunto(s)
Departamentos de Hospitales/organización & administración , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Oncología por Radiación , Carga de Trabajo , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Masculino , España , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To report the incidence of HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer (OC) in our region, and determine the influence of HPV status on survival among patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT). METHODS: A total of 102 patients with stage II-IV OC treated by CRT at four hospitals in Madrid, Spain were retrospectively reviewed. Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed to evaluate p16 expression in pretreatment tumor block samples obtained from these patients. HPV-positive and HPV-negative patients were compared to assess differences in overall survival (OS), loco-regional control and disease-free survival. RESULTS: Of the tumor samples evaluated, 26.7 % were p16 positive. HPV-positive patients were younger (median age, 56 vs 59 years; p = 0.052). No significant differences were observed in terms of tumor stage, gender, or smoking habit between HPV+ and HPV- patients. HPV+ patients showed a trend towards better OS (67.4, vs 49.7 %; hazard ratio, 0.55; p = 0.095). CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of HPV-related OC in our region is similar to that reported in other regions in Europe, yet lower than in North America. We observed a trend for improved OS in patients with HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer.