Outcome of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer with low metastatic burden treated with radical prostatectomy: a comparison to STAMPEDE arm H
- 57 Downloads
STAMPEDE arm H demonstrated a survival benefit for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) patients with low metastatic burden (LMB) who additionally received radiotherapy (RT) to the primary. However, it is unknown if radical prostatectomy (RP) may achieve equivalent results, since existing studies did neither include the same selection criteria nor examine comparable endpoints as STAMPEDE arm H.
We retrospectively analysed 78 RP patients (2008–2018) with LMB (< 4 bone metastases) as defined in the subgroup analysis of STAMPEDE arm H. Like in STAMPEDE, overall (OS), metastatic progression-free (MPFS), and PCa-specific (CSS) survival at 3 years, as well as complication and continence rates were assessed.
Median age was 64 years. Median follow-up was 36 months. Median initial prostate-specific antigen was 35 ng/ml. At 3 years, OS was 91%, MPFS was 63%, and CSS was 92%, while 81%, 67%, and 86%, respectively, were reported in the RT subgroup with LMB in STAMPEDE arm H. Clavien-Dindo grade III–IV complications were observed in 16 (21%) patients. Of 38 patients with available continence data, 28 (74%) patients were continent and 2 (5%) patients needed ≥ 3 pads/day at 1 year after RP.
When comparing our RP cohort with the results of STAMPEDE arm H with LMB who received RT, no major disadvantage in OS and CSS may be expected. Since local treatment in patients with LMB might now be considered the new standard, RP should be further explored as local treatment option in these patients.
KeywordsOverall survival Local treatment Oligometastatic prostate cancer Radiotherapy
Protocol/project development: MG/SK. Data collection or management: SK, PM, BB, and PT. Data analysis: SK and PT. Manuscript writing/editing: SK, MG, DT, and TS.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
There was no external financial support for this study. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Tilki D, Pompe RS, Bandini M, Marchioni M, Kretschmer A, Tian Z et al (2018) Local treatment for metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review. Int J Urol Off J Jpn Urol Assoc 25(5):390–403Google Scholar
- 9.European Association Urology (2019) European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2019 Edition. [Internet]. European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, editor. Presented at the EAU Annual Congress Barcelona 2019. European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, Arnhem. http://uroweb.org/guidelines/compilations-of-all-guidelines/
- 11.Protocol Amendment Pack [Internet]. STAMPEDE. [cited 2019 May 31]. http://www.stampedetrial.org/centres/protocol-amendment-pack/
- 13.Boevé LMS, Hulshof MCCM, Vis AN, Zwinderman AH, Twisk JWR, Witjes WPJ et al (2019) Effect on survival of androgen deprivation therapy alone compared to androgen deprivation therapy combined with concurrent radiation therapy to the prostate in patients with primary bone metastatic prostate cancer in a prospective randomised clinical trial: data from the HORRAD trial. Eur Urol 75(3):410–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Impact of radical prostatectomy as primary treatment in patients with prostate cancer with limited bone metastases—full text view—ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. [cited 2019 Apr 24]. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02454543