Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Patients
2.2. Radical Prostatectomy
2.3. Brachytherapy
2.4. Follow-Up
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
References
- Siegel, R.L.; Miller, K.D.; Fuchs, H.E.; Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2022, 72, 7–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, W.; Sun, K.; Zheng, R.; Zeng, H.; Zhang, S.; Xia, C.; Yang, Z.; Li, H.; Zou, X.; He, J. Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2014. Chin. J. Cancer Res. 2018, 30, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brandeis, J.; Pashos, C.L.; Henning, J.M.; Litwin, M.S. A nationwide charge comparison of the principal treatments for early stage prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000, 89, 1792–1799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianco, F.J., Jr.; Scardino, P.T.; Eastham, J.A. Radical prostatectomy: Long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”). Urology 2005, 66 (Suppl. 5), 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goy, B.W.; Burchette, R. Ten-year treatment complication outcomes of radical prostatectomy vs external beam radiation vs brachytherapy for 1503 patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2021, 20, 1083–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hannoun-Lévi, J.M. Brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Present and future. Cancer Radiother. 2017, 21, 469–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooperberg, M.R.; Lubeck, D.P.; Meng, M.V.; Mehta, S.S.; Carroll, P.R. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: Trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J. Clin. Oncol. 2004, 22, 2141–2149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ding, X.F.; Zhou, G.C.; Gu, X. Application of 125I implantation in the elderly prostate cancer patients. Chin. J. Urol. 2014, 35, 187–190. [Google Scholar]
- Mohler, J.L.; Armstrong, A.J.; Bahnson, R.R.; D’Amico, A.V.; Davis, B.J.; Eastham, J.A.; Enke, C.A.; Farrington, T.A.; Higano, C.S.; Horwitz, E.M.; et al. Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2016. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2016, 14, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Roach, M., 3rd; Hanks, G.; Thames, H., Jr.; Schellhammer, P.; Shipley, W.U.; Sokol, G.H.; Sandler, H. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: Recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006, 65, 965–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cookson, M.S.; Aus, G.; Burnett, A.L.; Canby-Hagino, E.D.; D’Amico, A.V.; Dmochowski, R.R.; Eton, D.T.; Forman, J.D.; Goldenberg, S.L.; Hernandez, J.; et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: The American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J. Urol. 2007, 177, 540–545. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Wei, J.T.; Dunn, R.L.; Litwin, M.S.; Sandler, H.M.; Sanda, M.G. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 2000, 56, 899–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mohler, J.L.; Antonarakis, E.S. NCCN Guidelines Updates: Management of Prostate Cancer. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2019, 17, 583–586. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Badakhshi, H.; Graf, R.; Budach, V.; Wust, P. Permanent interstitial low-dose-rate brachytherapy for patients with low risk prostate cancer: An interim analysis of 312 cases. Strahlenther Onkol. 2015, 191, 303–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giberti, C.; Chiono, L.; Gallo, F.; Schenone, M.; Gastaldi, E. Radical retropubic prostatectomy versus brachytherapy for low-risk prostatic cancer: A prospective study. World J. Urol. 2009, 27, 607–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, C.M.; Troncoso, P.; Swanson, D.A.; Munsell, M.F.; Kuban, D.A.; Lee, A.K.; Yeh, S.F.; Frank, S.J. Knife or needles? A cohort analysis of outcomes after radical prostatectomy or brachytherapy for men with low- or interme-diate-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Brachytherapy 2012, 11, 429–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, P.; Qian, B.; Shi, J.; Xiao, Y. Radical prostatectomy versus brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer on oncological and functional outcomes: A meta-analysis. Transl. Androl. Urol. 2020, 9, 332–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, X.X.; Xia, H.R.; Hou, H.M.; Liu, M.; Wang, J.Y. Comparison of Oncological Outcomes Between Radical Prostatectomy and Radiotherapy by Type of Radiotherapy in Elderly Prostate Cancer Patients. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 708373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suárez, J.F.; Zamora, V.; Garin, O.; Gutiérrez, C.; Pont, À.; Pardo, Y.; Goñi, A.; Mariño, A.; Hervás, A.; Herruzo, I.; et al. Mortality and biochemical recurrence after surgery, brachytherapy, or external radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: A 10-year follow-up cohort study. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 12589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, S.Y.; Chi, B.H.; Lim, B.; Kyung, Y.S.; You, D.; Jeong, I.G.; Song, C.; Hong, J.H.; Ahn, H.; Kim, C.S. Percent tumor volume vs American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system subclassification for predicting biochemical recurrence in patients with pathologic T2 prostate cancer. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 146, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciezki, J.P.; Weller, M.; Reddy, C.A.; Kittel, J.; Singh, H.; Tendulkar, R.; Stephans, K.L.; Ulchaker, J.; Angermeier, K.; Stephenson, A.; et al. A Comparison between Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy with or without Androgen Deprivation, External Beam Radiation Therapy with or without Androgen Deprivation, and Radical Prostatectomy with or without Adjuvant or Salvage Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2017, 97, 962–975. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Zhou, Z.; Yan, W.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, F.; Li, H.; Ji, Z. 125I low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer. Oncol. Lett. 2019, 18, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, R.C.; Basak, R.; Meyer, A.M.; Kuo, T.M.; Carpenter, W.R.; Agans, R.P.; Broughman, J.R.; Reeve, B.B.; Nielsen, M.E.; Usinger, D.S.; et al. Association Between Choice of Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy, or Active Surveillance and Patient-Reported Quality of Life Among Men with Localized Prostate Cancer. JAMA 2017, 317, 1141–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- De, B.; Pasalic, D.; Barocas, D.A.; Wallis, C.J.D.; Huang, L.C.; Zhao, Z.; Koyama, T.; Tang, C.; Conwill, R.; Goodman, M.; et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes after External Beam Radiotherapy with Low Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost versus Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Five-Year Results from a Prospective Comparative Effectiveness Study. J. Urol. 2022, 101097JU0000000000002902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elshaikh, M.A.; Angermeier, K.; Ulchaker, J.C.; Klein, E.A.; Chidel, M.A.; Mahoney, S.; Wilkinson, D.A.; Reddy, C.A.; Ciezki, J.P. Effect of anatomic, procedural, and dosimetric variables on urinary retention after permanent iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy. Urology 2003, 61, 152–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elshaikh, M.A.; Ulchaker, J.C.; Reddy, C.A.; Angermeier, K.W.; Klein, E.A.; Chehade, N.; Altman, A.; Ciezki, J.P. Prophylactic tamsulosin (Flomax) in patients undergoing prostate 125I brachytherapy for prostate carcinoma: Final report of a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized study. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2005, 62, 164–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Matsuoka, Y.; Uehara, S.; Toda, K.; Fukushima, H.; Tanaka, H.; Yoshida, S.; Yokoyama, M.; Yoshimura, R.; Kihara, K.; Fujii, Y. Focal brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: 5.7-year clinical outcomes and a pair-matched study with radical prostatectomy. Urol. Oncol. 2022, 40, 161.e15–161.e23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Characteristic | BT (n = 245) | RP (n = 312) | Total (n = 557) | p Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age (years) | <0.01 | |||
Range | 53–86 | 49–83 | 49–86 | |
Median | 75 | 64 | 68 | |
Mean (SD) | 74.16 (6.40) | 63.87 (7.66) | 68.40 (8.77) | |
Initial PSA (ng/mL) | 0.141 | |||
≤4, n (%) | 8 (3.3) | 8 (2.6) | 16 (2.9) | |
4–10, n (%) | 68 (27.7) | 111 (35.6) | 179 (32.1) | |
>10, n (%) | 169 (69.0) | 193 (61.8) | 362 (65.0) | |
Mean (SD) | 17.81 (9.12) | 15.34 (8.6) | 16.43 (8.91) | <0.01 |
Biopsy Gleason score | 0.427 | |||
≤6, n (%) | 127 (51.8) | 178 (57.0) | 305 (54.8) | |
7, n (%) | 69 (28.2) | 82 (26.3) | 151 (27.1) | |
≥8, n (%) | 49 (20) | 52 (16.7) | 101 (18.1) | |
Clinical T stage | 0.938 | |||
T1c, n (%) | 40 (16.3) | 48 (15.4) | 88 (15.8) | |
T2a, n (%) | 65 (26.5) | 84 (26.8) | 149 (26.8) | |
T2b, n (%) | 53 (21.6) | 63 (20.2) | 116 (20.8) | |
T2c, n (%) | 78 (31.9) | 108 (34.6) | 186 (33.4) | |
T3a, n (%) | 9 (3.7) | 9 (2.9) | 18 (3.2) | |
NCCN risk category | 0.606 | |||
Low, n (%) | 42 (17.1) | 61 (19.6) | 103 (18.5) | |
Intermediate, n (%) | 61 (24.9) | 83 (26.6) | 144 (25.8) | |
High, n (%) | 142 (58) | 168 (53.8) | 310 (55.7) |
Factor | Multivariate | ||
---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | p Value | |
Treatment modality | 0.082 | ||
RP vs. BT | 1.534 | 0.95–2.48 | |
Age (years) | 0.271 | ||
>65 vs. ≤65 | 1.329 | 0.80–2.21 | |
iPSA (ng/mL) | 0.841 | ||
>10 vs. ≤10 | 1.059 | 0.61–1.85 | |
Gleason score | |||
≤6 | 1 | Ref. | - |
7 | 1.574 | 0.91–2.72 | 0.105 |
≥8 | 3.669 | 2.06–6.53 | <0.001 |
Clinical T stage | |||
≥T2b vs. ≤T2a | 1.264 | 0.79–2.03 | 0.335 |
BT n = 245 (Mean ± SD) | RP n = 312 (Mean ± SD) | p Value (BT vs. RP) | |
---|---|---|---|
Urinary function | |||
Baseline | 96.4 ± 11.2 | 94.5 ± 10.4 | 0.039 |
3-month | 87.5 ± 14.3 | 81.7 ± 17.6 | <0.001 |
6-month | 92.6 ± 8.9 | 86.3 ± 14.2 | <0.001 |
12-month | 93.9 ± 12.2 | 89.1 ± 13.4 | <0.001 |
24-month | 95.3 ± 10.7 | 93.8 ± 11.3 | 0.112 |
Urinary irritative/obstructive | |||
Baseline | 95.1 ± 12.9 | 93.3 ± 11.1 | 0.078 |
3-month | 81.3 ± 15.7 | 85.4 ± 13.6 | <0.001 |
6-month | 85.7 ± 12.5 | 91.4 ± 5.9 | <0.001 |
12-month | 88.3 ± 10.2 | 92.6 ± 4.5 | <0.001 |
24-month | 95.5 ± 8.7 | 94.2 ± 5.3 | 0.03 |
Urinary incontinence | |||
Baseline | 97.9 ± 6.3 | 96.5 ± 7.6 | 0.021 |
3-month | 94.3 ± 7.5 | 68.5 ± 23.5 | <0.001 |
6-month | 96.5 ± 9.7 | 76.9 ± 19.3 | <0.001 |
12-month | 97.5 ± 8.6 | 84.2 ± 16.4 | <0.001 |
24-month | 96.7 ± 8.9 | 95.2 ± 12.9 | 0.121 |
Urinary bother | |||
Baseline | 94.6 ± 8.8 | 93.4 ± 12.1 | 0.193 |
3-month | 85.3 ± 16.1 | 87.6 ± 15.4 | 0.087 |
6-month | 88.4 ± 11.4 | 90.4 ± 10.2 | 0.03 |
12-month | 92.6 ± 10.1 | 92.9 ± 9.1 | 0.713 |
24-month | 93.9 ± 9.2 | 93.1 ± 8.7 | 0.294 |
Bowel function | |||
Baseline | 97.5 ± 5.2 | 96.1 ± 7.3 | 0.011 |
3-month | 95.1 ± 8.5 | 95.2 ± 8.8 | 0.893 |
6-month | 95.9 ± 8.7 | 94.9 ± 7.5 | 0.146 |
12-month | 96.3 ± 6.1 | 95.3 ± 6.7 | 0.070 |
24-month | 97.0 ± 5.7 | 95.9 ± 5.4 | 0.02 |
Bowel bother | |||
Baseline | 98.1 ± 3.6 | 97.7 ± 4.3 | 0.243 |
3-month | 95.8 ± 7.2 | 96.7 ± 7.4 | 0.150 |
6-month | 97.1 ± 6.8 | 96.9 ± 6.8 | 0.731 |
12-month | 97.3 ± 4.8 | 97.2 ± 6.2 | 0.835 |
24-month | 97.9 ± 4.1 | 97.5 ± 5.8 | 0.361 |
Sexual function | |||
Baseline | 47.8 ± 25.5 | 53.1 ± 24.7 | 0.014 |
3-month | 44.5 ± 18.8 | 22.1 ± 22.5 | <0.001 |
6-month | 45.8 ± 20.1 | 28.9 ± 20.6 | <0.001 |
12-month | 46.7 ± 23.4 | 38.8 ± 22.9 | <0.001 |
24-month | 47.5 ± 22.7 | 49.7 ± 22.3 | 0.252 |
Sexual bother | |||
Baseline | 82.1 ± 20.4 | 80.6 ± 22.8 | 0.42 |
3-month | 78.7 ± 22.6 | 62.4 ± 25.7 | <0.001 |
6-month | 80.9 ± 21.1 | 66.3 ± 26.1 | <0.001 |
12-month | 81.9 ± 19.5 | 69.1 ± 23.3 | <0.001 |
24-month | 81.3 ± 19.9 | 77.8 ± 24.8 | 0.072 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, F.; Luan, Y.; Fan, Y.; Huang, T.; Zhu, L.; Lu, S.; Tao, H.; Sheng, T.; Chen, D.; Ding, X. Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer. Medicina 2022, 58, 1387. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101387
Wang F, Luan Y, Fan Y, Huang T, Zhu L, Lu S, Tao H, Sheng T, Chen D, Ding X. Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer. Medicina. 2022; 58(10):1387. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101387
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Fei, Yang Luan, Yaqin Fan, Tianbao Huang, Liangyong Zhu, Shengming Lu, Huazhi Tao, Tao Sheng, Deqing Chen, and Xuefei Ding. 2022. "Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer" Medicina 58, no. 10: 1387. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101387
APA StyleWang, F., Luan, Y., Fan, Y., Huang, T., Zhu, L., Lu, S., Tao, H., Sheng, T., Chen, D., & Ding, X. (2022). Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer. Medicina, 58(10), 1387. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101387