Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use in the Setting of High-dose Radiation Therapy and the Risk of Prostate Cancer-Specific Mortality Stratified by the Extent of Competing Mortality.

PURPOSE: The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiation therapy (RT) is the standard of care for men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PC). However, whether competing mortality (CM) affects the ability of ADT to improve, survival remains unanswered. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We calculated a CM risk score using a Fine-Gray semiparametric model that included age and cardiometabolic comorbidities from a cohort of 17,669 men treated with high-dose RT with or without supplemental ADT for nonmetastatic PC. Fine and Gray competing risk regression analysis was used to assess whether ADT reduced the risk of PC-specific mortality for men with a low versus a high risk of CM among the 4550 patients within the intermediate- and high-risk cohort after adjustment for established PC prognostic factors, year of treatment, site, and ADT propensity score. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 8.4 years, 1065 men had died, 89 (8.36%) of PC. Among the men with a low CM score, ADT use was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of PC-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.87, P=.02) but was not for men with high CM (adjusted hazard ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 0.77-2.30, P=.30). CONCLUSIONS: Adding ADT to high-dose RT appears to be associated with decreased PC-specific mortality risk in men with a low but not a high CM score. These data should serve to heighten awareness about the importance of considering competing risks when determining whether to add ADT to RT for older men with intermediate- or high-risk PC.

Whole Pelvis Versus Prostate-Only Radiotherapy With or Without Short-Course Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Mortality Risk.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to determine whether the extent of prostate radiotherapy (ie, whole-pelvic radiotherapy [WPRT] vs. prostate and seminal vesicle radiotherapy [PSVRT]) is associated with all-cause mortality (ACM) in men treated with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multiple-institution cohort of 3709 prostate cancer patients was prospectively assembled from 1991 to 2006. The median age was 72 years and all patients had T1c-T3N0M0 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Patients were treated with WPRT or PSVRT followed by a brachytherapy boost, with or without neoadjuvant ADT (median duration, 4.2 months). Seventy percent of patients had unfavorable-risk disease (Gleason score ≥ 7; prostate-specific antigen ≥ 10 ng/mL; or stage ≥ T2b). Cox regression was applied to determine whether the radiation treatment volume affected the risk of ACM. The interaction between radiation volume and ADT use was assessed. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, 561 deaths were observed. A decreased risk of ACM was noted with the use of WPRT versus PSVRT (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.89; P = .01), or with ADT use (AHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.90; P = .004). However, a combination of WPRT and ADT did not further improve ACM compared with either WPRT alone or PSVRT with ADT. Moreover, there was a significant interaction between the radiotherapeutic treatment volume and ADT (AHR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.004-2.58; P = .048). CONCLUSION: Treatment with WPRT or short-course ADT is associated with a decreased risk of ACM, although a combination of the two does not yield greater benefit. This observation suggests a shared mechanism for this risk reduction, which we hypothesize to be via the treatment of micrometastatic disease within the pelvic lymph nodes.

The number of high-risk factors and the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality after brachytherapy: implications for treatment selection.

PURPOSE: To determine whether an increasing number of high-risk factors is associated with higher prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) among men treated with brachytherapy (BT)-based treatment, and whether supplemental therapy has an impact on this risk. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed the cases of 2234 men with localized prostate cancer treated between 1991 and 2007 with low-dose rate BT monotherapy (n = 457) or BT with supplemental external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT, n = 229), androgen suppression therapy (AST, n = 424), or both (n = 1124). All men had at least one high-risk factor (prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL, biopsy Gleason score 8-10, or clinical stage ≥T2c). Competing-risks multivariable regressions were performed to determine whether the presence of at least two high-risk factors was associated with an increased risk of PCSM, with adjustment for age, comorbidity, and the type of supplemental treatment. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 4.3 years. The number of men with at least two high-risk factors was highest in the group treated with BT, EBRT, and AST (21%), followed by BT plus EBRT or AST (13%), and BT alone (8%) (p(trend) < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) for PCSM for those with at least two high-risk factors (as compared with one) was 4.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-8.0; p < 0.001). The use of both supplemental EBRT and AST was associated with a decreased risk of PCSM (AHR 0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9; p = 0.03) compared with BT alone. When the high-risk factors were analyzed separately, Gleason score 8-10 was most significantly associated with increased PCSM (AHR 6.2; 95% CI, 3.5-11.2; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Men with high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma treated with BT have decreased PCSM if they receive trimodailty therapy that includes EBRT and AST. This benefit is likely most important in men with multiple determinants of high risk.

Type of diabetes mellitus and the odds of Gleason score 8 to 10 prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: It has been recently shown that diabetes mellitus (DM) is significantly associated with the likelihood of presenting with high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) or Gleason score (GS) 8 to 10; however, whether this association holds for both Type 1 and 2 DM is unknown. In this study we evaluated whether DM Type 1, 2, or both are associated with high-grade PCa after adjusting for known predictors of high-grade disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1991 and 2010, a total of 15,330 men diagnosed with PCa and treated with radiation therapy were analyzed. A polychotomous logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate whether Type 1 or 2 DM was associated with odds of GS 7 or GS 8 to 10 compared with 6 or lower PCa, adjusting for African American race, age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and digital rectal examination findings. RESULTS: Men with Type 1 DM (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-3.27; p = 0.003) or Type 2 DM (AOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.26-1.99; p < 0.001) were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with GS 8 to 10 PCa compared with nondiabetic men. However this was not true for GS 7, for which these respective results were AOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.93-1.82; p = 0.12 and AOR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.98-1.32; p = 0.10. CONCLUSION: Type 1 and 2 DM were associated with a higher odds of being diagnosed with Gleason score 8 to 10 but not 7 PCa. Pending validation, men who are diagnosed with Type I DM with GS 7 or lower should be considered for additional workup to rule out occult high-grade disease.

Influence of androgen deprivation therapy on all-cause mortality in men with high-risk prostate cancer and a history of congestive heart failure or myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether the excess risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) observed when androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is added to radiation for men with prostate cancer and a history of congestive heart failure (CHF) or myocardial infarction (MI) also applies to those with high-risk disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Of 14,594 men with cT1c-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer treated with brachytherapy-based radiation from 1991 through 2006, 1,378 (9.4%) with a history of CHF or MI comprised the study cohort. Of these, 22.6% received supplemental external beam radiation, and 42.9% received a median of 4 months of neoadjuvant ADT. Median age was 71.8 years. Median follow-up was 4.3 years. Cox multivariable analysis tested for an association between ADT use and ACM within risk groups, after adjusting for treatment factors, prognostic factors, and propensity score for ADT. RESULTS: ADT was associated with significantly increased ACM (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.34; p = 0.0001), with 5-year estimates of 22.71% with ADT and 11.62% without ADT. The impact of ADT on ACM by risk group was as follows: high-risk AHR = 2.57; 95% CI, 1.17-5.67; p = 0.019; intermediate-risk AHR = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.13-2.73; p = 0.012; low-risk AHR = 1.52; 95% CI, 0.96-2.43; p = 0.075). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a history of CHF or MI treated with brachytherapy-based radiation, ADT was associated with increased all-cause mortality, even for patients with high-risk disease. Although ADT has been shown in Phase III studies to improve overall survival in high-risk disease, the small subgroup of high-risk patients with a history of CHF or MI, who represented about 9% of the patients, may be harmed by ADT.

Diabetes mellitus, race and the odds of high grade prostate cancer in men treated with radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: Black men present more frequently with high grade prostate cancer and are more likely to have diabetes mellitus. We evaluated whether there is an independent association between diabetes mellitus and the risk of high grade prostate cancer in men diagnosed with prostate cancer and treated with radiation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A polychotomous logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate whether a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus was associated with the odds of Gleason score 7 or 8-10 prostate cancer in a cohort of 16,286 men, adjusting for black race, advancing age, prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination findings. RESULTS: Black men (adjusted OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.08-3.13, p = 0.024) and nonblack men (adjusted OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.33-1.89, p <0.001) with diabetes were more likely to have Gleason score 8-10 vs 6 or less prostate cancer than nondiabetic men. However, this was not true for Gleason score 7 vs 6 or less prostate cancer. Black race was significantly associated with Gleason score 7 vs 6 or less prostate cancer in men without and with diabetes (adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.17-1.63, p <0.001 and 1.61, 95% CI 1.17-2.21, p = 0.003, respectively). Black race was also associated with Gleason score 8-10 vs 6 or less prostate cancer in men without and with diabetes (adjusted OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01-1.83, p = 0.04 and 1.58, 95% CI 0.98-2.53, p = 0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of men undergoing radiotherapy for prostate cancer the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with an increased risk of being diagnosed with Gleason score 8-10 prostate cancer independent of black race.

Race and survival following brachytherapy-based treatment for men with localized or locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

PURPOSE: We investigated whether race was associated with risk of death following brachytherapy-based treatment for localized prostate cancer, adjusting for age, cardiovascular comorbidity, treatment, and established prostate cancer prognostic factors. METHODS: The study cohort was composed of 5,360 men with clinical stage T1-3N0M0 prostate cancer who underwent brachytherapy-based treatment at 20 centers within the 21st Century Oncology consortium. Cox regression multivariable analysis was used to evaluate the risk of death in African-American and Hispanic men compared to that in Caucasian men, adjusting for age, pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, clinical T stage, year and type of treatment, median income, and cardiovascular comorbidities. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 3 years, there were 673 deaths. African-American and Hispanic races were significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.77 and 1.79; 95% confidence intervals, 1.3-2.5 and 1.2-2.7; p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). Other factors significantly associated with an increased risk of death included age (p < 0.001), Gleason score of 8 to 10 (p = 0.04), year of brachytherapy (p < 0.001), and history of myocardial infarction treated with stent or coronary artery bypass graft (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for prostate cancer prognostic factors, age, income level, and revascularized cardiovascular comorbidities, African-American and Hispanic races were associated with higher ACM in men with prostate cancer. Additional causative factors need to be identified.

Coronary revascularization and mortality in men with congestive heart failure or prior myocardial infarction who receive androgen deprivation.

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken to determine the impact of prior coronary revascularization (angioplasty, stent, or coronary artery bypass graft) on the risk of all-cause mortality after neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT) for prostate cancer (PC) in men with a history of coronary artery disease (CAD)-induced congestive heart failure (CHF) or myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: Among 7839 men who received radiation with or without a median of 4 months of HT for PC from 1991 to 2006, 495 (6.3%) had CAD-induced CHF or MI and formed the study cohort. Of these men, 250 (50.5%) had been revascularized before treatment for PC. Cox regression was used to determine whether HT increased the risk of all-cause mortality, and whether revascularization altered this risk, after adjusting for known PC prognostic factors and a propensity score for revascularization. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 4.1 years. Neoadjuvant HT was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (28.9% vs 15.7% at 5 years; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.64; P = .01). Men who received HT without revascularization had the highest risk of all-cause mortality (33.3%; adjusted HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.01-2.18; P = .047), whereas men who were revascularized and did not receive HT had the lowest risk of all-cause mortality (9.4%; adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.28-0.93; P = .028). The reference group had an intermediate risk of all-cause mortality (23.4%) and was comprised of men in whom HT use and revascularization were either both given or both withheld. CONCLUSIONS: In men with a history of CAD-induced CHF or MI, neoadjuvant HT is associated with an excess risk of mortality, which appears to be reduced but not eliminated by prior revascularization.

Risk of all-cause and prostate cancer-specific mortality after brachytherapy in men with small prostate size.

BACKGROUND: Brachytherapy for prostate cancer can be technically challenging in men with small prostates (≤20 cc), but it is unknown whether their outcomes are different than those of men with larger prostates. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We studied 6,416 men treated with brachytherapy in one of 21 community-based practices. Cox regression and Fine and Gray's regression were used to determine whether volume ≤20 cc was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) or prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), respectively, after adjustment for other known prognostic factors. RESULTS: 443 patients (6.9%) had a prostate volume ≤20 cc. After a median follow-up of 2.91 years (interquartile range, 1.06-4.79), volume ≤20 cc was associated with a significantly higher risk of ACM (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.33 [95% CI 1.08-1.65], p = 0.0085) with 3-year estimates of ACM for ≤20 cc vs. >20 cc of 13.0% vs. 6.9% (p = 0.028). Only 23 men (0.36%) have died of prostate cancer, and no difference was seen in PCSM by volume (p = 0.4). CONCLUSION: Men with small prostates at the time of implant had a 33% higher risk of ACM, and the underlying cause of this remains uncertain. No increase in PCSM was observed in men with volume ≤20cc, suggesting that a small prostate should not in itself be a contraindication for brachytherapy, but inasmuch as absolute rates of PCSM were small, further follow-up will be needed to confirm this finding.

Mortality in men with localized prostate cancer treated with brachytherapy with or without neoadjuvant hormone therapy.

BACKGROUND: Discrepancies exist regarding the impact of neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) on the risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) in men who receive brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Therefore, the objective of the current study was to examine the effect of NHT on the risk of ACM in men with prostate cancer who receive with brachytherapy. METHODS: The study cohort included 2474 men with localized prostate cancer who either received NHT (N = 1083) or did not receive NHT (N = 1391) and brachytherapy without supplemental external beam radiation between 1991 and 2005 at centers within the 21st Century Oncology Consortium. All men had at least 2 years of follow-up. Low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk disease was present in 65%, 23%, and 12% of men, respectively. A Cox regression multivariate analysis was used to evaluate the risk of ACM in men who received NHT compared with all others adjusting for age, prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, and tumor classification. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 3.3-7.5 years) and adjusting for known prostate cancer prognostic factors and age, treatment with NHT was associated significantly with an increased risk of ACM (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.53; P = .04) in men aged > or =73 years. In men who were younger than the median age of 73 years, hormone therapy use was not significant (P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with men who were younger than the median age of 73 years, men aged > or =73 years with localized prostate cancer who received brachytherapy and NHT had an increased risk of ACM compared with men who did not receive NHT.