Ten-Year Treatment Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy Vs External Beam Radiation Therapy Vs Brachytherapy for 1503 Patients With Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 10-year oncologic treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) vs external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) vs brachytherapy (BT) for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis using propensity score matching was performed on 1503 IRPC patients who underwent treatment from 2004 to 2007. Eight hundred and nineteen underwent RP, 574 underwent EBRT to a median dose of 75.3 Gray, and 110 underwent BT using Iodine-125. Biochemical failure was defined by the American Urological Association definition of failure for RP, and the Phoenix definition for EBRT and BT. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 10.0 years for RP, 9.6 for EBRT, and 9.8 for BT. Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was given in 0.6% of RP, 58.9% of EBRT, and 12.7% of BT patients, P <.0001. Only 14% of BT received supplemental external radiation. The adjusted 10-year freedom from biochemical failure was 80.2% for BT vs 57.1% for RP vs 57.0% for EBRT, P = .0003. Subset analysis of unfavorable IRPC also showed improved freedom from biochemical failure with BT, P <.0001. There were no significant differences in metastases-free survival or prostate cancer-specific survival after adjusting for age and Charlson comorbidity index. CONCLUSION: BT using Iodine-125, used alone or in combination with supplemental external radiation, is a reasonable treatment option for IRPC patients, yielding equivalent rates of metastases-free survival and prostate cancer-specific survival.

Salvage Cryoablation for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: Initial Experience at a Regional Health Care System.

CONTEXT: Local recurrence after radiotherapy for prostate cancer remains challenging to treat effectively. Although oncologic control is highest with salvage prostatectomy, the procedure is associated with substantial morbidity. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with successful salvage cryoablation for radiorecurrent prostate cancer. DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent salvage cryoablation at our institution between 2005 and 2015. All patients had biopsy-proven local recurrence after radiotherapy. Patients with seminal vesicle invasion or metastases were excluded. Complete follow-up was obtained for all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary study endpoint was biochemical progression-free survival based on the Phoenix criteria. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients underwent salvage cryotherapy. Mean patient age was 69.3 years. The overall biochemical salvage rate was 50.7% at a median follow-up of 3.9 years. The following factors were independently associated with successful cryotherapy: Precryotherapy Gleason score of 3 + 3 or 3 + 4, low precryotherapy prostate-specific antigen (PSA), low precryotherapy PSA density, longer time to PSA nadir after radiotherapy, and low postcryotherapy PSA nadir. A postcryotherapy PSA nadir of 0.5 ng/mL or less was associated with a biochemical progression-free survival of 79.7% at 3 years and 64.7% at 5 years, whereas a postcryotherapy PSA nadir above 0.5 was associated with a biochemical progression-free survival of 5.6% at 3 years and 0% at 5 years (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Approximately 50% of the patients achieved biochemical salvage with cryoablation at 5 years. Nadir PSA after salvage was the strongest predictor of biochemical progression-free survival in our cohort.

Treatment results of brachytherapy vs. external beam radiation therapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer with 10-year followup.

PURPOSE: To compare 10-year treatment outcomes of brachytherapy vs. external beam radiation therapy for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2004 and 2007, 93 IRPC patients underwent brachytherapy using iodine-125 to a dose of 145 Gy without supplemental external radiation. A retrospective comparison was performed to a contemporary cohort of 597 patients treated with external beam radiation therapy to a median dose of 75.3 Gy using a propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: Median followup was 7.8 years. With brachytherapy, 51.6% had Gleason score 7 vs. 72.0% for external radiation (p < 0.001). Median initial prostate-specific antigen was 8.3 for brachytherapy vs. 9.4 for external radiation (p = 0.01). Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was given in 59.5% of external radiation vs. 10.8% of brachytherapy patients (p < 0.001). The 10-year freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) for brachytherapy was 81.7% vs. 54.5% for external radiation (p = 0.002). Unfavorable intermediate-risk patients experienced borderline significant improved FFBF with brachytherapy (p = 0.08). The 10-year freedom from salvage therapy for brachytherapy was 93.2% vs. 72.2% for external radiation (p = 0.006). There were no significant differences in distant metastases-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, or overall survival after adjusting for age. Multivariate analysis with propensity score matching showed that brachytherapy remained an independent predictor for improved FFBF (p = 0.007). Grade 1 and 2 late rectal complication rate was 6.5% for brachytherapy vs. 15.2% for external radiation (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Brachytherapy using iodine-125 without supplemental external radiation is a reasonable treatment option for selected IRPC patients.

Observation versus adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy in the management of stage I seminoma: clinical outcomes and prognostic factors for relapse in a large US cohort.

PURPOSE: The management of stage I seminoma has evolved over the past 20 years. Contemporary management options after orchiectomy include adjuvant radiation, adjuvant chemotherapy, and observation. This analysis defines the experience at Kaiser Permanente Southern California from 1990 to 2010. We examined outcomes for stage I seminoma patients and reviewed prognostic factors for recurrence in those managed with observation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 502 stage I seminoma patients who underwent orchiectomy from 1990 to 2010. Outcomes examined were relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and cause-specific survival (CSS). Risk factors for recurrence evaluated were age, preoperative hCG elevation, preoperative LDH elevation, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, rete testis invasion, epididymis invasion, and invasion through the tunica albuginea. RESULTS: Among radiation patients, 5-year RFS was 97.2%, OS was 98.0%, and CSS was 99.3%. Among chemotherapy patients, 2-year RFS was 98.3% and OS and CSS were 100%. Among observation patients, 5-year RFS was 89.2%, OS was 98.8%, and CSS was 100%. There was no difference in OS or CSS among the groups. RFS was significantly lower for observation patients. Among observation patients, univariate analysis identified tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, and rete testis invasion as risk factors for relapse. No factors were significant on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy yield similar outcomes in the management of stage I seminoma. Observation results in a lower RFS, but patients who relapse can be salvaged; OS and CSS are not affected.

Treatment of T3 and T4 anal carcinoma with combined chemoradiation and interstitial 192Ir implantation: a 10-year experience.

PURPOSE: To report our experience in treating T3 and T4 anal carcinoma with combined external beam (EBRT) and chemotherapy, followed by interstitial (192)Ir implant boost. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 1990 to 2000, 31 patients with T3 and T4 anal carcinoma were treated with: 30 Gy EBRT (2 Gy fractions, 5 days/week) + 5-fluorouracil + mitomycin-C. Median implant dose was 31.3 Gy at 0.5 cm, delivered at a mean rate of 0.52 Gy/h. RESULTS: Six patients had local persistence and 4 eventually developed local-regional recurrence. Eight underwent abdomino-perineal resection (APR). With the addition of APR in selected cases, the ultimate local-regional control after initial treatment was 84%. Distant metastases occurred in 10. Of the initial cohort, 55% is still alive and NED. Eight had radiation proctitis and 7 developed postimplant ulceration. Only 1 required surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of T3 and T4 anal cancer with combined chemotherapy and EBRT, followed by interstitial implant results in an ultimate local-regional control of 84%, after the inclusion of selected APR. It is well tolerated, with acceptable toxicity.