Definitive Local Treatment for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A National Cancer Database Analysis
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in US males, with metastatic disease (mPCa) comprising 5% of cases. This represents an incurable and uniformly lethal disease. Thus, novel therapeutic approaches are needed. Cytoreductive surgery in the metastatic setting has become commonplace for renal cell carcinoma, and definitive local radiotherapy has been employed in the oligometastatic setting for prostate cancer via the STAMPEDE trial. This study further explores the use of definitive local treatment via pelvic radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy along with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs. ADT alone in the setting of metastatic prostate cancer.
Methods: The 2019 National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried to conduct a retrospective cohort analysis of cT1-4N0-3M1 PCa who received local therapy in conjunction with ADT vs. ADT alone. Clinicopathologic variables were compared between the two groups using Wilcoxon signed rank and Chi-square for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Overall survival (OS) analysis was performed using Cox Proportional Hazards and the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparisons were made between local therapy + ADT vs. ADT alone and between radical prostatectomy + ADT vs. radiation therapy + ADT vs. ADT alone.
Results: A total of n=36,635 patients with cM1 were identified, with 3197 (8.7%) patients receiving local therapy + ADT. Among local therapy + ADT, 2884 (90.2%) patients received radiation therapy + ADT, and 313 (9.8%) received radical prostatectomy + ADT. The median follow-up was 2.8 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significant improvement in 5-year OS for patients who received local therapy + ADT vs. ADT alone. For ADT alone, 5-year OS was 31.3% (CI= 30.7-31.8%) vs. 54.2%. (CI= 52.4-56.1%) for local therapy +ADT. Furthermore, comparing the type of local therapy on Kaplan-Meier analysis: radical prostatectomy + ADT showed better 5-yr OS, 74.0% (CI= 67.5-79.1%) vs. 52.2% (CI= 50.2-54.2%) for radiation therapy +ADT (p<0.001).
Conclusion: Definitive local treatment, in addition to ADT, may improve 5-year OS for well-selected patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Patient outcomes are significantly improved for those treated with radical prostatectomy vs. radiation therapy. These findings support multimodal treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, and further studies are needed to optimize criteria for patient selection and choice of definitive localized therapy in this setting.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, Bray F, Jemal A. Recent Global Patterns in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates. Eur Urol. Jan 2020;77(1):38-52. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.005
3. Damodaran S, Kyriakopoulos CE, Jarrard DF. Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Has the Paradigm Changed? Urol Clin North Am. Nov 2017;44(4):611-621. doi:10.1016/j.ucl.2017.07.008
4. Kyriakopoulos CE, Chen YH, Carducci MA, et al. Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase III E3805 CHAARTED Trial. J Clin Oncol. Apr 10 2018;36(11):1080-1087. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.75.3657
5. Davis ID, Martin AJ, Stockler MR, et al. Enzalutamide with Standard First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. Jul 11 2019;381(2):121-131. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1903835
6. Chi KN, Agarwal N, Bjartell A, et al. Apalutamide for Metastatic, Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. Jul 4 2019;381(1):13-24. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1903307
7. Fizazi K, Tran N, Fein L, et al. Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with newly diagnosed high-risk metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (LATITUDE): final overall survival analysis of a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. May 2019;20(5):686-700. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30082-8
8. Parker CC, James ND, Brawley CD, et al. Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. Dec 1 2018;392(10162):2353-2366. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32486-3
9. Sekhoacha M, Riet K, Motloung P, Gumenku L, Adegoke A, Mashele S. Prostate Cancer Review: Genetics, Diagnosis, Treatment Options, and Alternative Approaches. Molecules. Sep 5 2022;27(17)doi:10.3390/molecules27175730
10. Wilt TJ, Ullman KE, Linskens EJ, et al. Therapies for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Comparative Effectiveness Review. J Urol. Apr 2021;205(4):967-976. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000001578
11. Parker CC, James ND, Brawley CD, et al. Radiotherapy to the prostate for men with metastatic prostate cancer in the UK and Switzerland: Long-term results from the STAMPEDE randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. Jun 2022;19(6):e1003998. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003998
12. Farhood B, Mortezaee K, Haghi-Aminjan H, et al. A systematic review of radiation-induced testicular toxicities following radiotherapy for prostate cancer. J Cell Physiol. Sep 2019;234(9):14828-14837. doi:10.1002/jcp.28283
13. Achard V, Panje CM, Engeler D, Zilli T, Putora PM. Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Treatment Options. Oncology. 2021;99(7):413-421. doi:10.1159/000513258
14. Costello AJ. Considering the role of radical prostatectomy in 21st century prostate cancer care. Nat Rev Urol. Mar 2020;17(3):177-188. doi:10.1038/s41585-020-0287-y
15. Carneiro A, Baccaglini W, Glina FPA, et al. Impact of local treatment on overall survival of patients with metastatic prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Braz J Urol. Jul-Aug 2017;43(4):588-599. doi:10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0483
16. Rogowski P, Roach M, 3rd, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, et al. Radiotherapy of oligometastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review. Radiat Oncol. Mar 9 2021;16(1):50. doi:10.1186/s13014-021-01776-8
17. Baccaglini W, Rodrigues AF, Teles SB, et al. The current role of local treatment in metastatic prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Oncol. Nov 2022;61(11):1386-1393. doi:10.1080/0284186X.2022.2132113
18. Rusthoven CG, Jones BL, Flaig TW, et al. Improved Survival With Prostate Radiation in Addition to Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Men With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34(24):2835-2842. doi:10.1200/jco.2016.67.4788
19. Sinha S, Muralidhar V, Feng FY, Nguyen PL. Characteristics and national trends of patients receiving treatment of the primary tumor for metastatic prostate cancer. Prostate Int. Sep 2017;5(3):89-94. doi:10.1016/j.prnil.2017.04.003
20. Paget S. The distribution of secondary growths in cancer of the breast. 1889. Cancer Metastasis Rev. Aug 1989;8(2):98-101.
21. Akhtar M, Haider A, Rashid S, Al-Nabet A. Paget's "Seed and Soil" Theory of Cancer Metastasis: An Idea Whose Time has Come. Adv Anat Pathol. Jan 2019;26(1):69-74. doi:10.1097/PAP.0000000000000219
22. Kaplan RN, Riba RD, Zacharoulis S, et al. VEGFR1-positive haematopoietic bone marrow progenitors initiate the pre-metastatic niche. Nature. Dec 8 2005;438(7069):820-7. doi:10.1038/nature04186
23. Boeve LMS, Hulshof M, Vis AN, et al. 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. Mar 2019;75(3):410-418. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.09.008
24. Vengaloor Thomas T, Gordy XZ, Lirette ST, et al. Lack of Racial Survival Differences in Metastatic Prostate Cancer in National Cancer Data Base (NCDB): A Different Finding Compared to Non-metastatic Disease. Front Oncol. 2020;10:533070. doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.533070