Survival Outcomes of Whole-Pelvic Versus Prostate-Only Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients With Use of the National Cancer Data Base

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Dec 1;93(5):1052-63. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Sep 18.

Abstract

Purpose/objectives: The addition of whole pelvic (WP) compared with prostate-only (PO) radiation therapy (RT) for clinically node-negative prostate cancer remains controversial. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the survival benefit of adding WPRT versus PO-RT for high-risk, node-negative prostate cancer, using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB).

Methods and materials: Patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated from 2004 to 2006, with available data for RT volume, coded as prostate and pelvis (WPRT) or prostate alone (PO-RT) were included. Multivariate analysis (MVA) and propensity-score matched analysis (PSM) were performed. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) based on overall survival (OS) using Gleason score (GS), T stage, and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was also conducted.

Results: A total of 14,817 patients were included: 7606 (51.3%) received WPRT, and 7211 (48.7%) received PO-RT. The median follow-up time was 81 months (range, 2-122 months). Under MVA, the addition of WPRT for high-risk patients had no OS benefit compared with PO-RT (HR 1.05; P=.100). On subset analysis, patients receiving dose-escalated RT also did not benefit from WPRT (HR 1.01; P=.908). PSM confirmed no survival benefit with the addition of WPRT for high-risk patients (HR 1.05; P=.141). In addition, RPA was unable to demonstrate a survival benefit of WPRT for any subset. Other prognostic factors for inferior OS under MVA included older age (HR 1.25; P<.001), increasing comorbidity scores (HR 1.46; P<.001), higher T stage (HR 1.17; P<.001), PSA (HR 1.81; P<.001), and GS (HR 1.29; P<.001), and decreasing median county household income (HR 1.15; P=.011). Factors improving OS included the addition of androgen deprivation therapy (HR 0.92; P=.033), combination external beam RT plus brachytherapy boost (HR 0.71; P<.001), and treatment at an academic/research institution (HR 0.84; P=.002).

Conclusion: In the largest reported analysis of WPRT for patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated in the dose-escalated era, the addition of WPRT demonstrated no survival advantage compared with PO-RT.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Androgen Antagonists / therapeutic use
  • Brachytherapy / methods
  • Brachytherapy / mortality
  • Databases, Factual
  • Humans
  • Insurance Coverage / statistics & numerical data
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Multivariate Analysis
  • Neoplasm Grading
  • Pelvis
  • Propensity Score
  • Prostate
  • Prostate-Specific Antigen / blood
  • Prostatic Neoplasms / blood
  • Prostatic Neoplasms / mortality*
  • Prostatic Neoplasms / pathology
  • Prostatic Neoplasms / radiotherapy*
  • Radiotherapy / methods
  • Radiotherapy / mortality
  • Radiotherapy / statistics & numerical data
  • Radiotherapy Dosage
  • Survival Analysis
  • United States / epidemiology

Substances

  • Androgen Antagonists
  • Prostate-Specific Antigen