Suppr超能文献

与挽救性全腺冷冻治疗相比,挽救性局部冷冻治疗在治疗放射性抵抗或复发性前列腺癌时具有相似的短期肿瘤学控制效果并能改善排尿功能。

Salvage Focal Cryotherapy Offers Similar Short-term Oncologic Control and Improved Urinary Function Compared With Salvage Whole Gland Cryotherapy for Radiation-resistant or Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

作者信息

Tan Wei Phin, ElShafei Ahmed, Aminsharifi Alireza, Khalifa Ahmad O, Polascik Thomas J

机构信息

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.

Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Department of Urology, Medical School, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.

出版信息

Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020 Jun;18(3):e260-e265. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.11.009. Epub 2019 Dec 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We compared the short-term oncologic and functional outcomes of salvage focal cryotherapy (SFC) with those of salvage total cryotherapy (STC) for radiotherapy (RT)-persistent/recurrent prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We queried the Cryo On-Line Database registry for men who had undergone SFC and STC of the prostate for RT-persistent or recurrent disease. Propensity score weighting was used to match age at treatment, presalvage therapy prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason sum, and presalvage cryotherapy androgen deprivation therapy status. The primary outcome was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

A total of 385 men with biopsy-proven persistent or recurrent prostate cancer after primary RT were included in the present study. The median follow-up, age, prostate-specific antigen, and Gleason sum before salvage cryotherapy was 24.4 months (first and third quartile, 9.8 and 60.3), 70 years (first and third quartile, 66 and 74 years), 4 ng/dL (first and third quartile, 2.7 and 5.6 ng/dL), and 7 (first and third quartile, 6 and 8), respectively. After propensity score weighting, the difference in progression-free survival was not statistically significant between the patients who had undergone STC and those who had undergone SFC (79.8% vs. 76.98%; P = .11 on weighted log-rank test). SFC was associated with a lower probability of post-treatment transient urinary retention (5.6% vs. 22.4%; P < .001). No significant differences were found in the incidence of rectal fistula (1.4% vs. 3.8; P = .30), new-onset urinary incontinence within 12 months (9.3% vs. 15.1%; P = .19), or new-onset erectile dysfunction within 12 months (52.6% vs. 59.6%; P = .47) between the SFC and STC groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

STC resulted in similar 2-year oncologic outcomes compared with SFC in the RT-persistent/recurrent disease population. However, the patients who had undergone SFC had a lower urinary retention rate compared with those who had undergone STC.

摘要

背景

我们比较了挽救性局部冷冻疗法(SFC)与挽救性全前列腺冷冻疗法(STC)治疗放疗(RT)后持续存在/复发前列腺癌的短期肿瘤学和功能结果。

材料与方法

我们查询了冷冻在线数据库登记处中因RT后疾病持续或复发而接受前列腺SFC和STC治疗的男性患者。采用倾向评分加权法匹配治疗时的年龄、挽救性治疗前前列腺特异性抗原水平、Gleason评分总和以及挽救性冷冻治疗前雄激素剥夺治疗状态。主要结局为无进展生存期。

结果

本研究共纳入385例经活检证实为初次RT后前列腺癌持续或复发的男性患者。挽救性冷冻治疗前的中位随访时间、年龄、前列腺特异性抗原和Gleason评分总和分别为24.4个月(第一和第三四分位数,9.8和60.3)、70岁(第一和第三四分位数,66和74岁)、4 ng/dL(第一和第三四分位数,2.7和5.6 ng/dL)以及7(第一和第三四分位数,6和8)。倾向评分加权后,接受STC治疗的患者与接受SFC治疗的患者在无进展生存期方面的差异无统计学意义(79.8%对76.98%;加权对数秩检验P = 0.11)。SFC与治疗后短暂性尿潴留的发生率较低相关(5.6%对22.4%;P < 0.001)。SFC组和STC组在直肠瘘发生率(1.4%对3.8;P = 0.30)、12个月内新发尿失禁发生率(9.3%对15.1%;P = 0.19)或12个月内新发勃起功能障碍发生率(52.6%对59.6%;P = 0.47)方面均未发现显著差异。

结论

在RT后疾病持续/复发人群中,与SFC相比,STC产生了相似的2年肿瘤学结果。然而,接受SFC治疗的患者与接受STC治疗的患者相比,尿潴留率较低。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

5
Using Effect Size-or Why the P Value Is Not Enough.使用效应量——为何P值并不足够。
J Grad Med Educ. 2012 Sep;4(3):279-82. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-12-00156.1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验