Tan Wei Phin, ElShafei Ahmed, Aminsharifi Alireza, Khalifa Ahmad O, Polascik Thomas J
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.
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020 Jun;18(3):e260-e265. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.11.009. Epub 2019 Dec 5.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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。
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。
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。
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。