Suppr超能文献

局部前列腺癌局部消融治疗(高强度聚焦超声、冷冻疗法或电穿孔)后挽救性前列腺切除术和挽救性放疗的疗效比较分析。

Comparative Effectiveness Analyses of Salvage Prostatectomy and Salvage Radiotherapy Outcomes Following Focal or Whole-Gland Ablative Therapy (High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound, Cryotherapy or Electroporation) for Localised Prostate Cancer.

机构信息

University College London, London, UK; University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK; The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.

University College London, London, UK.

出版信息

Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2022 Jan;34(1):e69-e78. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.10.012. Epub 2021 Nov 3.

Abstract

AIMS

Ablative therapy, such as focal therapy, cryotherapy or electroporation, aims to treat clinically significant prostate cancer with reduced treatment-related toxicity. Up to a third of patients may require further local salvage treatment after ablative therapy failure. Limited descriptive, but no comparative, evidence exists between different salvage treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare oncological and functional outcomes after salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SRARP) and salvage radiotherapy (SRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were collected prospectively and retrospectively on 100 consecutive SRARP cases and 100 consecutive SRT cases after ablative therapy failure in a high-volume tertiary centre.

RESULTS

High-risk patients were over-represented in the SRARP group (66.0%) compared with the SRT group (48.0%) (P = 0.013). The median (interquartile range) follow-up after SRARP was 16.5 (10.0-30.0) months and 37.0 (18.5-64.0) months after SRT. SRT appeared to confer greater biochemical recurrence-free survival at 1, 2 and 3 years compared with SRARP in high-risk patients (year 3: 86.3% versus 66.0%), but biochemical recurrence-free survival was similar for intermediate-risk patients (year 3: 90.0% versus 75.6%). There was no statistical difference in pad-free continence at 12 and 24 months between SRARP (77.2 and 84.7%) and SRT (75.0 and 74.0%) (P = 0.724, 0.114). Erectile function was more likely to be preserved in men who underwent SRT. After SRT, cumulative bowel and urinary Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity grade I were 25.0 and 45.0%, grade II were 11.0 and 11.0% and grade III or IV complications were 4.0 and 5.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We report the first comparative analyses of salvage prostatectomy and radiotherapy following ablative therapy. Men with high-risk disease appear to have superior oncological outcomes after SRT; however, treatment allocation does not appear to influence oncological outcomes for men with intermediate-risk disease. Treatment allocation was associated with a different spectrum of toxicity profile. Our data may inform shared decision-making when considering salvage treatment following focal or whole-gland ablative therapy.

摘要

目的

消融治疗,如局部治疗、冷冻治疗或电穿孔,旨在通过降低与治疗相关的毒性来治疗具有临床意义的前列腺癌。多达三分之一的患者在消融治疗失败后可能需要进一步的局部挽救性治疗。不同挽救性治疗结果之间的描述性证据有限,比较性证据则不存在。本研究的目的是比较消融治疗失败后行挽救性机器人辅助前列腺根治性切除术(SRARP)和挽救性放疗(SRT)的肿瘤学和功能结局。

材料和方法

在一家高容量的三级中心,前瞻性和回顾性地收集了 100 例连续的 SRARP 病例和 100 例连续的 SRT 病例的数据,这些病例均为消融治疗失败后的患者。

结果

与 SRT 组(48.0%)相比,SRARP 组中高危患者比例过高(66.0%)(P = 0.013)。SRARP 后的中位(四分位距)随访时间为 16.5(10.0-30.0)个月,SRT 后的中位(四分位距)随访时间为 37.0(18.5-64.0)个月。在高危患者中,SRT 似乎在 1、2 和 3 年时提供了更好的生化无复发生存率(3 年:86.3%对 66.0%),但在中危患者中,生化无复发生存率相似(3 年:90.0%对 75.6%)。在 12 个月和 24 个月时,SRARP(77.2%和 84.7%)和 SRT(75.0%和 74.0%)的无 pads 控尿率无统计学差异(P = 0.724,0.114)。接受 SRT 的男性更有可能保留勃起功能。在 SRT 后,肠道和尿路放射性治疗肿瘤学组的累积 1 级毒性分别为 25.0%和 45.0%,2 级毒性分别为 11.0%和 11.0%,3 级或 4 级并发症分别为 4.0%和 5.0%。

结论

我们报告了首次对消融治疗后行前列腺切除术和放疗的比较分析。高危疾病患者似乎在 SRT 后有更好的肿瘤学结局;然而,治疗分配似乎并不影响中危疾病患者的肿瘤学结局。治疗分配与不同的毒性谱相关。我们的数据可能为考虑对局部或全腺体消融治疗后进行挽救性治疗时的共同决策提供信息。

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