Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Department of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Asian J Androl. 2022 Sep-Oct;24(5):494-499. doi: 10.4103/aja2021113.
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second-most common cancer among men. Both active surveillance or watchful waiting (AS/WW) and focal laser ablation (FLA) can avoid the complications caused by radical treatment. How to make the choice between these options in clinical practice needs further study. Therefore, this study aims to compare and analyze their effects based on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) to obtain better long-term benefits. We included patients with low-risk PCa from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database of 2010-2016. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were conducted for OS and CSS in the two groups. To eliminate bias, this study applied a series of sensitivity analyses. Moreover, Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted to obtain survival status. A total of 18 841 patients with low-risk PCa were included, with a median of 36-month follow-up. According to the multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression, the FLA group presented inferior survival benefits in OS than the AS/WW group (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.37-3.33, P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounders, the result persisted (HR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.02-2.81, P < 0.05). According to the results of the sensitivity analysis, the inverse probability of the treatment weighing model indicated the same result in OS. In conclusion, AS/WW and FLA have the advantage of fewer side effects and the benefit of avoiding overtreatment compared with standard treatment. Our study suggested that AS/WW provides more survival benefits for patients with low-risk PCa. More relevant researches and data will be needed for further clarity.
前列腺癌(PCa)是男性中第二大常见的癌症。主动监测或观察等待(AS/WW)和局灶激光消融(FLA)都可以避免根治性治疗引起的并发症。在临床实践中,如何在这两种选择之间做出选择需要进一步研究。因此,本研究旨在比较和分析基于总生存(OS)和癌症特异性生存(CSS)的这两种治疗方法的效果,以获得更好的长期获益。我们纳入了 2010 年至 2016 年 SurveillanceEpidemiologyandEndResults 数据库中低危 PCa 患者。对两组的 OS 和 CSS 进行多变量 Cox 比例风险分析。为了消除偏倚,本研究进行了一系列敏感性分析。此外,绘制 Kaplan-Meier 曲线以获得生存状态。共纳入 18841 例低危 PCa 患者,中位随访时间为 36 个月。根据多变量 Cox 比例风险回归,FLA 组 OS 生存获益劣于 AS/WW 组(风险比[HR]:2.13,95%置信区间[CI]:1.37-3.33,P<0.05)。调整混杂因素后,结果仍然存在(HR:1.69,95%CI:1.02-2.81,P<0.05)。根据敏感性分析结果,逆概率处理加权模型(InverseProbabilityoftheTreatmentWeighingModel)在 OS 中也得到了相同的结果。总之,与标准治疗相比,AS/WW 和 FLA 具有副作用更少和避免过度治疗的优势。我们的研究表明,AS/WW 为低危 PCa 患者提供了更多的生存获益。需要更多相关的研究和数据来进一步明确。