The correlation between the ASTRO Consensus Panel definition of biochemical failure and clinical outcome for patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam irradiation. American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

PURPOSE

We reviewed our institution's experience treating patients with external beam irradiation (RT) to determine if the ASTRO Consensus Panel definition of biochemical failure (BF) following radiation therapy correlates with clinical distant metastases free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and local control (LC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 1/1/87 and 12/31/92, 568 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer received external beam irradiation (RT) using localized prostate fields at William Beaumont Hospital (median total dose 66.6 Gy; range: 60-70.4 Gy). Biochemical failure was defined as three consecutive increases in post-treatment prostate specific antigen (PSA) after achieving a nadir. Biochemical failure was recorded as the time midway between the nadir and the first rising PSA. Five-year actuarial rates of clinical DMFS, DFS, CSS, and LC were calculated for patients who were biochemically controlled (BC) versus those who failed biochemically. Median follow-up was 56 months (range: 24-118 months).

RESULTS

Five-year actuarial rates of DMFS, DFS, CSS, and LC were significantly greater in patients who were biochemically controlled versus those who were not (p < 0.001). In patients who were BC, the 5-year actuarial rates of DMFS, DFS, CSS, and LC were 99%, 99%, 98%, and 99% respectively. For patients who failed biochemically, the 5-year actuarial rates of DMFS, DFS, CSS, and LC were 74%, 64%, 89%, and 86% respectively. When stratifying by pretreatment PSA, Gleason score, and T stage these differences remained significant for DMFS, DFS, and CSS. The Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that BC was the single most important predictor of clinical outcome for DMFS, DFS, CSS, and LC. Pretreatment PSA and Gleason score were also independent predictors of outcome for DMFS and DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASTRO Consensus Panel definition of BF following radiation therapy correlates well with clinical DMFS, DFS, and CSS. These findings suggest that the Consensus Panel definition may be a surrogate for clinical progression and survival and should be considered a valid endpoint for separating successful versus unsuccessful treatment. Additional studies with longer follow-up will be needed to corroborate these findings.