Comparison of Health-Related Quality of Life 5 Years After SPIRIT: Surgical Prostatectomy Versus Interstitial Radiation Intervention Trial

Predicting Urinary Function Outcomes Following Low-dose-rate Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer

Background and objective

Our aim was to develop a tool using readily available clinical parameters to predict the probability of poor urinary function following low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for localized prostate cancer.

Methods

Data from the multicentre, prospective Swiss LDR-BT cohort were analyzed for men treated with LDR-BT. Inclusion criteria were minimum follow-up of 3 yr or postoperative treatment with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). A total of 914 men were analyzed, with complete data available for 607 men. Pre-interventional variables assessed were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), prostate volume (PV), maximum urinary flow rate, prostate-specific antigen, postvoid residual urine volume, and age. The primary outcome was poor urinary function after LDR-BT, defined as an IPSS-Quality of Life score >3 ("mostly dissatisfied" or worse) at 3 yr or the occurrence of TURP during follow-up. Associations were evaluated using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was also performed.

Key findings and limitations

Poor urinary function outcomes were observed in 46 patients (5.0%). Significant predictors included pre-interventional IPSS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per point 1.18; p < 0.001) and PV (aOR per ml, 1.04; p = 0.004). Limitations of the study include potential selection bias and the absence of external validation.

Conclusions and clinical implications

Pre-interventional IPSS and PV were significant predictors of poor urinary function after LDR-BT for prostate cancer. A risk calculator based on these parameters was developed to assist individualized treatment planning. Further studies are needed to validate these findings before they can be applied in routine clinical practice.

Patient summary

We created a tool to predict the likelihood of urinary problems after a type of radiotherapy called brachytherapy for prostate cancer. The size of the prostate and urinary symptoms before treatment were associated with poor urinary function after treatment. This tool could help doctors and patients in making informed decisions about treatment for prostate cancer.

Measuring patient reported outcomes in brachytherapy: Why we should do it and more importantly how

As the treatment for cancer improves and advances are made, the clinical focus is often on treatment response and survival. However, these are not the only factors which are important to patients. More patients are living longer after cancer treatment and therefore it is important that we can describe not only the treatment to patients but also what their life will be like during and after treatment. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) allow us to describe these. Although there are a range of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to the clinician to assess these, the use of them in many areas of brachytherapy lags behind ideal levels. Brachytherapy has many features that differ to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) yet the assessment of quality of life during and after treatment is much more scarce than EBRT. Brachytherapy is often used in the setting of organ preservation or in place of radical surgery, yet there is a paucity of quality of life data comparing the different treatment modalities. This review article will aim to elaborate on the evidence that exists in the use of specific PROMs within prostate, breast and gynaecologic cancers and describe the development of a novel PROMs approach in rectal brachytherapy which aims to identify and resolve symptoms at an early stage.

A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Comparing Radiation Therapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer

The treatment landscape for localized and regional prostate cancer includes active surveillance, radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP). Population-based studies comparing RP to radiation reveal conflicting results due to methodological flaws. This systematic review and pooled analysis of studies aim to compare cause-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and toxicity outcomes, comparing RP to RT in the management of prostate cancer. This systematic review search included the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries according to the PRISMA statement with the inception of each database up to June 24, 2023. Randomized phase 2 or 3 clinical trials that compared RP to RT in prostate cancer were included. The forest plot for the Odds ratio (OR) was plotted using the Mantel-Haenszel method, and the Z test was used to assess significance. A fixed effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search yielded seven completed randomized clinical trials and four ongoing trials. The majority of complete trials had low to intermediate-risk patient populations. OR for OS was 1.00 with 95% CI, 0.71-1.41 (P-value: 0.98), CSS OR was 0.99 with 95% CI, 0.45-2.18 (P-value 0.11), OR for DFS was 1.26 with 95% CI, 0.89-1.78 (P-value 0.19) when comparing RP to RT. The rate of distant metastatic disease was 2.3% in the RP versus 2.9% in the RT at 10 years. The rate of second malignant neoplasms was 4.5% in the RP compared to 4.2% in the RT arm at 10 years. RP caused more urinary symptoms, with a predominance of the need for urinary pads and a higher incidence of sexual dysfunction, and RT caused a higher incidence of bowel symptoms, such as blood in stools and fecal incontinence. This study provides evidence that the treatment-related outcomes are similar in patients with low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer when comparing RP to RT. Multidisciplinary treatment approaches and factoring patients' values and preferences should form the cornerstone of the ideal treatment option for each patient with localized prostate cancer. Patients with prostate cancer have an equal chance of being cancer-free and alive at 10 years with either RP or RT. In terms of side effects, RP causes more urine leakage and loss of erections, whereas RT tends to cause more bowel side effects, such as blood in stools and fecal leakage.

Brachytherapy: The urologist opinion

Prostate cancer remains a prevalent concern worldwide, necessitating continual advancements in treatment modalities. This abstract explores the role of brachytherapy as a viable and effective option in the management of prostate cancer. Brachytherapy involves the implantation of radioactive sources directly into the prostate, providing a localized dose of radiation. n recent studies and clinical trials, brachytherapy has demonstrated promising outcomes, particularly in terms of disease control and patient outcomes. The treatment's ability to deliver a concentrated intraprostatic dose, often in combination with external beam radiotherapy, has shown favorable results. Furthermore, brachytherapy's impact on disease-free survival and its potential in reducing urinary and bowel toxicity have been subjects of investigation. This abstract delves into the technical aspects, patient outcomes, and emerging trends in brachytherapy for prostate cancer. By examining the current literature and research findings, we aim to shed light on the evolving role of brachytherapy in the comprehensive management of prostate cancer, emphasizing its potential as a valuable therapeutic option.

The oncologic and safety outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer

Around 40 years have passed since a modern low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy for prostate cancer was introduced. LDR brachytherapy has become one of the definitive treatment options besides radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). LDR brachytherapy has several advantages over EBRT such as a higher prescribed dose to the prostate gland while avoiding unnecessary irradiation of organs at risk, a precipitous dose gradient, a brief treatment time, and a short hospital stay. Previous reports revealed that the long-term oncologic outcomes of LDR brachytherapy are superior to those of EBRT. The oncologic outcomes of low- to intermediate-risk patients are equivalent to those of RP using the recurrence definition of surgery of prostate specific antigen (PSA) >0.2 ng/mL, while the oncologic outcomes of LDR brachytherapy as tri-modality (combined EBRT and androgen deprivation therapy) for high-risk patients is superior to that of RP using the recurrence definition of surgery. In respect of toxicity, urinary disorders such as urgency and frequency are often observed after the acute phase of treatment, but these events usually resolve, while the quality of life of urinary continence is well preserved for a long time. Erectile function decreases yearly, but is relatively preserved compared to RP. In conclusion, the most noteworthy strength of LDR brachytherapy for low- to intermediate-risk patients is the "brief treatment time" that provides long recurrence-free survival, while that for high-risk patients who received LDR brachytherapy (tri-modality) is "excellent disease control."

Effects of surgery versus radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer in terms of urinary, bowel, and sexual domains

BACKGROUND

The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPCa) after treatment mainly surgery and radiotherapy (RT) has received increasing attention. The aim of this study is to compare the HRQoL of LPCa after surgery and RT.

METHODS

Web of Science, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched after January 2000 to observe the HRQoL scores after surgery and RT at different treatment time points.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies were included in this study, and the results showed that LPCa received surgery had better bowel scores than RT at ≤3 (weighted mean differences [WMD] = 4.18; p = 0.03), 3-6 (WMD = 4.16; p < 0.001), 6-12 (WMD = 2.99; p = 0.004), 24-60 (WMD = 1.87; p = 0.06), and ≥60 (WMD = 4.54; p = 0.02) months. However, LPCa received RT had higher urinary scores at ≤3 (WMD = -7.39; p = 0.02), 3-6 (WMD = -6.03; p = 0.02), 6-12 (WMD = -4.90; p < 0.001), 24-60 (WMD = -3.96; p < 0.001), ≥60 (WMD = -2.95; p < 0.001) months and had better sexual scores at ≤3 (WMD = -13.58; p = 0.09), 3-6 (WMD = -12.32; p = 0.06), 6-12 (WMD = -12.03; p = 0.002), 24-60 (WMD = -11.29; p < 0.001), and ≥60 (WMD = -3.10; p = 0.46) months than surgery. The scores difference between surgery and RT decreased over time.

CONCLUSION

Overall, for LPCa, surgery was associated with better HRQoL in the bowel domain, whereas RT was associated with better HRQoL in the urinary and sexual domains, with the difference between surgery and RT narrowing over time.

Long-Term Biochemical Control of a Prospective Cohort of Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Interstitial Brachytherapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy

AIMS

To report long-term oncological outcomes of men treated prospectively as part of the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group phase III Surgical Prostatectomy Versus Interstitial Radiation Intervention Trial (SPIRIT) at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2003-2004, patients eligible for SPRIT attended a multidisciplinary educational session, following which they could choose radical prostatectomy, low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) or randomisation to SPIRIT. Biochemical failure was determined by the accepted definitions of a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥0.2 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy and the Phoenix definition of PSA ≥2 ng/ml above the nadir after LDR-BT. A sensitivity analysis, using a PSA >0.5 ng/ml to define biochemical failure after LDR-BT and a threshold PSA ≥0.2 ng/ml, was carried out to test the robustness of the results. To account for the competing risk of death, Gray's test was used to test the equality of the cumulative incidence function of biochemical failure between treatment groups. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival and prostate cancer-specific survival. A P-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of 156 patients, 100 received LDR-BT (15 after randomisation) and 56 underwent radical prostatectomy (15 after randomisation). The median follow-up was 12.6 and 14.7 years for LDR-BT and radical prostatectomy, respectively. The median age was 60 years; the median pre-treatment PSA was 5.5 (interquartile range 4.3-7.1). No significant differences in patient characteristics were found between groups. Two patients received adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. The cumulative incidence function of biochemical failure was 0%, 1.1% and 2.4% at 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively, in the LDR-BT arm versus 8.5%, 15.8% and 15.8% in the radical prostatectomy arm (P < 0.001). These results were consistent when varying the definition of biochemical failure defined as PSA ≥0.5 ng/ml (P = 0.01). At 15 years, overall survival was higher in patients treated with radical prostatectomy compared with those treated with LDR-BT; however, no statistical difference was found in prostate cancer-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

In low-risk prostate cancer patients, LDR-BT offers excellent long-term oncological outcomes comparable with radical prostatectomy, in addition to the previously reported advantage for LDR-BT in urinary and sexual quality of life domains and patient satisfaction.

Cost effectiveness of treatment strategies for high risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) have multiple accepted treatment options. Because there is no overall survival benefit of one option over another, appropriate treatment must consider patient life expectancy, quality of life, and cost.

METHODS

The authors compared quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost effectiveness among treatment options for HRPC using a Markov model with three treatment arms: (1) external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) delivered with 20 fractions, (2) EBRT with 23 fractions followed by low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy boost, or (3) radical prostatectomy alone. An exploratory analysis considered a simultaneous integrated boost according to the FLAME trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01168479).

RESULTS

Treatment strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). EBRT with LDR brachytherapy boost was a cost-effective strategy (ICER, $20,929 per QALY gained). These results were most sensitive to variations in the biochemical failure rate. However, the results still demonstrated cost effectiveness for the brachytherapy boost paradigm, regardless of any tested parameter ranges. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that EBRT with LDR brachytherapy was favored in 52% of 100,000 Monte Carlo iterations. In an exploratory analysis, EBRT with a simultaneous integrated boost was also a cost-effective strategy, resulting in an ICER of $62,607 per QALY gained; however, it was not cost effective compared with EBRT plus LDR brachytherapy boost.

CONCLUSIONS

EBRT with LDR brachytherapy boost may be a cost-effective treatment strategy compared with EBRT alone and radical prostatectomy for HRPC, demonstrating high-value care. The current analysis suggests that a reduction in biochemical failure alone can result in cost-effective care, despite no change in overall survival.

Comparative effectiveness of low-dose-rate brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer

We compared clinical outcomes associated with seed brachytherapy (SEED-BT) alone and SEED-BT plus external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer using propensity score-matched analysis. From 2006 to 2011, 993 patients diagnosed with intermediate-risk were treated with either SEED-BT alone (n = 775) or SEED-BT plus EBRT (n = 158) at 3 tertiary hospitals. In the propensity score-matched analysis (102 pairs), median follow-up was 95 months (range 18–153 months). The 8-year biochemical recurrence-free rate (bRFR) was significantly better with SEED-BT alone than with combined radiotherapy (93.3% vs. 88.4%; HR 0.396; 95% CI 0.158–0.991). Grade 2 or greater late genitourinary toxicities were significantly fewer with SEED-BT alone than with combined radiotherapy (21.0% vs. 33.2%; HR 0.521; 95% CI 0.308–0.881). Similarly, grade 2 or greater late gastrointestinal toxicities were significantly fewer with SEED-BT alone (0% vs. 12.2%; HR 0.125; 95% CI 0.040–0.390). For the unfavorable intermediate-risk subgroups, SEED-BT alone yielded a significantly better bRFR than the combined radiotherapy (HR 0.325; 95% CI 0.115–0.915). SEED-BT alone might be a better disease-management plan than SEED-BT plus EBRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer regardless of favorable and unfavorable characteristics.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy versus Brachytherapy: Relative Strengths of Two Highly Efficient Options for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a valid option for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In randomized trials, it was found not inferior to conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). It also compares favorably to brachytherapy (BT) even if level 1 evidence is lacking. However, BT remains a strong competitor, especially for young patients, as series with 10-15 years of median follow-up have proven its efficacy over time. SBRT will thus have to confirm its effectiveness over the long-term as well. SBRT has the advantage over BT of less acute urinary toxicity and, more hypothetically, less sexual impairment. Data are limited regarding SBRT for high-risk disease while BT, as a boost after EBRT, has demonstrated superiority against EBRT alone in randomized trials. However, patients should be informed of significant urinary toxicity. SBRT is under investigation in strategies of treatment intensification such as combination of EBRT plus SBRT boost or focal dose escalation to the tumor site within the prostate. Our goal was to examine respective levels of evidence of SBRT and BT for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicity and quality of life, and to discuss strategies of treatment intensification.

Outcome of primary androgen deprivation therapy in super-elderly men with localized high-risk prostate cancer

The purpose of this study is to provide certain data on clinical outcome of primary androgen deprivation therapy in men over 80 years of age with localized high-risk prostate cancer. This study included 54 Japanese super-elderly men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with primary androgen deprivation therapy between 2005 and 2015. The median overall survival was 9.1 years (95% confidence interval, 8.1-10.1) and no patient died from prostate cancer. Overall, 51.9% of patients experienced any grade of adverse events following androgen deprivation therapy. Associations between clinicopathological factors including comorbidity count at initial diagnosis and overall survival were investigated. On multivariate analysis, only comorbidity count at initial diagnosis [≥2 vs. ≤1; hazard ratio, 5.34 (95% confidence interval, 1.55-18.49); P = 0.003] was an independent risk factor for overall survival. Our findings suggest that comorbidity count at initial diagnosis is robustly prognostic for overall survival. For super-elderly men with localized high-risk prostate cancer, comorbidity count at initial diagnosis should be emphasized when deciding whether primary androgen deprivation therapy is necessary or not.

The 45-month therapy outcomes of permanent seed implantation and radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety-related outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) and permanent seed implantation (PI) using iodine-125 seeds in patients with prostate cancer. Method A retrospective analysis of 196 patients with biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer (T2-T3) was performed in this study. Forty-five patients who underwent PI using iodine-125 seeds combined with endocrine therapy or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were compared with 151 patients who underwent RP combined with endocrine therapy or adjuvant ADT. The efficacy and safety outcomes were compared using Kaplan–Meier curves and t-tests. Results Between the RP and PI treatment modalities, no significant difference (P > 0.05) in biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) was observed using Kaplan–Meier curves, regardless of the combination of adjuvant treatment modalities. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed (P > 0.05) with respect to PSA fluctuations, albumin, leukocyte count, urinary and rectal symptoms, erectile function or quality of life (QoL) between the two therapy methods. However, significant differences in the maximum flow rate, average length of hospital stay and indwelling catheter time were observed between the two groups (P < 0.001). Conclusion Iodine-125 seed implantation significantly shortened the average length of hospital stay and indwelling catheter time compared with RP, and the haemoglobin level was significantly higher in the PI group than in the RP group; however, the maximum urine flow rate was lower after of PI than after RP. These two methods showed similar BRFS rates among prostate cancer patients.

GEC-ESTRO ACROP prostate brachytherapy guidelines

This is an evidence-based guideline for prostate brachytherapy. Throughout levels of evidence quoted are those from the Oxford Centre for Evidence based Medicine (https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/oxford-centre-for-evidence-based-medicine-levels-of-evidence-march-2009). Prostate interstitial brachytherapy using either permanent or temporary implantation is an established and evolving treatment technique for non-metastatic prostate cancer. Permanent brachytherapy uses Low Dose Rate (LDR) sources, most commonly I-125, emitting photon radiation over months. Temporary brachytherapy involves first placing catheters within the prostate and, on confirmation of accurate positioning, temporarily introducing the radioactive source, generally High Dose Rate (HDR) radioactive sources of Ir-192 or less commonly Co-60. Pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy has also been used for prostate cancer [1] but few centres have adopted this approach. Previous GEC ESTRO recommendations have considered LDR and HDR separately [2-4] but as there is considerable overlap, this paper provides updated guidance for both treatment techniques. Prostate brachytherapy allows safe radiation dose escalation beyond that achieved using external beam radiotherapy alone as it has greater conformity around the prostate, sparing surrounding rectum, bladder, and penile bulb. In addition there are fewer issues with changes in prostate position during treatment delivery. Systematic review and randomised trials using both techniques as boost treatments demonstrate improved PSA control when compared to external beam radiotherapy alone [5-7].

Two-year quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy according to pentafecta criteria and cancer of the prostate risk assessment (CAPRA-S)

The quality of life (QoL) of men with optimal outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is largely unexplored. Thus we assessed meaningful changes of QoL measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 24 months after RARP according to postsurgical Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score (CAPRA-S) and pentafecta criteria. 2871 prostate cancer (PCa) patients with completed EORTC QLQ-C30 were stratified according to CAPRA-S, pentafecta (erectile function recovery, urinary continence recovery, biochemical-recurrence-free survival (BFS), negative surgical margins) and 90-day Clavien–Dindo-complications (CDC) ≤ 3a. Multivariable logistic regression analyses (LRM) aimed to predict improvement of EORTC QoL. Mean preoperative QoL values did not significantly differ between CAPRA-S low- (LR) vs. high-risk (HR, 75.7 vs. 75.2; p = 0.7) and pentafecta vs. non-pentafecta groups (75.6 vs. 75.2; p = 0.6). After RARP, stable QoL rates for CAPRA-S LR vs. HR and pentafecta were 30, 26 and 30%, respectively. Corresponding improved QoL rates were 44, 32 and 47%. In LRM, CAPRA-S and pentafecta criteria were independent predictors of improved QoL. We conclude that most favourable combined outcomes after RARP might confer stable or even improved QoL but up to one third of patients might experience deterioration. This warrants further investigation how to capture the underlying cause and to address and potentially solve these perceived negative effects despite successful RARP.

Testing the efficacy of a couple-focused, tailored eHealth intervention for symptom self-management among men with prostate cancer and their partners: the study protocol

BACKGROUND

Men with localized prostate cancer often experience urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal symptoms; general distress; pain; fatigue; and sleep disturbance. For men in an intimate relationship, these symptoms disrupt couples' relationships and intimacy. The symptoms also reduce quality of life for both men and their partners, who are often their primary caregivers. Management of the negative effects of cancer and its treatment is a significantly under-addressed supportive care need for these men and their intimate partners. To address these unmet supportive care needs, our interdisciplinary team developed and pilot tested the usability and feasibility of an evidence-based, couple-focused, tailored eHealth intervention, "Prostate Cancer Education & Resources for Couples" (PERC). Based on the adapted stress and coping theoretical framework and developed with stakeholder involvement, PERC aims to improve quality of life for both men and their partners by enhancing their positive appraisals, self-efficacy, social support, and healthy behaviors for symptom management.

METHODS

We will test the efficacy of PERC using a population-based, geographically and demographically diverse cohort in a randomized controlled trial. Primary aim: Assess if patients and partners receiving PERC will report greater improvement in their cancer-related quality of life scores than those in the control group (usual care plus the National Cancer Institute prostate cancer website) at 4, 8, and 12 months post-baseline. Secondary aim: Test if patients and partners in PERC will report significantly more positive appraisals and higher levels of coping resources at follow-ups than those in the control group. Exploratory aim: Determine if patient race and ethnicity, education, type of treatment, or couples' relationship quality moderate the effects of PERC on patient and partner QOL at follow-ups.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide a novel model for self-managing chronic illness symptoms that impact couples' relationships, intimacy, and quality of life. It addresses the National Institute of Nursing Research's goal to develop and test new strategies for symptom self-management to help patients and caregivers better manage their illness and improve quality of life. It also responds to calls for programs from the Institute of Medicine and American Cancer Society to address treatment-related effects and improve survivors' QOL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CT.gov NCT03489057.

Patient assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms using the international prostate symptom score following low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

To correlate changes in urinary patient-reported outcomes including the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), acute urinary retention and urethral stricture with urethral dose in those treated with low dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with prostate LDR between 2012 and 2019 (n=117) completed IPSS urinary symptom assessments prior to treatment and at each follow-up. CT simulation was obtained with urinary catheter 1-month post-implant for dosimetric analysis. 113 patients with pre- and ≥1 post-LDR IPSS score available were analyzed. Urethral dosimetric parameters including U75, U100, U125, U150 and U200 were abstracted from post-implant dosimetry and assessed for association with urinary toxicity using bivariate logistic regression and Spearman correlation. Outcomes included clinically significant change (CSC, defined as 4 or more points or 25% rise above baseline) in IPSS score at 6 and 12 months, acute urinary retention (AUR), and urethral stricture (US).

RESULTS

89 (79%) patients were treated with LDR monotherapy (145 Gy) and 24 (21%) with LDR boost (110 Gy) with external beam radiation therapy. Twenty (18%) had baseline IPSS ≥15. Median IPSS scores were: baseline 6 (3-12; n=113), 1-month 17 (10-25; n=110), 6 months 12 (7-18; n=77), 1 year 8 (5-14; n=52). CSC-6 was observed in 59 (77%), CSC-12 in 26 (50%), AUR in 12 (11%), and US in 4 (4%). No association was identified between urethral dose parameters and CSC-6, CSC-12, AUR, or US. No correlation between urethral dose and IPSS at 6- and 12-months was identified. The IPSS ≥15 group exhibited lower rates of CSC-12 (13% v. 57%, p=0.05) but not CSC-6 (55% v. 80%, p=0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a relationship between urethral dose and IPSS elevation, AUR or US. We did identify a significantly lower change in IPSS at 12 months for those with baseline IPSS ≥15 compared to those with low baseline scores.

Radical Prostatectomy: Sequelae in the Course of Time

Objective: Radical prostatectomy (RP) is a frequent treatment for men suffering from localized prostate cancer (PCa). Whilst offering a high chance for cure, it does not come without a significant impact on health-related quality of life. Herein we review the common adverse effects RP may have over the course of time. Methods: A collaborative narrative review was performed with the identification of the principal studies on the topic. The search was executed by a relevant term search on PubMed from 2010 to February 2021. Results: Rates of major complications in patients undergoing RP are generally low. The main adverse effects are erectile dysfunction varying from 11 to 87% and urinary incontinence varying from 0 to 87% with a peak in functional decline shortly after surgery, and dependent on definitions. Different less frequent side effects also need to be taken into account. The highest rate of recovery is seen within the first year after RP, but even long-term improvements are possible. Nevertheless, for some men these adverse effects are long lasting and different, less frequent side effects also need to be taken into account. Despite many technical advances over the last two decades no surgical approach can be clearly favored when looking at long-term outcome, as surgical volume and experience as well as individual patient characteristics are still the most influential variables. Conclusions: The frequency of erectile function and urinary continence side effects after RP, and the trajectory of recovery, need to be taken into account when counseling patients about their treatment options for prostate cancer.

Enhancing survivorship care planning for patients with localized prostate cancer using a couple-focused web-based, mHealth program: the results of a pilot feasibility study

PURPOSE

To examine the feasibility of an enhanced survivorship care plan (ESCP) that integrated the web-based program Patient Education Resources for Couples (PERC) into a standardized survivorship care plan (SCP) and estimated the outcomes of ESCPs versus SCPs.

METHODS

In this randomized pilot trial, localized prostate cancer (PC) patients and partners (i.e., couple) were randomly assigned to ESCP that contained a link to PERC or to SCP that contained a link to general PC information on the National Cancer Institute website. Couples completed assessments measuring quality of life (QOL), appraisal of symptoms, and coping resources at baseline (T1) and 4-6 months later (T2). We examined feasibility (e.g., recruitment and retention) using descriptive statistics. Linear mixed models examined changes in couples' outcomes over time and Poisson regression examined differences in patient healthcare utilization.

RESULTS

Sixty-two couples completed T1 surveys (recruitment rate 41.6%) and were randomly assigned to receive ESCP (n = 31) or SCP (n = 31). Twenty-eight (ESCP) and 25 (SCP) couples completed T2 surveys (retention rates = 90.3% vs. 80.7%). ESCP participants (70%) reviewed webpages consistent with patients' symptoms. ESCP patients reported greater program satisfaction (p = 0.02) and better urinary symptom scores (p < 0.01) than SCP patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivering ESCPs that embed a web-link to a couple-focused, tailored program is feasible and can potentially improve patient outcomes. The promising results need to be validated in a larger definitive trial using a diverse sample.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

SCPs, enhanced using a web-based intervention (e.g., PERC), may help PC cancer survivors better manage their urinary symptoms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04350788.

Ten-year longitudinal health-related quality of life following iodine-125 brachytherapy monotherapy for localized prostate cancer

Purpose

This prospective longitudinal study quantifies health-related quality of life (HRQoL) up to 10 years following permanent iodine-125 (¹²⁵I) prostate brachytherapy alone for localized prostate cancer.

Material and methods

In total, 120 patients completed a validated expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) questionnaire pre-treatment and at 8 time points after treatment (6 weeks, 6, 10, 18 months, and 2, 3, 5, 10 years). At each time point, clinically relevant small, moderate, and severe declines in HRQoL were defined as 0.2-0.5 SD, 0.5-0.8 SD, and > 0.8 SD of baseline function for each of urinary, bowel, and sexual domains, respectively.

Results

Response rates in the first two years were > 90%, but thereafter dropped to 75% and 48% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. 50 patients (41.6%) responded at all stages. Maximal deterioration in mean urinary and sexual summary scores was noted 6 weeks after implant, with severe urinary symptoms and moderate bowel/sexual symptoms. At 6 months, urinary and bowel quality of life (QoL) had improved to mild impairment, which then fully resolved at 10 months. Sexual QoL remained mildly impaired throughout the 10 years of follow-up. At 10 years, new mild impairment of urinary and bowel QoL was found.

Conclusions

Clinically mild changes in urinary, bowel, and sexual QoL are found 10 years after ¹²⁵I monotherapy. The impairment in sexual function persists from treatment, but urinary and bowel symptoms are new at 10 years.

The Impact of Prostate Cancer Treatment on Quality of Life: A Narrative Review with a Focus on Randomized Data

Despite excellent oncologic outcomes, the management of localized prostate cancer remains complex and is dependent on multiple factors, including patient life expectancy, medical comorbidities, tumor characteristics, and genetic risk factors. Decades of iterative clinical trials have improved the optimization and utilization of surgical and radiation-based modalities, as well as their combinatorial use with anti-androgen and systemic therapies. While cure rates are high and converging on equivalent disease control should an upfront surgical or radiotherapeutic approach be optimized, the long-term side effects of surgical and radiation-based treatments can differ significantly in nature. Decisions regarding the selection of therapy are therefore best made in an informed and shared medical decision-making process between clinician and patient with respect to cancer control as well as adverse effects. We outline in this narrative review an understanding regarding implications of surgical and radiation treatment on quality of life after treatment, and how these data may be considered in the context of advising patients regarding the selection of therapy. This narrative review largely focuses on the quality of life data obtained from prospective randomized trials of men treated for prostate cancer. We believe this provides the best assessment of the quality of life and can be used to inform patients when making treatment decisions.

Fifteen year quality of life outcomes in men with localised prostate cancer: population based Australian prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To assess treatment related changes in quality of life up to 15 years after diagnosis of localised prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Population based, prospective cohort study with follow-up over 15 years.

SETTING

New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

1642 men with localised prostate cancer, aged less than 70, and 786 controls randomly recruited from the New South Wales electoral roll into the New South Wales Prostate Cancer Care and Outcomes Study (PCOS).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

General health and disease specific quality of life were self-reported at seven time points over a 15 year period, using the 12-item Short Form Health Survey scale, University of California, Los Angeles prostate cancer index, and expanded prostate cancer index composite short form (EPIC-26). Adjusted mean differences were calculated with controls as the comparison group. Clinical significance of adjusted mean differences was assessed by the minimally important difference, defined as one third of the standard deviation (SD) from the baseline score.

RESULTS

At 15 years, all treatment groups reported high levels of erectile dysfunction, depending on treatment (62.3% (active surveillance/watchful waiting, n=33/53) to 83.0% (non-nerve sparing radical prostatectomy, n=117/141)) compared with controls (42.7% (n=44/103)). Men who had external beam radiation therapy or high dose rate brachytherapy or androgen deprivation therapy as primary treatment reported more bowel problems. Self-reported urinary incontinence was particularly prevalent and persistent for men who underwent surgery, and an increase in urinary bother was reported in the group receiving androgen deprivation therapy from 10 to 15 years (year 10: adjusted mean difference -5.3, 95% confidence interval -10.8 to 0.2; year 15: -15.9; -25.1 to -6.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving initial active treatment for localised prostate cancer had generally worse long term self-reported quality of life than men without a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Men treated with radical prostatectomy faired especially badly, particularly in relation to long term sexual outcomes. Clinicians and patients should consider these long term quality of life outcomes when making treatment decisions.

Health-related quality of life and rates of toxicity after high-dose-rate brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a common treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer. Quality of life is an important factor when discussing therapy options for high-risk prostate cancer. This study evaluated adverse effects and health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

Materials and Methods

Ninety male patients (median age, 71 years; range, 50 to 79 years) with high-risk prostate cancer underwent HDR-BT after EBRT between December 2009 and January 2017 with a median follow-up of 43 months. A total of 57 patients (69.5%) answered the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life of Cancer Patients questionnaire (QLQ-C30; ver. 3.0), and 8 patients died during follow-up. In order to put the results of this study in context, we compared the results with reference data from the EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual. Correlations of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, International Prostate Symptom Score, and HRQOL measures were calculated.

Results

The study participants reported better physical functioning and better global health compared with the reference data, but worse social, role, and cognitive functioning. We found negative statistically significant correlations between the last-measured PSA value and social functioning (p>0.01), cognitive functioning, pain, and constipation (all p<0.05). Toxicity rates were 10.0% for gastrointestinal and 12.2% for genitourinary adverse effects. All reported complications for toxicity were Grade I.

Conclusions

The described therapy results in high biochemical control rates with minimal adverse effects. Compared with reference groups, the HRQOL of this study cohort was acceptable. PSA values during follow-up seem to be a possible indicator to influence HRQOL.

Long-term oncological and functional follow-up in low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: results from the prospective nationwide Swiss registry

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term oncological, functional and toxicity outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) in relation to risk factors and radiation dose in a prospective multicentre cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data of patients from 12 Swiss centres undergoing LDR-BT from September 2004 to March 2018 were prospectively collected. Patients with a follow-up of ≥3 months were analysed. Functional and oncological outcomes were assessed at ~6 weeks, 6 and 12 months after implantation and annually thereafter. LDR-BT was performed with ¹²⁵ I seeds. Dosimetry was done 6 weeks after implantation based on the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology recommendations. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rise above the PSA nadir + 2 was defined as biochemical failure. Functional outcomes were assessed by urodynamic measurement parameters and questionnaires.

RESULTS

Of 1580 patients in the database, 1291 (81.7%) were evaluable for therapy outcome. The median (range) follow-up was 37.1 (3.0-141.6) months. Better BRFS was found for Gleason score ≤3+4 (P = 0.03, log-rank test) and initial PSA level of <10 ng/mL (P < 0.001). D'Amico Risk groups were significantly associated with BRFS (P < 0.001), with a hazard ratio of 2.38 for intermediate- and high-risk patients vs low-risk patients. The radiation dose covering 90% of the prostate volume (D90) after 6 weeks was significantly lower in patients with recurrence. Functional outcomes returned close to baseline levels after 2-3 years. A major limitation of these findings is a substantial loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our results are in line with other studies showing that LDR-BT is associated with good oncological outcomes together with good functional results.

Tumor burden and location as prognostic factors in patients treated by iodine seed implant brachytherapy for localized prostate cancers

Background

Iodine seed implant brachytherapy is indicated for low risk and selected favorable intermediate risk prostate cancers. A percentage of positive biopsies > 50% is usually considered as a contra-indication, and the tumor location could also influence the treatment efficacy. We studied the association of the percentage of positive biopsy cores, and tumor location, with progression-free survival.

Methods

Among the 382 patients treated at our center by permanent implant iodine seed brachytherapy for a localized prostate cancer between 2006 and 2013, 282 had accessible detailed pathology reports, a minimum follow-up of 6 months, and were included. Progression was defined as a biochemical, local, nodal, or distant metastatic relapse. We studied cancer location on biopsies (base, midgland or apex of the prostate) and percentage of positive biopsy cores, as well as potential confounders (pre-treatment PSA, tumor stage, Gleason score, risk group according to D’Amico’s classification modified by Zumsteg, adjunction of androgen deprivation therapy, and dosimetric data).

Results

Most patients (197; 69.9%) had a low risk, 67 (23.8%) a favorable intermediate risk, 16 (5.7%) an unfavorable intermediate risk, and 1 (0.3%) a high-risk prostate cancer. An involvement of the apex was found for 131 patients (46,5%), of the midgland for 149 (52,8%), and of the base for 145 (51,4%). The median percentage of positive biopsy cores was 17% [3–75%]. The median follow-up was 64 months [12–140]. Twenty patients (7%) progressed: 4 progressions (20%) were biochemical only, 7 (35%) were prostatic or seminal, 6 (30%) were nodal, and 3 (15%) were metastatic. The median time to failure was 39.5 months [9–108]. There were more Gleason scores ≥7 among patients who progressed (40% vs 19%; p = 0.042). None of the studied covariates (including tumor location, and percentage of positive biopsy cores), were significantly associated with progression-free survival. The risk group showed a trend towards an association (p = 0.055).

Conclusions

Brachytherapy is an efficient treatment (5-year control rate of 93%) for patients carefully selected with classical criteria. The percentage and location of positive biopsies were not significantly associated with progression-free survival. A Gleason score ≥ 7 was more frequent in case of progression.

Combined Modality Therapies for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Narrative Review of Current Understanding and New Directions

Despite the many prospective randomized trials that have been available in the past decade regarding the optimization of radiation, hormonal, and surgical therapies for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa), many questions remain. There is currently a lack of level I evidence regarding the relative efficacy of radical prostatectomy (RP) followed by adjuvant radiation compared to radiation therapy (RT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for high-risk PCa. Current retrospective series have also described an improvement in biochemical outcomes and PCa-specific mortality through the use of augmented radiation strategies incorporating brachytherapy. The relative efficacy of modern augmented RT compared to RP is still incompletely understood. We present a narrative review regarding recent advances in understanding regarding comparisons of overall and PCa-specific mortality measures among patients with high-risk PCa treated with either an RP/adjuvant RT or an RT/ADT approach. We give special consideration to recent trends toward the assembly of multi-institutional series targeted at providing high-quality data to minimize the effects of residual confounding. We also provide a narrative review of recent studies examining brachytherapy boost and systemic therapies, as well as an overview of currently planned and ongoing studies that will further elucidate strategies for treatment optimization over the next decade.

Physician And Patient Barriers To Radiotherapy Service Access: Treatment Referral Implications

Radiotherapy is one of the mainstays of cancer treatment, and about 60% of cancer patients receive this type of treatment during their course of treatment. An evident gap between optimal and actual radiotherapy utilization proportions has recently been reported, which has been ascribed to lack of referral to radiation oncology. There are many factors influencing the radiotherapy referral, including patient anxiety about toxicity, wrong perception of efficacy and side effects by physicians and patients, insufficient knowledge of referral process. These factors, defined as barriers can be categorized in health system barriers, physician and patient barriers. In the present brief narrative review, we discussed barriers to radiotherapy referral focusing on physician and patient barriers.

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: A 15-year experience in Japan

The history of prostate brachytherapy has passed one century. In 1983, modern low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy using a transrectal ultrasound-guided procedure was introduced. In the early 1990s, low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced and rapidly spread across the USA due to its excellent oncological control, cost-effectiveness and technically easy procedure. Since low-dose-rate brachytherapy was introduced in Japan (2003), over 15 years have passed. More than 43 000 patients have undergone low-dose-rate brachytherapy. Japanese urologists and radiation oncologists are on course with leading brachytherapists in the USA. A nationwide prospective cohort study, J-POPS, was initiated in 2005. The J-POPS group also provides educational programs including an annual novel training course in low-dose-rate brachytherapy to familiarize urologists, radiation oncologists and pathologists with the procedure. Important information on Japanese patients has accumulated, especially by the J-POPS study group. The Japanese investigators reported excellent oncological outcomes of low-dose-rate brachytherapy, showing equivalent or superior efficacy to surgery in low- to intermediate-risk patients, and superior efficacy in high-risk patients using the surgery biochemical recurrence definition (prostate-specific antigen cut-off value of 0.2 ng/mL). Two randomized controlled studies (SHIP study: intermediate risk, and TRIP study: high risk) carried out by the J-POPS group are ongoing, and an additional follow-up study (J-POPS 2 study) has been started to evaluate survival outcomes over longer follow-up periods. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is expected to provide a survival benefit, which must be confirmed by further studies with longer follow-up periods in the future.

Quality of life in prostate cancer patients receiving particle radiotherapy: A review of the literature

Proton and carbon ion radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer is associated with a lower incidence of adverse events than conventional radiotherapy. There are few reports on the quality of life of patients treated with particle therapy, and limited patient-reported outcomes. Analysis of quality of life is important for patients treated with radiotherapy alone or in combination with hormonal therapy, and long-term results, dose fractionation and costs need to be included in the analysis. This information might help both clinical decision-making and selection of appropriate treatments according to the individual needs of patients. This study reviews the literature on the quality of life and outcomes of patients treated with particle therapy, and discusses future directions.

Trend of the burden of chronic illnesses: using the Canadian Community Health Survey

OBJECTIVES

Burden of illnesses has been described in the literature using the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with chronic conditions. However, the studies reporting trends of burden are sparse. The aim of this study was to explore the trends of burden of chronic illness from the perspective of HRQoL.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a secondary analysis of administrative database.

METHODS

Seven data sets of the Canadian Community Health Survey from 2001 to 2014 were obtained for the analysis. Multiple linear and logistic regression models were used on each data set to assess the burden of illness on the Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI₃), life satisfaction (LS), and perceived health (PH).

RESULTS

People with the effect of stroke constantly had low scores on the HUI₃, LS, and PH. Regression analyses revealed that arthritis, back problem, and mood disorder have greater impact on the HUI₃ score. Effect of stroke, mood disorder, and anxiety disorder stably had the largest negative impact on LS, while chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), effect of stroke, and cancer had the largest effect on PH.

CONCLUSION

This study identified that arthritis, back pain, mood disorder, effect of stroke, and COPD constantly have high burden on health outcomes compared with other chronic condition over the past decade.

Quality of life outcomes after low dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: Current status and future perspectives

The present review summarizes data from studies reporting on health-related quality of life after brachytherapy and competing modalities. There are various therapeutic modalities for localized prostate cancer, including radical surgery, external beam radiotherapy and active surveillance. Advances in surgical and radiation treatment have entered clinical practice in the form of robot-assisted surgery or intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Brachytherapy remains the main treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer, with 10-year survival data showing favorable outcomes. Because each treatment modality has achieved favorable survival outcomes, focus in determining appropriate treatment has shifted toward health-related quality of life, where each treatment has a different profile and/or adverse symptoms. The development of health-related quality of life assessment tools has allowed the creation of a pool of specific health-related quality of life data across many studies. The present article reviews the impact of brachytherapy and other modalities on quality of life, as well as future directions.

Consensus statements on the management of clinically localized prostate cancer from the Hong Kong Urological Association and the Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology

OBJECTIVE

To formulate consensus statements to facilitate physician management strategies for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) in Hong Kong by jointly convening a panel of 12 experts from the two local professional organizations representing PCa specialists, who had previously established consensus statements on the management of metastatic PCa for the locality.

METHODS

Through a series of meetings, the panellists discussed their clinical experience and the published evidence regarding various areas of the management of localized PCa, then drafted consensus statements. At the final meeting, each drafted statement was voted on by every panellist based on its practicability of recommendation in the locality.

RESULTS

A total of 76 consensus statements were ultimately accepted and established by panel voting.

CONCLUSION

Derived from the recent evidence and major overseas guidelines, along with local clinical experience and practicability, the consensus statements were aimed to serve as a practical reference for physicians in Hong Kong for the management of localized PCa.

The current state of randomized clinical trial evidence for prostate brachytherapy

Interstitial brachytherapy is one of several curative therapeutic options for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. In this review, we summarize all available randomized data to support the optimal use of prostate brachytherapy. Evidence from completed randomized controlled trials is the focus of this review with a presentation also of important ongoing trials. Gaps in knowledge are identified where future investigation may be fruitful with intent to inspire well-designed prospective studies with standardized treatment that focuses on improving oncological outcomes, reducing morbidity, or maintaining quality of life.

Functional results in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. An updated literature review

Prostate cancer is the second most frequently diagnosed cancer in men. The initial diagnosis is made in increasingly younger patients, so it seems to be essential to guarantee optimal functional results. We carried out a systematic search to define the functional results of each of the therapeutic options for localized prostate cancer. Radical prostatectomy generates a greater negative effect on urinary continence and erectile function compared to active surveillance and radiotherapy. Robotic surgery seems to offer better functional results, especially at the level of erectile function. Urinary and bowel symptoms are more pronounced after radiotherapy compared to other options. Patients must be warned of the possible functional results prior to choice of treatment.

Low dose rate prostate brachytherapy

Low dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy is an evidence based radiation technique with excellent oncologic outcomes. By utilizing direct image guidance for radioactive source placement, LDR brachytherapy provides superior radiation dose escalation and conformality compared to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). With this level of precision, late grade 3 or 4 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity rates are typically between 1% and 4%. Furthermore, when performed as a same day surgical procedure, this technique provides a cost effective and convenient strategy. A large body of literature with robust follow-up has led multiple expert consensus groups to endorse the use of LDR brachytherapy as an appropriate management option for all risk groups of non-metastatic prostate cancer. LDR brachytherapy is often effective when delivered as a monotherapy, although for some patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, optimal outcome are achieved in combination with supplemental EBRT and/or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In addition to reviewing technical aspects and reported clinical outcomes of LDR prostate brachytherapy, this article will focus on the considerations related to appropriate patient selection and other aspects of its use in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: outcomes at >10 years of follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To examine biochemical control, survival, and late morbidity with definitive low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) for patients with prostate cancer surviving for >10 years after treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We identified 757 men with localised prostate cancer who underwent definitive LDR-BT in the period 1990-2006 and were followed for >10 years at our institution. Biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were selected as study endpoints. Survival was examined using the log-rank test, Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox regression modelling. Urinary, quality of life (QoL), and potency scores at baseline and last follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 12.5 years (range, 10.1-21.8 years). At the time of analysis, 88.6% of patients were alive, 1.5% died from prostate cancer and 13.9% developed biochemical failure, with 82% of failures occurring in the first decade of follow-up. Overall, 2.3% developed distant metastases. On multivariate analyses, stage T3a-T3b, prostate-specific antigen level of >20 ng/mL, intermediate- and high-risk disease predicted worse BFFS; whereas age >70 years at diagnosis and stage T3a-T3b predicted worse OS. A total biologically effective dose of ≥150 Gy and androgen-deprivation therapy were associated with improved BFFS, but not OS. The overall 17-year rates for BFFS, DMFS, PCSS, and OS were 79, 97, 97, and 72%, respectively. Respective 17-year BFFS rates for low-, intermediate- and high-risk patients were 86, 80, and 65% (P < 0.001), whereas OS rates for the same groups were 82, 73, and 60%, respectively (P = 0.09). Amongst those patients who were potent at baseline, 25% remained potent at the last follow-up. Urinary function and QoL were mainly unaffected.

CONCLUSIONS

LDR-BT yields excellent survival rates, with a 17-year PCSS rate of 97%. In all, 18% of patients with biochemical relapse failed at >10 years after implantation, which justifies their continued follow-up.

Cultural adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the expanded prostate cancer index composite

AIM

The expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) is a widely adopted instrument for the quality of life of patients with prostate cancer. We aimed to create a Chinese version of EPIC to further research in the Chinese-speaking population.

METHODS

A prototype was created by forward-backward translations and revisions. During cultural adaptation, 15 participants were interviewed after they had completed the prototype. A few issues highlighted included confusion related to the question format, subject non-familiarity with the Chinese term for "hot flashes," and the use of the Chinese term for "breast" as a strictly female body part. A pilot version was created based on the cultural adaptation findings. Validation of the pilot version was performed by having 50 participants complete the Chinese EPIC and EORTC QLQ-c30 twice within a 4-week period. Test-retest reliability (Pearson's correlations and difference distribution) and internal consistency (Cronbach's α) were measured using SAS version 9.4.

RESULTS

Test-retest reliability values for the urinary, bowel, sexual and hormone domains were 0.71, 0.51, 0.51 and 0.66, respectively; subscale test-retest reliability ranged between 0.29 and 0.82. Internal consistency for domains was good with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.76 to 0.78 for the initial test and 0.67 to 0.85 for the retest. The performance of this version of EPIC was comparable to the validated EORTC QLQ-C30.

CONCLUSION

The EPIC questionnaire was successfully translated into Chinese and was culturally adapted. The resultant Chinese version has high reliability and validity and will be an important tool for research on quality of life in the Chinese population.

Enhancing Survivorship Care Planning for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer Using a Couple-Focused mHealth Symptom Self-Management Program: Protocol for a Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

This project explores a new model of care that enhances survivorship care planning and promotes health for men with localized prostate cancer transitioning to posttreatment self-management. Survivorship care planning is important for patients with prostate cancer because of its high incidence rate in the United States, the frequent occurrence of treatment-related side effects, and reduced quality of life (QOL) for both men and their partners. A key component of comprehensive survivorship care planning is survivorship care plans (SCPs), documents that summarize cancer diagnosis, treatment, and plans for follow-up care. However, research concerning the effectiveness of SCPs on patient outcomes or health service use has thus far been inconclusive. SCPs that are tailored to individual patients' needs for information and care may improve effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the feasibility of an enhanced survivorship care plan (ESCP) that integrates a symptom self-management mHealth program called Prostate Cancer Education and Resources for Couples (PERC) into the existing standardized SCP. The specific aims are to (1) examine the feasibility of delivering ESCPs and (2) to estimate the magnitude of benefit of ESCPs.

METHODS

We will use a two-group randomized controlled pretest-posttest design and collect data at baseline (T1) and 4 months later (T2) among 50 patients completing initial treatment for localized prostate cancer and their partners. First, we will assess the feasibility of ESCP by recruitment, enrollment, and retention rates; program satisfaction with the ESCP; and perceived ease of use of the ESCP. To achieve the secondary aim, we will compare the ESCP users with the standardized SCP users and assess their primary outcomes of QOL (overall, physical, emotional, and social QOL); secondary outcomes (reduction in negative appraisals and improvement in self-efficacy, social support, and health behaviors to manage symptoms); and number of visits to posttreatment care services between T1 and T2. We will assess the primary and secondary outcomes using measurements with sound psychometrical properties. We will use a qualitative and quantitative mixed methods approach to achieve the research aims.

RESULTS

This project is ongoing and will be completed by the end of 2018.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study will help design a definitive randomized trial to test the efficacy of the ESCPs, a potentially scalable program, to enhance supportive care for prostate cancer patients and their families.

Health-related-quality-of-life and toxicity after single fraction 19 Gy high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: Phase II trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, tolerance and impact on health-related-quality-of-life (HRQoL) of the high-dose-rate brachytherapy of 19 Gy (BRT-HDR-19 Gy) single fraction in prostate cancer.

METHODS

From January 2014 to July 2016, 43 patients with low/intermediate risk were treated with BRT-HDR-19 Gy. The patients were monitored prospectively for toxicity and HRQoL.

RESULTS

The median age, initial PSA and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were 71 years (55-78), 7.0 ng/mL (4.2-17.8) and 5 (0-14) respectively. 44% were low-risk and 56% intermediate-risk. Median CTV-V100 (where Vn is the fractional volume of the organ that receives n% of the prescribed dose) was 96.5%, Urethral-Dmax 106% and rectum-2 cc (the dose to 2 cc of rectal wall) 53%. After a median follow-up of 20 months (4-26), acute grade-2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurred in 4 patients (9%) and none presented acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Similarly, four patients (9%) presented late GU grade-2 toxicity. No grade-3 toxicity occurred. In terms of HRQoL, there was a statistically significant decline in Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary urgency/obstructive domain at month 3 (p = 0.047), and returned to baseline by month 6. Mean EPIC urinary incontinence, bowel, sexual and hormonal domains did not present significant post BRT-HDR-19 Gy changes. Patients rated their satisfaction at 6 months as "very-satisfied" (23%) or "extremely-satisfied" (77%).

CONCLUSIONS

BRT-HDR-19 Gy demonstrates excellent results in terms of toxicity, tolerance, safety, patient satisfaction and HRQoL.

Review of the comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, or expectant management of localized prostate cancer in registry data

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of treatment for prostate cancer is primarily based on randomized controlled trials. Long-term outcomes are generally difficult to evaluate within experimental studies and may benefit from large pools of observational data. We conducted a systematic review of administrative and registry studies to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer on overall and prostate-cancer specific mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P, 2015), we conducted a systematic search of Ovid Medline and Embase (1946-February 2017) and identified studies that evaluated the relationship between types of treatment for localized prostate cancer and mortality. Additional articles were identified through manual search. Randomized, prospective, and single institution studies were excluded. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated with the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were reported to evaluate overall and cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS

We screened 4,721 studies and included for review, 19 that were published between 2001 and 2015. The pooled population included 228,444 patients. Countries of origin included the United States, Canada, China, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Sweden, and the sources included administrative (n = 6) and cancer registry or prostate databases (n = 11). Overall and cancer-specific mortality were lowest among definitive treatment arms as compared to conservative therapy with no treatment, observation, or active surveillance. Radiotherapy was associated with worse overall and cancer-specific mortality than radical prostatectomy.

CONCLUSION

Although observational studies using large, population-based cohorts have the potential for bias, we found consistent evidence that high-quality observational studies may be used to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatment. Methodologic limitations of observational data should be considered.

[Toxicity and quality of life comparison of iodine 125 brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancers]

Quality of life is a major issue for good prognostic prostate cancer, for which brachytherapy is one of the reference treatments. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is a recent alternative however not yet validated as a standard treatment. This review of the literature reports and compares the toxicities and the quality of life, either after exclusive brachytherapy with iodine 125 or after SBRT. The comparison is made with the limitations of the absence of randomized trial comparing the two treatment techniques. Acute toxicity appears to be lower after SBRT compared to brachytherapy (from 10 to 40 % versus 30 to 40 %, respectively). Conversely, acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity (from 0 to 21 % and from 0 to 10 % of grade 2, respectively) appears more frequent with SBRT. Late urinary toxicity seems identical between both techniques (from 20 to 30 % of grade 2), with a possible urinary flare syndrome. Both treatments have an impact on erectile dysfunction, although it is not possible to conclude that a technique is superior because of the limited data on SBRT. SBRT has better bowel and urinary (irritation or obstruction) quality of life scores than brachytherapy; while sexual and urinary incontinence remain the same. The absence of randomized trial comparing SBRT with brachytherapy for prostate cancers does not allow to conclude on the superiority of one technique over another, thus justifying a phase III medicoeconomic evaluation.

Long-term oncological outcomes and toxicity in 597 men aged ≤60 years at time of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for localised prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To report oncological and functional outcomes of men treated with low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy aged ≤60 years at time of treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of 3262 patients treated with LDR brachytherapy at our centre up to June 2016, we retrospectively identified 597 patients aged ≤60 years at treatment with ≥3-years post-implantation follow-up and four prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, of which one was at baseline. Overall survival (OS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) and relapse free survival (RFS) were analysed together with prospectively collected physician-reported adverse events and patient-reported symptom scores.

RESULTS

The median (range) age was 57 (44-60) years, follow-up was 8.9 (1.5-17.2) years, and PSA follow-up 5.9 (0.8-15) years. Low-, intermediate- and high-risk disease represented 53%, 37% and 10% of the patients, respectively. At 10 years after implantation OS and PCSS were 98% and 99% for low-risk, 99% and 100% for intermediate-risk, and 93% and 95% for high-risk disease, respectively. At 10 years after implantation RFS, using the PSA level nadir plus 2 ng/mL definition, was 95%, 90% and 87% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease, respectively. Urinary stricture was the most common genitourinary adverse event occurring in 19 patients (3.2%). At 5 years after implantation erectile function was preserved in 75% of the patients who were potent before treatment.

CONCLUSION

LDR brachytherapy is an effective treatment with long-term control of prostate cancer in men aged ≤60 years at time of treatment. It was associated with low rates of treatment-related toxicity and can be considered a first-line treatment for prostate cancer in this patient group.

Quality of Life Outcomes after Primary Treatment for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Current evidence-based management for clinically localised prostate cancer includes active surveillance, surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy. The impact of these treatment modalities on quality of life (QoL) is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review comparative studies investigating disease-specific QoL outcomes as assessed by validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures with at least 1 yr of follow-up after primary treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were critically appraised for the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was undertaken.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Of 11486 articles identified, 18 studies were eligible for inclusion, including three randomised controlled trials (RCTs; follow-up range: 60-72 mo) and 15 nonrandomised comparative studies (follow-up range: 12-180 mo) recruiting a total of 13604 patients. Two RCTs recruited small cohorts and only one was judged to have a low risk of bias. The quality of evidence from observational studies was low to moderate. For a follow-up of up to 6 yr, active surveillance was found to have the lowest impact on cancer-specific QoL, surgery had a negative impact on urinary and sexual function when compared with active surveillance and EBRT, and EBRT had a negative impact on bowel function when compared with active surveillance and surgery. Data from one small RCT reported that brachytherapy has a negative impact on urinary function 1 yr post-treatment, but no significant urinary toxicity was reported at 5 yr.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review comparing the impact of different primary treatments on cancer-specific QoL for men with clinically localised prostate cancer, using validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures only. There is robust evidence that choice of primary treatment for localised prostate cancer has distinct impacts on patients' QoL. This should be discussed in detail with patients during pretreatment counselling.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our review of the current evidence suggests that for a period of up to 6 yr after treatment, men with localised prostate cancer who were managed with active surveillance reported high levels of quality of life (QoL). Men treated with surgery reported mainly urinary and sexual problems, while those treated with external beam radiotherapy reported mainly bowel problems. Men eligible for brachytherapy reported urinary problems up to a year after therapy, but then their QoL returned gradually to as it was before treatment.

Identifying novel genes and biological processes relevant to the development of cancer therapy-induced mucositis: An informative gene network analysis

Mucositis is a complex, dose-limiting toxicity of chemotherapy or radiotherapy that leads to painful mouth ulcers, difficulty eating or swallowing, gastrointestinal distress, and reduced quality of life for patients with cancer. Mucositis is most common for those undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and for those being treated for malignancies of the head and neck. Treatment and management of mucositis remain challenging. It is expected that multiple genes are involved in the formation, severity, and persistence of mucositis. We used Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA), a novel network-based approach that integrates complex intracellular and intercellular interactions involved in diseases, to systematically explore the molecular complexity of mucositis. As a first step, we searched the literature to identify genes that harbor or are close to the genetic variants significantly associated with mucositis. Our literature review identified 27 candidate genes, of which ERCC1, XRCC1, and MTHFR were the most frequently studied for mucositis. On the basis of this 27-gene list, we used IPA to generate gene networks for mucositis. The most biologically significant novel molecules identified through IPA analyses included TP53, CTNNB1, MYC, RB1, P38 MAPK, and EP300. Additionally, uracil degradation II (reductive) and thymine degradation pathways (p = 1.06-08) were most significant. Finally, utilizing 66 SNPs within the 8 most connected IPA-derived candidate molecules, we conducted a genetic association study for oral mucositis in the head and neck cancer patients who were treated using chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy (186 head and neck cancer patients with oral mucositis vs. 699 head and neck cancer patients without oral mucositis). The top ranked gene identified through this association analysis was RB1 (rs2227311, p-value = 0.034, odds ratio = 0.67). In conclusion, gene network analysis identified novel molecules and biological processes, including pathways related to inflammation and oxidative stress, that are relevant to mucositis development, thus providing the basis for future studies to improve the management and treatment of mucositis in patients with cancer.