Practice Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients With N0M0 Prostate Cancer and a Very High Prostate-Specific Antigen Level

Restricted access

Background: Management of patients with a very high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (≥98.0 ng/mL) but clinically localized (N0M0) prostate cancer is challenging. This study sought to determine practice patterns and outcomes among these patients. Patients and Methods: A total of 748,825 patients with prostate cancer from 2004 through 2012 were identified using the National Cancer Database. These patients were subdivided by PSA level (0–9.9, 10.0–19.9, 20.0–39.9, 40.0–59.9, 60.0–79.9, 80.0–97.9, and ≥98.0 ng/mL), nodal status (N0 vs N1), and distant metastases (M0 vs M1). Rates of locoregional treatment and 5-year overall survival (OS) in each group were determined. Survival was compared using Cox regression after adjusting for multiple patient-specific factors. Results: The rate of locoregional treatment for patients with N0M0 disease and PSA level ≥98.0 ng/mL was significantly lower than for those with N1M0 disease (52.6% vs 60.4%; P<.001) or N0M0 disease and PSA level <98.0 ng/mL (52.6% vs 86.6%; P<.001). The 5-year OS rate was similar for patients with N1M0 disease and those with N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level (63.2% vs 59.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.91; P=.063). The survival benefit associated with locoregional treatment was higher among those with N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level than among those with N1M0 disease (aHR, 0.28 vs 0.44; P<.001). Conclusions: Patients with clinical N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level (≥98.0 ng/mL) have outcomes similar to those with N1 disease but receive locoregional treatment at a lower rate. Future work is needed to investigate the utility of locoregional treatment in this population.

Submitted November 9, 2018; accepted for publication February 8, 2019.Author contributions: Study concept and design: Muralidhar, Nguyen, King, Orio. Data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation: All authors. Statistical analysis: Muralidhar, Nguyen, King, Orio. Drafting of manuscript: All authors. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.Disclosures: Dr. Nguyen has disclosed that he receives support from Bayer, Astellas, Ferring, Dendreon, Blue Earth, Genome Dx, Augmenix, Boston Scientific, and Janssen. Dr. Efstathiou has disclosed that he is a scientific advisor for Janssen and Blue Earth Diagnostics. The remaining authors have not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation, analysis, results, or discussion of this article.Correspondence: Peter F. Orio III, DO, MS, Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115. Email: Peter_Orio@dfci.harvard.edu
  • 1.

    Mohler JL, Lee RJ, Antonarakis ES, . NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 4.2018. To view the most recent version, visit NCCN.org. Accessed October 1, 2018.

  • 2.

    Pilepich MV, Winter K, Lawton CA, . Androgen suppression adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in prostate carcinoma—long-term results of phase III RTOG 85-31. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:1285–1290.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, . Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet 2009;373:301–308.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, . 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1415–1424.

  • 5.

    Bolla M, de Reijke TM, Van Tienhoven G, . Duration of androgen suppression in the treatment of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2516–2527.

  • 6.

    Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, . Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014;370:932–942.

  • 7.

    Bilimoria KY, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, . The National Cancer Data Base: a powerful initiative to improve cancer care in the United States. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:683–690.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Briganti A, Karnes RJ, Da Pozzo LF, . Combination of adjuvant hormonal and radiation therapy significantly prolongs survival of patients with pT2-4 pN+ prostate cancer: results of a matched analysis. Eur Urol 2011;59:832–840.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Tward JD, Kokeny KE, Shrieve DC. Radiation therapy for clinically node-positive prostate adenocarcinoma is correlated with improved overall and prostate cancer-specific survival. Pract Radiat Oncol 2013;3:234–240.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Rusthoven CG, Carlson JA, Waxweiler TV, . The impact of definitive local therapy for lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a population-based study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:1064–1073.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Lin CC, Gray PJ, Jemal A, . Androgen deprivation with or without radiation therapy for clinically node-positive prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:djv119.

  • 12.

    Ghavamian R, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, . Radical retropubic prostatectomy plus orchiectomy versus orchiectomy alone for pTxN+ prostate cancer: a matched comparison. J Urol 1999;161:1223–1227; discussion 1227–1228.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Engel J, Bastian PJ, Baur H, . Survival benefit of radical prostatectomy in lymph node-positive patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010;57:754–761.

  • 14.

    Evans JD, Jethwa KR, Ost P, . Prostate cancer-specific PET radiotracers: a review on the clinical utility in recurrent disease. Pract Radiat Oncol 2018;8:28–39.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Akin-Akintayo OO, Jani AB, Odewole O, . Change in salvage radiotherapy management based on guidance with FACBC (Fluciclovine) PET/CT in postprostatectomy recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2017;42:e22–28.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Byrne K, Eade T, Kneebone A, . Delineating sites of failure following post-prostatectomy radiation treatment using 68-Ga-PSMA-PET. Radiother Oncol 2018;126:244–248.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Rodrigues G, Bae K, Roach M, . Impact of ultrahigh baseline PSA levels on biochemical and clinical outcomes in two Radiation Therapy Oncology Group prostate clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;80:445–452.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Tai P, Tonita J, Woitas C, . Treatment outcomes in non-metastatic prostate cancer patients with ultra-high prostate-specific antigen. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;83:e525–530.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Vanasupa BP, Paquette EL, Wu H, . The role of radical prostatectomy in patients with pretreatment prostate-specific antigen > or = 40 ng/mL. Urol Oncol 2002;7:167–172.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Ou YC, Chen JT, Cheng CL, . Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients with prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/ml. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2003;33:574–579.

  • 21.

    Wiebe E, Rodrigues G, Lock M, . Outcome analysis of prostate cancer patients with pre-treatment PSA greater than 50 ng/ml. Can J Urol 2008;15:4078–4083.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, . Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1708–1717.

  • 23.

    Lawton CAF, Lin X, Hanks GE, . Duration of androgen deprivation in locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term update of NRG oncology RTOG 9202. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017;98:296–303.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Muralidhar V, Mahal BA, Rose BS, . Disparities in the receipt of local treatment of node-positive prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017;15:563–569.

  • 25.

    McDavid K, Tucker TC, Sloggett A, . Cancer survival in Kentucky and health insurance coverage. Arch Intern Med 2003;163:2135–2144.

  • 26.

    Gilligan T. Social disparities and prostate cancer: mapping the gaps in our knowledge. Cancer Causes Control 2005;16:45–53.

  • 27.

    Mahal BA, Aizer AA, Ziehr DR, . Trends in disparate treatment of African American men with localized prostate cancer across National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk groups. Urology 2014;84:386–392.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Mahal BA, Aizer AA, Ziehr DR, . The association between insurance status and prostate cancer outcomes: implications for the Affordable Care Act. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014;17:273–279.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Falchook AD, Salloum RG, Hendrix LH, . Use of bone scan during initial prostate cancer workup, downstream procedures, and associated Medicare costs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:243–248.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Prasad SM, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, . Inappropriate utilization of radiographic imaging in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in the United States. Cancer 2012;118:1260–1267.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 571 571 58
PDF Downloads 143 143 8
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0