Purpose To assess outcomes between salvage radiation therapy (SRT) with curative intent and stereotactic radiotherapy for macroscopic prostate recurrence (SSRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP). In order to compare these two different options, we compared their outcomes with a propensity score-based matched analysis. Methods Data from 185 patients in seven Italian centres treated for macroscopic prostate bed recurrence after RP were retrospectively collected. To make a comparison between the two treatment groups, propensity matching was applied to create comparable cohorts. Results After matching, 90 patients in the SRT and SSRT groups were selected (45 in each arm). Kaplan-Meier analysis did not show any significant differences in terms of BRFS and PFS between matched populations (p = 0.08 and p = 0.8, respectively). Multivariate models show that treatment was not associated with BRFS, neither in the whole or matched cohort, with HR of 2.15 (95%CI 0.63-7.25, p = 0.21) and 2.65 (95%CI 0.59-11.97, p = 0.21), respectively. In the matched cohort, lower rate of toxicity was confirmed for patients undergoing SSRT, with acute GI and GU adverse events reported in 4.4 versus 44.4% (p < 0.001) and 28.9 versus 46.7% (p = 0.08) of patients, and late GI and GU adverse events reported in 0 versus 13.3% (p = 0.04) and 6.7 versus 22.2% (p = 0.03) of patients, respectively. Conclusion Considering the favourable therapeutic ratio of this approach and the lower number of fractions needed, SSRT should be considered as an attractive alternative to conventional SRT in this setting.

Stereotactic or conventional radiotherapy for macroscopic prostate bed recurrence: a propensity score analysis

Ingrosso, Gianluca;Trippa, Fabio;
2022-01-01

Abstract

Purpose To assess outcomes between salvage radiation therapy (SRT) with curative intent and stereotactic radiotherapy for macroscopic prostate recurrence (SSRT) after radical prostatectomy (RP). In order to compare these two different options, we compared their outcomes with a propensity score-based matched analysis. Methods Data from 185 patients in seven Italian centres treated for macroscopic prostate bed recurrence after RP were retrospectively collected. To make a comparison between the two treatment groups, propensity matching was applied to create comparable cohorts. Results After matching, 90 patients in the SRT and SSRT groups were selected (45 in each arm). Kaplan-Meier analysis did not show any significant differences in terms of BRFS and PFS between matched populations (p = 0.08 and p = 0.8, respectively). Multivariate models show that treatment was not associated with BRFS, neither in the whole or matched cohort, with HR of 2.15 (95%CI 0.63-7.25, p = 0.21) and 2.65 (95%CI 0.59-11.97, p = 0.21), respectively. In the matched cohort, lower rate of toxicity was confirmed for patients undergoing SSRT, with acute GI and GU adverse events reported in 4.4 versus 44.4% (p < 0.001) and 28.9 versus 46.7% (p = 0.08) of patients, and late GI and GU adverse events reported in 0 versus 13.3% (p = 0.04) and 6.7 versus 22.2% (p = 0.03) of patients, respectively. Conclusion Considering the favourable therapeutic ratio of this approach and the lower number of fractions needed, SSRT should be considered as an attractive alternative to conventional SRT in this setting.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11391/1536536
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact