Real-world clinical outcomes of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).

Abstract

330 Background: Patients (pts) with localized prostate cancer (LPC) or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC) have several treatment options, including external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and radical prostatectomy, which can be curative in some pts. However, limited real-world evidence exists on the long-term clinical outcomes of these pts, particularly those with high-risk LPC (HRLPC). This study examines real-world clinical outcomes for HRLPC and low/intermediate risk LPC (LIRLPC) pts treated with EBRT in the US. Methods: A retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked registry-claims data from 2012−2019 included LPC pts aged ≥65 treated with EBRT as initial definitive therapy. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized for HRLPC and LIRLPC pts. Clinical outcomes of interest (overall survival, metastasis-free survival [MFS] and time to initiation of advanced PC treatment) were compared using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazards (PH) models. Results: Of 11,127 LPC pts treated with EBRT within 6 months of LPC diagnosis, ~40% (n=4,414) were HRLPC and ~60% (N=6,713) were LIRLPC. Patient characteristics for both groups appeared similar, with mean age at EBRT initiation >70 years, 86% white, and mean follow-up time >40 months. ADT was used with EBRT in 78% HRLPC and 34% LIRLPC. Median (IQR) duration of ADT therapy (via KM analysis) was 9.9 (5.8, 21.5) months for HRLPC and 7.2 (5.3, 9.8) months for LIRLPC. A higher proportion of HRLPC vs LIRLPC pts experienced metastasis, death, and progression to advanced PC therapies (medians were not reached). Unadjusted Cox PH survival analyses showed higher risk of mortality, metastasis, and advanced PC therapy use for HRLPC vs LIRLPC pts. Conclusions: This real-world study of clinical outcomes in pts with HRLPC and LIRLPC treated with EBRT suggested substantial additional disease burden in pts with HRLPC and highlights the need for additional strategies and treatments to improve clinical outcomes in pts with HRLPC. [Table: see text]