You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized: Radiation Therapy (MP53)1 Apr 2020MP53-11 COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF LOCAL VERSUS SYSTEMIC SALVAGE THERAPIES FOR RADIO-RECURRENT PROSTATE CANCER: A SUB-ANALYSIS OF CCTG PR-7 Glenn Bauman, Keyue Ding, Joseph Chin*, Shiva Nair, Alessandra Iaboni, Juanita Crook, Laurence Klotz, David Dearnaley, Eric Horwitz, and Christopher O'Callaghan Glenn BaumanGlenn Bauman More articles by this author , Keyue DingKeyue Ding More articles by this author , Joseph Chin*Joseph Chin* More articles by this author , Shiva NairShiva Nair More articles by this author , Alessandra IaboniAlessandra Iaboni More articles by this author , Juanita CrookJuanita Crook More articles by this author , Laurence KlotzLaurence Klotz More articles by this author , David DearnaleyDavid Dearnaley More articles by this author , Eric HorwitzEric Horwitz More articles by this author , and Christopher O'CallaghanChristopher O'Callaghan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000915.011AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Optimal management of radio-recurrent prostate cancer remains to be defined. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is widely used but may adversely affect quality of life and relegates those men with isolated local recurrence to an essentially palliative treatment. Local salvage carries a different side effect profile and potentially curative treatment intent however, no comparisons with salvage ADT exist. METHODS: We conducted a propensity matched analysis of two existing cohorts: an institutional series of whole gland cryotherapy (CRYO) and men enrolled on a multi-institutional prospective trial (NCT00003653) of ADT. [1,2] Our specific objectives were to compare time to castrate resistance, overall survival, and cancer specific survival between CRYO vs. ADT. RESULTS: There were 172 CRYO and 1119 ADT patients included in the matched analysis. Median follow-up time was 6.7 years [ADT] vs. 18.0 years [CRYO]. The median PFS was 7.0 years [ADT] vs. 10.7 years [CRYO]. On logistic regression for PFS the HR was 0.63 (95% CI 0.44, 0.89, p=0.009) favoring CRYO. The 10-year disease specific event rate was 18.5% [ADT] vs. 16.2% [CRYO], not statistically different (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36, 1.34, p=0.27). The median OS for the ADT cohort was 10.2 years [ADT] versus 12.3 years [CRYO].(Figure) On logistic regression for OS the HR was 0.620 (CI 0.415, 0.927, p=0.0199) favoring CRYO. A planned sub-analysis revealed no difference in these results when the CRYO patients were analyzed according to use of ADT prior to cryoablation (no CRYO patients received adjuvant ADT). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that local salvage therapy with deferred ADT might be associated with improved outcomes compared to immediate salvage ADT alone. 1. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(10):895-903. 2. European Urology. 2011;60(3):405-10. Source of Funding: This analysis was funded by a Sanofi-CARO grant © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e786-e787 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Glenn Bauman More articles by this author Keyue Ding More articles by this author Joseph Chin* More articles by this author Shiva Nair More articles by this author Alessandra Iaboni More articles by this author Juanita Crook More articles by this author Laurence Klotz More articles by this author David Dearnaley More articles by this author Eric Horwitz More articles by this author Christopher O'Callaghan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract