Radiotherapy & Oncology
Volume 93, Issue 2 , Pages 185-191, November 2009

Radical prostatectomy vs. intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the management of localized prostate adenocarcinoma

  • Ayal A. Aizer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Address: Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, PO Box 208040, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
    • ,
  • James B. Yu

      Affiliations

    • Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    • ,
  • John W. Colberg

      Affiliations

    • Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    • ,
  • Anne M. McKeon

      Affiliations

    • Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    • ,
  • Roy H. Decker

      Affiliations

    • Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    • ,
  • Richard E. Peschel

      Affiliations

    • Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

Received 15 May 2009; received in revised form 25 August 2009; accepted 1 September 2009. published online 05 October 2009.

Abstract 

Background and purpose

To determine whether radical prostatectomy (RP) or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to ⩾72Gy, plus hormonal therapy if indicated, results in improved biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) in localized prostate adenocarcinoma.

Materials and methods

Between 1997 and 2005, a consecutive sample of 556 patients who underwent RP (n=204) or IMRT (n=352) at two referral centers was analyzed. The patients were stratified into prognostic groups based on clinical stage, Gleason score, and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The outcome measure was BDFS.

Results

IMRT patients had more advanced disease at baseline (p<.001). There was no difference in five-year BDFS rates between RP and IMRT in the favorable (92.8% vs. 85.3%, p=.20) or intermediate prognosis (86.7% vs. 82.2%, p=.46) subsets. A difference favoring IMRT plus hormonal therapy was seen in the poor prognosis (38.4% vs. 62.2%, p<.001) subset. Within the entire cohort, after adjustment for confounding variables, Gleason score (p<.001) and clinical stage (p<.001) predicted BDFS, but treatment modality (p=.06) did not. Within the poor prognosis subset, treatment modality (p=.006) predicted BDFS.

Conclusions

BDFS is similar between RP and IMRT for patients with a favorable or intermediate prognosis. Patients with a poor prognosis display higher BDFS when treated with IMRT to ⩾72Gy plus hormonal therapy.

Keywords: Prostate, Cancer, Surgery, Radiation, Biochemical, Outcome

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0167-8140(09)00498-8

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2009.09.001

Radiotherapy & Oncology
Volume 93, Issue 2 , Pages 185-191, November 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution