Search

Purpose The randomized controlled European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22911 studied the effect of radiotherapy after prostatectomy in patients with adverse risk factors. Review pathology data of specimens from participants in this trial were analyzed to identify which factors predict increased benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. Patients and Methods After prostatectomy, 1,005 patients with stage pT3 and/or positive surgical margins were randomly assigned to a wait-and-see (n = 503) and an adjuvant radiotherapy (60 Gy conventional irradiation) arm (n = 502). Pathologic review data were available for 552 patients from 11 participating centers. The interaction between the review pathology characteristics and treatment benefit was assessed by log-rank test for heterogeneity (P < .05). Results Margin status assessed by review pathology was the strongest predictor of prolonged biochemical disease-free survival with immediate postoperative radiotherapy (heterogeneity, P < .01): by year 5, immediate postoperative irradiation could prevent 291 events/1,000 patients with positive margins versus 88 events/1,000 patients with negative margins. The hazard ratio for immediate irradiation was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.26 to 0.54) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.46) in the groups with positive and negative margins, respectively. We could not identify a significant impact of the positive margin localization. Conclusion Provided careful pathology of the prostatectomy is performed, our results suggest that immediate postoperative radiotherapy might not be recommended for prostate cancer patients with negative surgical margins. These findings require validation on an independent data set.

The aim of this open, non-randomised, 2-stage feasibility study was to determine whether radical prostatectomy (RP) was safe and could provide cure for good prognosis patients with clinical T3 prostate cancer, in a multicentre setting. Cure was defined as a 3 months post-operative of undetectable serum PSA in combination with the presence of pathologically negative margins in the surgical specimen. Forty patients were enrolled of whom 38 were eligible. Six patients (5 pN+ and 1 pNx) did not meet the inclusion criteria and were excluded leaving 32 evaluable pN0 patients of whom 19 (59.4%, SE = 4.26) achieved a complete response (CR) and in whom only two serious toxic events (STEs) were observed. The results of the first phase of the study passed the toxicity criteria (<3 STE’s) but failed on the cure rate (>20 CRs). This resulted in discontinuation of the study after the first stage. The main reason for failure was the incidence of positive margins in the resected specimen. Although the study was stopped after the first phase, 28 of the 32 pN0 patients (87.5%) had undetectable serum PSA at 3 months. We continue to believe that RP with extensive resection can be beneficial as monotherapy for T3aN0M0 prostate cancer.

Background: Local failure after prostatectomy can arise in patients with cancer extending beyond the capsule. We did a randomised controlled trial to compare radical prostatectomy followed by immediate external irradiation with prostatectomy alone for patients with positive surgical margin or pT3 prostate cancer. Methods: After undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy, 503 patients were randomly assigned to a wait-and-see policy, and 502 to immediate postoperative radiotherapy (60 Gy conventional irradiation delivered over 6 weeks). Eligible patients had pN0M0 tumours and one or more pathological risk factors: capsule perforation, positive surgical margins, invasion of seminal vesicles. Our revised primary endpoint was biochemical progression-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings: The median age was 65 years (IQR 61-69). After a median follow-up of 5 years, biochemical progression-free survival was significantly improved in the irradiated group (74·0%, 98% CI 68·7-79·3 vs 52·6%, 46·6-58·5; p<0·0001). Clinical progression-free survival was also significantly improved (p=0·0009). The cumulative rate of locoregional failure was significantly lower in the irradiated group (p<0·0001). Grade 2 or 3 late effects were significantly more frequent in the postoperative irradiation group (p=0·0005), but severe toxic toxicity (grade 3 or higher) were rare, with a 5-year rate of 2·6% in the wait-and-see group and 4·2% in the postoperative irradiation group (p=0·0726). Interpretation: Immediate external irradiation after radical prostatectomy improves biochemical progression-free survival and local control in patients with positive surgical margins or pT3 prostate cancer who are at high risk of progression. Further follow-up is needed to assess the effect on overall survival

EORTC trial 22911 demonstrated that immediate postoperative irradiation significantly improved biochemical failure free survival (BPFS) compared to wait-and-see (W & S) until relapse in patients with pT2-3 tumours and pathological risk factors after radical prostatectomy. In this study, we have investigated the heterogeneity of the treatment benefit across defined subgroups of patients. Data from 972 patients were used. A risk model was developed in the W&S group and the Log-rank test for heterogeneity was applied (alpha = 0.05). Positive surgical margin (SM+), seminal vesicle invasion (SV+), WHO differentiation grade, pre- and postoperative PSA were independent predictors for BPFS in the W&S group. Men with SV+ were at higher risk of relapse whereas those with SM+ but no capsule infiltration (ECE-) did not seem to differ from those with SM-ECE+ or with SM+ECE+. Postoperative irradiation improved biochemical progression-free survival in all patient groups. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the endpoint of clinical progression-free survival. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.