Radiation therapy compared to radical prostatectomy as first-line definitive therapy for patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present an update of the available literature on external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with or without brachytherapy (BT) compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) for patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature assessing the survival outcomes in patients with high-risk PCa who received EBRT with or without BT compared to RP as the first-line therapy with curative intent. We queried PubMed and Web of Science database in January 2021. Moreover, we used random or fixed-effects meta-analytical models in the presence or absence of heterogeneity per the I2 statistic, respectively. We performed six meta-analyses for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were selected with 23 studies being eligible for both OS and CSS. EBRT alone had a significantly worse OS and CSS compared to RP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.65; and HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.25-1.93). However, there was no difference in OS (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.76-1.34) and CSS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-1.06) between EBRT plus BT compared to RP. CONCLUSION: While cancer control affected by EBRT alone seems inferior to RP in patients with high-risk PCa, BT additive to EBRT was not different from RP. These data support the need for BT in addition to EBRT as part of multimodal RT for high-risk PCa.Abbreviations: ADT: androgen-deprivation therapy; BT: brachytherapy; CSS: cancer-specific survival; HR: hazard ratio; MFS, metastatic-free survival; MOOSE: Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology; OR: odds ratio; OS: overall survival; PCa: prostate cancer; RR: relative risk; RP: radical prostatectomy; RCT: randomised controlled trials; (EB)RT: (external beam) radiation therapy.
