Meta-analysis of studies comparing oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy and brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer

Gabriele Cozzi, Gennaro Musi, Roberto Bianchi, Danilo Bottero, Antonio Brescia, Antonio Cioffi, Giovanni Cordima, Maurizio Delor, Ettore Di Trapani, Matteo Ferro, Deliu Victor Matei, Andrea Russo, Francesco Alessandro Mistretta, Ottavio De Cobelli

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) with brachytherapy (BT). Methods: A literature review was conducted according to the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We included studies reporting comparative oncologic outcomes of RP versus BT for localized prostate cancer (PCa). From each comparative study, we extracted the study design, the number and features of the included patients, and the oncologic outcomes expressed as all-cause mortality (ACM), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) or, when the former were unavailable, as biochemical recurrence (BCR). All of the data retrieved from the selected studies were recorded in an electronic database. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager version 5.3 software, designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Statistical heterogeneity was tested using the Chi-square test. Results: Our cumulative analysis did not show any significant difference in terms of BCR, ACM or PCSM rates between the RP and BT cohorts. Only three studies reported risk-stratified outcomes of intermediate- and high-risk patients, which are the most prone to treatment failure. Conclusions: our analysis suggested that RP and BT may have similar oncologic outcomes. However, the analysis included a limited number of studies, and most of them were retrospective, making it impossible to derive any definitive conclusion, especially for intermediate- and high-risk patients. In this scenario, appropriate urologic counseling remains of utmost importance.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)241-250
Number of pages10
JournalTherapeutic Advances in Urology
Volume9
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2017

Fingerprint

Brachytherapy
Prostatectomy
Meta-Analysis
Prostatic Neoplasms
Mortality
Recurrence
Chi-Square Distribution
Treatment Failure
Counseling
Software
Databases

Keywords

  • biochemical recurrence
  • brachytherapy
  • cancer control
  • oncologic outcome
  • prostate cancer
  • radical prostatectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

@article{b79d022a502a42e697547d810fef50ba,
title = "Meta-analysis of studies comparing oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy and brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer",
abstract = "Background: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) with brachytherapy (BT). Methods: A literature review was conducted according to the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We included studies reporting comparative oncologic outcomes of RP versus BT for localized prostate cancer (PCa). From each comparative study, we extracted the study design, the number and features of the included patients, and the oncologic outcomes expressed as all-cause mortality (ACM), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) or, when the former were unavailable, as biochemical recurrence (BCR). All of the data retrieved from the selected studies were recorded in an electronic database. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager version 5.3 software, designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Statistical heterogeneity was tested using the Chi-square test. Results: Our cumulative analysis did not show any significant difference in terms of BCR, ACM or PCSM rates between the RP and BT cohorts. Only three studies reported risk-stratified outcomes of intermediate- and high-risk patients, which are the most prone to treatment failure. Conclusions: our analysis suggested that RP and BT may have similar oncologic outcomes. However, the analysis included a limited number of studies, and most of them were retrospective, making it impossible to derive any definitive conclusion, especially for intermediate- and high-risk patients. In this scenario, appropriate urologic counseling remains of utmost importance.",
keywords = "biochemical recurrence, brachytherapy, cancer control, oncologic outcome, prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy",
author = "Gabriele Cozzi and Gennaro Musi and Roberto Bianchi and Danilo Bottero and Antonio Brescia and Antonio Cioffi and Giovanni Cordima and Maurizio Delor and {Di Trapani}, Ettore and Matteo Ferro and Matei, {Deliu Victor} and Andrea Russo and Mistretta, {Francesco Alessandro} and {De Cobelli}, Ottavio",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1756287217731449",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "241--250",
journal = "Therapeutic Advances in Urology",
issn = "1756-2872",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Meta-analysis of studies comparing oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy and brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer

AU - Cozzi, Gabriele

AU - Musi, Gennaro

AU - Bianchi, Roberto

AU - Bottero, Danilo

AU - Brescia, Antonio

AU - Cioffi, Antonio

AU - Cordima, Giovanni

AU - Delor, Maurizio

AU - Di Trapani, Ettore

AU - Ferro, Matteo

AU - Matei, Deliu Victor

AU - Russo, Andrea

AU - Mistretta, Francesco Alessandro

AU - De Cobelli, Ottavio

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) with brachytherapy (BT). Methods: A literature review was conducted according to the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We included studies reporting comparative oncologic outcomes of RP versus BT for localized prostate cancer (PCa). From each comparative study, we extracted the study design, the number and features of the included patients, and the oncologic outcomes expressed as all-cause mortality (ACM), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) or, when the former were unavailable, as biochemical recurrence (BCR). All of the data retrieved from the selected studies were recorded in an electronic database. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager version 5.3 software, designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Statistical heterogeneity was tested using the Chi-square test. Results: Our cumulative analysis did not show any significant difference in terms of BCR, ACM or PCSM rates between the RP and BT cohorts. Only three studies reported risk-stratified outcomes of intermediate- and high-risk patients, which are the most prone to treatment failure. Conclusions: our analysis suggested that RP and BT may have similar oncologic outcomes. However, the analysis included a limited number of studies, and most of them were retrospective, making it impossible to derive any definitive conclusion, especially for intermediate- and high-risk patients. In this scenario, appropriate urologic counseling remains of utmost importance.

AB - Background: The aim of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) with brachytherapy (BT). Methods: A literature review was conducted according to the 'Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses' (PRISMA) statement. We included studies reporting comparative oncologic outcomes of RP versus BT for localized prostate cancer (PCa). From each comparative study, we extracted the study design, the number and features of the included patients, and the oncologic outcomes expressed as all-cause mortality (ACM), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) or, when the former were unavailable, as biochemical recurrence (BCR). All of the data retrieved from the selected studies were recorded in an electronic database. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager version 5.3 software, designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Statistical heterogeneity was tested using the Chi-square test. Results: Our cumulative analysis did not show any significant difference in terms of BCR, ACM or PCSM rates between the RP and BT cohorts. Only three studies reported risk-stratified outcomes of intermediate- and high-risk patients, which are the most prone to treatment failure. Conclusions: our analysis suggested that RP and BT may have similar oncologic outcomes. However, the analysis included a limited number of studies, and most of them were retrospective, making it impossible to derive any definitive conclusion, especially for intermediate- and high-risk patients. In this scenario, appropriate urologic counseling remains of utmost importance.

KW - biochemical recurrence

KW - brachytherapy

KW - cancer control

KW - oncologic outcome

KW - prostate cancer

KW - radical prostatectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031705298&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031705298&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1756287217731449

DO - 10.1177/1756287217731449

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85031705298

VL - 9

SP - 241

EP - 250

JO - Therapeutic Advances in Urology

JF - Therapeutic Advances in Urology

SN - 1756-2872

IS - 11

ER -