监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库中前列腺癌外照射放疗后继发性恶性肿瘤的发病率和存活率

Melissa J. Huynh, Lawson Eng, Long H. Ngo, Nicholas E. Power, Sophia C. Kamran, Theodore T. Pierce, Andrea C. Lo
{"title":"监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库中前列腺癌外照射放疗后继发性恶性肿瘤的发病率和存活率","authors":"Melissa J. Huynh, Lawson Eng, Long H. Ngo, Nicholas E. Power, Sophia C. Kamran, Theodore T. Pierce, Andrea C. Lo","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.8508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The study objective was to investigate the incidence of secondary bladder (BCa) and rectal cancers (RCa) after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) alone, and to compare cancer-specific survival of these secondary neoplasms to their primary counterparts.\nMethods: This retrospective cohort study included men in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry with a diagnosis of non-metastatic, clinically node-negative PCa treated with either RP or EBRT from 1995–2011 and allowed a minimum five-year lag period for the development of secondary BCa or RCa. Patients were divided into two eras, 1995–2002 and 2003–2011, to examine differences in incidence of secondary malignancies over time. Univariable and multivariable competing risk analyses with Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard and cause-specific hazard models were used to examine the risk of developing a secondary BCa or RCa. Competing risks analyses were used to compare cancer-specific survival of primary vs. secondary BCa and RCa.\nResults: A total of 198 184 men underwent RP and 190 536 underwent EBRT for PCa. The cumulative incidence of secondary BCa at 10 years was 1.71% for RP, and 3.7% for EBRT (p<0.001), while that of RCa was 0.52% for RP and 0.99% for EBRT (p<0.001). EBRT was associated with approximately twice the risk of developing a secondary BCa and RCa compared to RP. The hazard of secondary BCa following EBRT delivered during 2003–2011 was 20% less than from 1995–2002 (p<0.09, Fine-Gray model), while that of secondary RCa was 31% less (p<0.001) (hazard ratio 0.78, p<0.001) for Fine-Gray and cause-specific hazard models. In the Fine-Gray model, the risk of death from BCa was 27% lower for secondary BCa after RP compared to primary BCa, while the risk of death was 9% lower for secondary BCa after EBRT compared to primary BCa. There was no difference in RCa-specific survival between primary or secondary RCa after RP or EBRT.\nConclusions: The risk of BCa and RCa is approximately twice as high for men undergoing EBRT for localized PCa compared to RP, but that risk is declining, likely reflecting advancements in radiation delivery. The development of secondary RCa or BCa does not confer an elevated risk of death compared to their primary counterparts.","PeriodicalId":38001,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Urological Association Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence and survival of secondary malignancies after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database\",\"authors\":\"Melissa J. Huynh, Lawson Eng, Long H. Ngo, Nicholas E. Power, Sophia C. Kamran, Theodore T. Pierce, Andrea C. Lo\",\"doi\":\"10.5489/cuaj.8508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The study objective was to investigate the incidence of secondary bladder (BCa) and rectal cancers (RCa) after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) alone, and to compare cancer-specific survival of these secondary neoplasms to their primary counterparts.\\nMethods: This retrospective cohort study included men in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry with a diagnosis of non-metastatic, clinically node-negative PCa treated with either RP or EBRT from 1995–2011 and allowed a minimum five-year lag period for the development of secondary BCa or RCa. Patients were divided into two eras, 1995–2002 and 2003–2011, to examine differences in incidence of secondary malignancies over time. Univariable and multivariable competing risk analyses with Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard and cause-specific hazard models were used to examine the risk of developing a secondary BCa or RCa. Competing risks analyses were used to compare cancer-specific survival of primary vs. secondary BCa and RCa.\\nResults: A total of 198 184 men underwent RP and 190 536 underwent EBRT for PCa. The cumulative incidence of secondary BCa at 10 years was 1.71% for RP, and 3.7% for EBRT (p<0.001), while that of RCa was 0.52% for RP and 0.99% for EBRT (p<0.001). EBRT was associated with approximately twice the risk of developing a secondary BCa and RCa compared to RP. The hazard of secondary BCa following EBRT delivered during 2003–2011 was 20% less than from 1995–2002 (p<0.09, Fine-Gray model), while that of secondary RCa was 31% less (p<0.001) (hazard ratio 0.78, p<0.001) for Fine-Gray and cause-specific hazard models. In the Fine-Gray model, the risk of death from BCa was 27% lower for secondary BCa after RP compared to primary BCa, while the risk of death was 9% lower for secondary BCa after EBRT compared to primary BCa. There was no difference in RCa-specific survival between primary or secondary RCa after RP or EBRT.\\nConclusions: The risk of BCa and RCa is approximately twice as high for men undergoing EBRT for localized PCa compared to RP, but that risk is declining, likely reflecting advancements in radiation delivery. The development of secondary RCa or BCa does not confer an elevated risk of death compared to their primary counterparts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Urological Association Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Urological Association Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8508\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Urological Association Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介研究目的是调查前列腺癌(PCa)体外放射治疗(EBRT)与单纯根治性前列腺切除术(RP)相比,继发性膀胱癌(BCa)和直肠癌(RCa)的发病率,并比较这些继发性肿瘤与原发性肿瘤的癌症特异性生存率:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了 1995-2011 年间接受前列腺癌根治术或前列腺电切术治疗的、诊断为非转移性、临床结节阴性 PCa 的男性癌症监测、流行病学和最终结果登记患者,并为继发性 BCa 或 RCa 的发生预留了至少五年的滞后期。患者被分为 1995-2002 年和 2003-2011 年两个时期,以研究继发性恶性肿瘤发病率随时间变化的差异。使用Fine-Gray子分布危险模型和特定病因危险模型进行单变量和多变量竞争风险分析,以研究继发性BCa或RCa的发病风险。竞争风险分析用于比较原发性与继发性 BCa 和 RCa 的癌症特异性生存率:共有198 184名男性接受了RP治疗,190 536名男性接受了EBRT治疗。10年后,RP和EBRT的继发性BCa累积发病率分别为1.71%和3.7%(P<0.001),而RP和EBRT的RCa累积发病率分别为0.52%和0.99%(P<0.001)。与 RP 相比,EBRT 发生继发性 BCa 和 RCa 的风险大约是 RP 的两倍。与1995-2002年相比,2003-2011年期间接受EBRT后继发BCa的风险降低了20%(P<0.09,Fine-Gray模型),而继发RCa的风险降低了31%(P<0.001)(Fine-Gray和特定病因风险模型的风险比为0.78,P<0.001)。在Fine-Gray模型中,RP术后继发性BCa的死亡风险比原发性BCa低27%,而EBRT术后继发性BCa的死亡风险比原发性BCa低9%。RP或EBRT术后的原发性或继发性RCa特异性生存率没有差异:结论:与RP相比,接受EBRT治疗局部PCa的男性发生BCa和RCa的风险大约高出一倍,但这种风险正在下降,这可能反映了放射治疗的进步。与原发性RCa或BCa相比,继发性RCa或BCa不会增加死亡风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Incidence and survival of secondary malignancies after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database
Introduction: The study objective was to investigate the incidence of secondary bladder (BCa) and rectal cancers (RCa) after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) compared to radical prostatectomy (RP) alone, and to compare cancer-specific survival of these secondary neoplasms to their primary counterparts. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included men in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry with a diagnosis of non-metastatic, clinically node-negative PCa treated with either RP or EBRT from 1995–2011 and allowed a minimum five-year lag period for the development of secondary BCa or RCa. Patients were divided into two eras, 1995–2002 and 2003–2011, to examine differences in incidence of secondary malignancies over time. Univariable and multivariable competing risk analyses with Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard and cause-specific hazard models were used to examine the risk of developing a secondary BCa or RCa. Competing risks analyses were used to compare cancer-specific survival of primary vs. secondary BCa and RCa. Results: A total of 198 184 men underwent RP and 190 536 underwent EBRT for PCa. The cumulative incidence of secondary BCa at 10 years was 1.71% for RP, and 3.7% for EBRT (p<0.001), while that of RCa was 0.52% for RP and 0.99% for EBRT (p<0.001). EBRT was associated with approximately twice the risk of developing a secondary BCa and RCa compared to RP. The hazard of secondary BCa following EBRT delivered during 2003–2011 was 20% less than from 1995–2002 (p<0.09, Fine-Gray model), while that of secondary RCa was 31% less (p<0.001) (hazard ratio 0.78, p<0.001) for Fine-Gray and cause-specific hazard models. In the Fine-Gray model, the risk of death from BCa was 27% lower for secondary BCa after RP compared to primary BCa, while the risk of death was 9% lower for secondary BCa after EBRT compared to primary BCa. There was no difference in RCa-specific survival between primary or secondary RCa after RP or EBRT. Conclusions: The risk of BCa and RCa is approximately twice as high for men undergoing EBRT for localized PCa compared to RP, but that risk is declining, likely reflecting advancements in radiation delivery. The development of secondary RCa or BCa does not confer an elevated risk of death compared to their primary counterparts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Published by the Canadian Urological Association, the Canadian Urological Association Journal (CUAJ) released its first issue in March 2007, and was published four times that year under the guidance of founding editor (Editor Emeritus as of 2012), Dr. Laurence H. Klotz. In 2008, CUAJ became a bimonthly publication. As of 2013, articles have been published monthly, alternating between print and online-only versions (print issues are available in February, April, June, August, October, and December; online-only issues are produced in January, March, May, July, September, and November). In 2017, the journal launched an ahead-of-print publishing strategy, in which accepted manuscripts are published electronically on our website and cited on PubMed ahead of their official issue-based publication date. By significantly shortening the time to article availability, we offer our readers more flexibility in the way they engage with our content: as a continuous stream, or in a monthly “package,” or both. CUAJ covers a broad range of urological topics — oncology, pediatrics, transplantation, endourology, female urology, infertility, and more. We take pride in showcasing the work of some of Canada’s top investigators and providing our readers with the latest relevant evidence-based research, and on being the primary repository for major guidelines and other important practice recommendations. Our long-term vision is to become an essential destination for urology-based research, education, and advocacy for both physicians and patients, and to act as a springboard for discussions within the urologic community.
期刊最新文献
Safety and efficacy of ultrasound-assisted bedside ureteric stent placement 2024 Canadian Urological Association endorsement of an expert report: Kidney involvement in tuberous sclerosis complex Sacral neuromodulation in pediatric refractory bladder and bowel dysfunction Fostering the continued growth of our association On vacation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1