The Efficacy and Safety of Metastasis-directed Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies
Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu metaanalýza, systematický přehled, časopisecké články, přehledy
PubMed
37945451
DOI
10.1016/j.eururo.2023.10.012
PII: S0302-2838(23)03209-8
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Metastasectomy, Metastasis-directed therapy, Oligometastatic, Prostate cancer, Radiation therapy,
- MeSH
- antagonisté androgenů škodlivé účinky MeSH
- doba přežití bez progrese choroby MeSH
- hormony MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory prostaty * farmakoterapie MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- metaanalýza MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
- Názvy látek
- antagonisté androgenů MeSH
- hormony MeSH
CONTEXT: Despite the lack of level 1 evidence, metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) is used widely in the management of metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) patients. Data are continuously emerging from well-designed prospective studies. OBJECTIVE: To summarise and report the evidence on oncological and safety outcomes of MDT in the management of mPCa patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for prospective studies assessing progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC), androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)-free survival (ADT-FS), overall survival (OS), and/or adverse events (AEs) in mPCa patients treated with MDT. A meta-analysis was performed for 1- and 2-yr PFS, LC, ADT-FS, OS, and rate of AEs. Meta-regression and sensitivity analysis were performed to account for heterogeneity and identify moderators. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 22 prospective studies (n = 1137), including two randomised controlled trials (n = 116). Two studies were excluded from the meta-analysis (n = 120). The estimated 2-yr PFS was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36-56%) or 42% (95% CI: 33-52%) after excluding studies using biochemical or ADT-related endpoints. The estimated 2-yr LC, ADT-FS, and OS were 97% (95% CI: 94-98%), 55% (95% CI: 44-65%), and 97% (95% CI: 95-98%), respectively. Rates of treatment-related grade 2 and ≥3 AEs were 2.4% (95% CI: 0.2-7%) and 0.3% (95% CI: 0-1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MDT is a promising treatment strategy associated with favourable PFS, excellent LC, and a low toxicity profile that allows oligorecurrent hormone-sensitive patients to avoid or defer ADT-related toxicity. Integration of MDT with other therapies offers a promising research direction, in particular, in conjunction with systemic treatments and as a component of definitive care for oligometastatic PCa. However, in the absence of randomised trials, using MDT for treatment intensification remains an experimental approach, and the impact on OS is uncertain. PATIENT SUMMARY: Direct treatment of metastases is a promising option for selected prostate cancer patients. It can delay hormone therapy and is being investigated as a way of intensifying treatment at the expense of manageable toxicity.
Department of Biostatistics and Translational Medicine Medical University of Lodz Lodz Poland
Department of Radiation Oncology Iridium Network Wilrijk Belgium
Department of Radiotherapy ICO René Gauducheau Saint Herblain France
Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria
Department of Urology Hospital Clínico San Carlos Madrid Spain
Department of Urology La Croix Du Sud Hospital Quint Fonsegrives France
Department of Urology St Antonius Hospital Utrecht The Netherlands
Unit of Urology Division of Oncology IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Milan Italy
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
Metastasis-directed therapy in oligometastatic prostate cancer