TY - JOUR
T1 - Follow-up care over 12 months of patients with prostate cancer in Spain
T2 - A multicenter prospective cohort study
AU - Bonfill, Xavier
AU - Martinez-Zapata, María José
AU - Vernooij, Robin Wm
AU - Sánchez, María José
AU - Morales-Suárez-Varela, María
AU - Emparanza, José Ignacio
AU - Ferrer, Montse
AU - Pijoan, José Ignacio
AU - Palou, Joan
AU - Madrid, Eva
AU - Abraira, Víctor
AU - Zamora, Javier
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by an Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) Grant PS09/01204 (Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria [FIS], Spain). Dr María José Martinez Zapata is funded by a Miguel Servet II research contract from the ISCIII (CP1120/00023). ISCIII had any role in the design or execution of the study; in the data collection, management, or interpretation; or in the writing, reviewing, or approval of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 the Author(s).
PY - 2021/11/24
Y1 - 2021/11/24
N2 - The therapeutic approach is crucial to prostate cancer prognosis. We describe treatments and outcomes for a Spanish cohort of patients with prostate cancer during the first 12 months after diagnosis and identify the factors that influenced the treatment they received. This multicenter prospective cohort study included patients with prostate cancer followed up for 12 months after diagnosis. Treatment was stratified by factors such as hospital, age group (<70 and ≥70 years), and D’Amico cancer risk classification. The outcomes were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, adverse events (AEs), and mortality. The patient characteristics associated with the different treatment modalities were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. We included 470 men from 7 Spanish tertiary hospitals (mean (standard deviation) age 67.8 (7.6) years), 373 (79.4%) of which received treatment (alone or in combination) as follows: surgery (n = 163; 34.7%); radiotherapy (RT) (n = 149; 31.7%); and hormone therapy (HT) (n = 142; 30.2%). The remaining patients (n = 97) were allocated to no treatment, that is, watchful waiting (14.0%) or active surveillance (5.7%). HT was the most frequently administered treatment during follow-up and RT plus HT was the most common therapeutic combination. Surgery was more frequent in patients aged <70, with lower histologic tumor grades, Gleason scores <7, and lower prostate-specific antigen levels; while RT was more frequent in patients aged ≥70 with histologic tumor grade 4, and higher ECOG scores. HT was more frequent in patients aged ≥70, with histologic tumor grades 3 to 4, Gleason score ≥8, ECOG ≥1, and higher prostate-specific antigen levels. The number of fully active patients (ECOG score 0) decreased significantly during follow-up, from 75.3% at diagnosis to 65.1% at 12 months (P < .001); 230 (48.9%) patients had at least 1 AE, and 12 (2.6%) patients died. Surgery or RT were the main curative options. A fifth of the patients received no treatment. Palliative HT was more frequently administered to older patients with higher tumor grades and higher Gleason scores. Close to half of the patients experienced an AE related to their treatment.
AB - The therapeutic approach is crucial to prostate cancer prognosis. We describe treatments and outcomes for a Spanish cohort of patients with prostate cancer during the first 12 months after diagnosis and identify the factors that influenced the treatment they received. This multicenter prospective cohort study included patients with prostate cancer followed up for 12 months after diagnosis. Treatment was stratified by factors such as hospital, age group (<70 and ≥70 years), and D’Amico cancer risk classification. The outcomes were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, adverse events (AEs), and mortality. The patient characteristics associated with the different treatment modalities were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. We included 470 men from 7 Spanish tertiary hospitals (mean (standard deviation) age 67.8 (7.6) years), 373 (79.4%) of which received treatment (alone or in combination) as follows: surgery (n = 163; 34.7%); radiotherapy (RT) (n = 149; 31.7%); and hormone therapy (HT) (n = 142; 30.2%). The remaining patients (n = 97) were allocated to no treatment, that is, watchful waiting (14.0%) or active surveillance (5.7%). HT was the most frequently administered treatment during follow-up and RT plus HT was the most common therapeutic combination. Surgery was more frequent in patients aged <70, with lower histologic tumor grades, Gleason scores <7, and lower prostate-specific antigen levels; while RT was more frequent in patients aged ≥70 with histologic tumor grade 4, and higher ECOG scores. HT was more frequent in patients aged ≥70, with histologic tumor grades 3 to 4, Gleason score ≥8, ECOG ≥1, and higher prostate-specific antigen levels. The number of fully active patients (ECOG score 0) decreased significantly during follow-up, from 75.3% at diagnosis to 65.1% at 12 months (P < .001); 230 (48.9%) patients had at least 1 AE, and 12 (2.6%) patients died. Surgery or RT were the main curative options. A fifth of the patients received no treatment. Palliative HT was more frequently administered to older patients with higher tumor grades and higher Gleason scores. Close to half of the patients experienced an AE related to their treatment.
KW - Hormone therapy
KW - Multicenter study
KW - Multivariate analysis
KW - Prostate cancer
KW - Prostatic neoplasms
KW - Radiotherapy
KW - Surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122748109&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/MD.0000000000027801
DO - 10.1097/MD.0000000000027801
M3 - Article
C2 - 34964747
SN - 0025-7974
VL - 100
JO - Medicine
JF - Medicine
IS - 47
M1 - e27801
ER -