Influence of metastatic sites and burden on oncological outcomes in patients progressing to metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer

被引:0
|
作者
Wenzel, Mike [1 ]
Hoeh, Benedikt [1 ]
Humke, Clara [1 ]
Koll, Florestan [1 ]
Cano Garcia, Cristina [1 ]
Siech, Carolin [1 ]
Steuber, Thomas [2 ]
Graefen, Markus [2 ]
Traumann, Miriam [1 ]
Kluth, Luis [1 ]
Chun, Felix K. H. [1 ]
Mandel, Philipp [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Goethe Univ Frankfurt Main, Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Urol, Frankfurt, Germany
[2] Univ Hosp Hamburg Eppendorf, Martini Klin Prostate Canc Ctr, Hamburg, Germany
关键词
Lymph node; mCRPC; High volume; De Novo; Visceral; Bone; VISCERAL METASTASES;
D O I
10.1007/s00345-024-05341-2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients harbor reduced life expectancy after first-line treatment progression. Currently, no information is available regarding the influence of metastatic sites and osseous burden on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of mCRPC patients. Methods We relied on the Frankfurt Metastatic Cancer Database of the Prostate (FRAMCAP) database to select patients progressing to mCRPC and stratified them according to lymph node vs. osseous vs. visceral metastatic sites. Moreover, we stratified osseous mCRPC patients regarding the number of metastatic lesions. Endpoints were PFS and OS in uni- and multivariable Cox regression models. Results Of 363 patients, 9.4% harbored M1a vs. 78% M1b vs. 12% M1c mCRPC with significantly higher PSA in M1b (9 vs. 22 vs. 8ng/ml). Rates of DeNovo (15% vs. 60% vs. 56%) were significantly lower in the M1a mCRPC group, compared to M1b and M1c (p < 0.001). In PFS analyses, a median of 12.7 vs. 10.1 vs. 15.9 months for M1a vs. M1b vs. M1c mCRPC was observed (p > 0.05). In multivariable Cox regression models, M1c mCRPC was independently at higher risk for progression (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.93, p = 0.048), relative to M1a. Regarding OS, significant differences were observed (p = 0.002), with median OS of 58 vs. 42 vs. 25 months for M1a vs. M1b vs. M1c mCRPC and corresponding HRs of 1.54 (p = 0.11) and 2.76 (p < 0.01). In multivariable models M1c mCRPC was associated with higher risk of death (HR: 3.56, p = 0.049), relative to M1a. No differences were observed after stratification according to number of bone lesions (all p >= 0.05). Conclusion M1c mCRPC patients are independently at higher risk for progression and death, while M1a patients harbor best cancer-control outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] BURDEN OF METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER (MCRPC) IN TURKEY
    Erdal, E.
    Malhan, S.
    Oksuz, E.
    Benekli, M.
    Cag, C.
    Dane, F.
    Kabasakal, L.
    Kucuk, O.
    Sozen, T. S.
    Sar, C.
    Kahveci, B.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (07) : A725 - A726
  • [2] Influence of Tumor Characteristics and Time to Metastatic Disease on Oncological Outcomes in Metachronous Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients
    Wenzel, Mike
    Lutz, Malin
    Hoeh, Benedikt
    Koll, Florestan
    Garcia, Cristina Cano
    Siech, Carolin
    Steuber, Thomas
    Graefen, Markus
    Tilki, Derya
    Kluth, Luis A.
    Banek, Severine
    Chun, Felix K. H.
    Mandel, Philipp
    CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER, 2024, 22 (05)
  • [3] Clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients with non‑metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
    Peter Arnold
    Maria Cristina Penaloza-Ramos
    Lola Adedokun
    Sarah Rees
    Mohamed Lockhat
    Lisa Spary
    Alan Watkins
    Vincent Gnanapragasam
    Simon J. Crabb
    Scientific Reports, 11
  • [4] Contemporary Treatment Patterns and Oncological Outcomes of Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer and First- to Sixth- line Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Patients
    Wenzel, Mike
    Siech, Carolin
    Hoeh, Benedikt
    Koll, Florestan
    Humke, Clara
    Tilki, Derya
    Steuber, Thomas
    Graefen, Markus
    Banek, Severine
    Kluth, Luis A.
    Chun, Felix K. H.
    Mandel, Philipp
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2024, 66 : 46 - 54
  • [5] Enzalutamide for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
    Ramadan, Wijdan H.
    Kabbara, Wissam K.
    Al Masri, Hiba S. Al Basiouni
    ONCOTARGETS AND THERAPY, 2015, 8 : 871 - 876
  • [6] PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES IN METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER
    Aggarwal, S.
    Segal, J.
    Kumar, S.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2013, 16 (07) : A421 - A421
  • [7] Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
    Henriques, Vanessa
    Wenzel, Mike
    Demes, Melanie-Christin
    Koellermann, Jens
    PATHOLOGE, 2021, 42 (04): : 431 - 438
  • [8] Chemotherapy in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer
    Rosino, Antonio
    Ballester, Inmaculada
    Tudela, Julian
    Gonzalez-Billalabeitia, Enrique
    ARCHIVOS ESPANOLES DE UROLOGIA, 2018, 71 (08): : 676 - 684
  • [9] Treatment with abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients progressing after docetaxel: a retrospective study
    Cicero, Giuseppe
    De Luca, Rossella
    Blasi, Livio
    Pepe, Alessio
    Pavone, Carlo
    Simonato, Alchiede
    Dieli, Francesco
    ANTI-CANCER DRUGS, 2017, 28 (09) : 1047 - 1052
  • [10] Enzalutamide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after chemotherapy and abiraterone acetate
    Thomsen, Frederik Birkebaek
    Roder, Martin Andreas
    Rathenborg, Per
    Brasso, Klaus
    Borre, Michael
    Iversen, Peter
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 48 (03) : 268 - 275