Adjuvant vs. salvage radiation therapy in men with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy: Survey of North American genitourinary expert radiation oncologists

dc.contributor.authorMcClelland, Shearwood
dc.contributor.authorSandler, Kiri A.
dc.contributor.authorDegnin, Catherine
dc.contributor.authorChen, Yiyi
dc.contributor.authorMitin, Timur
dc.contributor.departmentRadiation Oncology, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T19:10:21Z
dc.date.available2019-08-28T19:10:21Z
dc.date.issued2019-05
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: The management of patients with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy (RP) is controversial. Level 1 evidence demonstrates that adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) improves survival compared to no treatment; however, it may overtreat up to 30% of patients, as randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using salvage RT on observation arms failed to reveal a survival advantage of adjuvant RT. We, therefore, sought to determine the current view of adjuvant vs. salvage RT among North American genitourinary (GU) radiation oncology experts. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 88 practicing North American GU physicians serving on decision-making committees of cooperative group research organizations. Questions pertained to opinions regarding adjuvant vs. salvage RT for this patient population. Treatment recommendations were correlated with practice patterns using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Forty-two of 88 radiation oncologists completed the survey; 23 (54.8%) recommended adjuvant RT and 19 (45.2%) recommended salvage RT. Recommendation of active surveillance for Gleason 3+4 disease was a significant predictor of salvage RT recommendation (p=0.034), and monthly patient volume approached significance for recommendation of adjuvant over salvage RT; those seeing <15 patients/month trended towards recommending adjuvant over salvage RT (p=0.062). No other demographic factors approached significance. CONCLUSIONS: There is dramatic polarization among North American GU experts regarding optimal management of patients with high-risk features after RP. Ongoing RCTs will determine whether adjuvant RT improves survival over salvage RT. Until then, the almost 50/50 division seen from this analysis should encourage practicing clinicians to discuss the ambiguity with their patients.en_US
dc.identifier.citationMcClelland, S., 3rd, Sandler, K. A., Degnin, C., Chen, Y., & Mitin, T. (2019). Adjuvant vs. salvage radiation therapy in men with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy: Survey of North American genitourinary expert radiation oncologists. Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 13(5), E132–E134. doi:10.5489/cuaj.5470en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/20684
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherCanadian Urological Associationen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.5489/cuaj.5470en_US
dc.relation.journalCanadian Urological Association Journalen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourcePMCen_US
dc.subjectRadical prostatectomy (RP)en_US
dc.subjectAdjuvant radiation therapy (RT)en_US
dc.subjectSalvage radiation therapyen_US
dc.titleAdjuvant vs. salvage radiation therapy in men with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy: Survey of North American genitourinary expert radiation oncologistsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
cuaj-1-e132.pdf
Size:
356.18 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: