BACKGROUND: We assessed patients and tumor characteristics, as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) items, associated with curative intent treatment decision-making in clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: Clinically localized PCa treated with either radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) within 12 months from diagnosis were abstracted from The PROState cancer monitoring in ITaly, from the National Research Council (Pros-IT CNR) database. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) models predicting RT vs. RP were fitted, after adjustment for HRQoL items, patients and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1 041 patients, 631 (60.2%) were treated with RP and 410 (39.8%) with RT. Relative to RT, RP patients were younger age (mean age 64.5±6.6 vs. 71.4±4.9, p<0.001) and had higher rates of D’Amico low-intermediate risk groups (31.8 vs. 21.9% low, 46.3 vs. 43.5% intermediate and 21.9 vs. 34.6% high risk, p<0.001). Overall, 93.2% of RP patients were enrolled by Urologists and 82.7% of RT patients by Radiation Oncologists. RP patients had generally higher means values of HRQoL items. In MLR models, higher RT rates were independently associated with more advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 6.14, p<0.001) and BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (OR 1.78, p<0.001). Conversely, lower rates of RT were independently associated with married (OR 0.55, p=0.01) and worker status (OR 0.52, p=0.004), enrollment in academic centers (OR 0.59, p=0.005) and higher physical composite score (OR 0.88, p=0.03) and baseline sexual function (OR 0.92, p<0.001) items. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing definitive treatment at Italian institutions receive RP instead of RT. Moreover, those who are younger, married, working, as well as those with better physical and sexual function are more likely to undergo surgery.
Overview of potential determinants of radical prostatectomy versus radiation therapy in management of clinically localized prostate cancer: results from an Italian, prospective, observational study (the Pros-IT CNR study) / A. Antonelli, C. Palumbo, M. Noale, W. Artibani, P. Bassi, F. Bertoni, S. Bracarda, A. Bruni, R. Corvò, M. Gacci, S.M. Magrini, R. Montironi, A. Porreca, A. Tubaro, V. Zagonel, S. Maggi, A. Alitto, E. Ambrosi, A. Antonelli, C. Aristei, M. Barbieri, F. Bardari, L. Bardoscia, S. Barra, S. Bartoncini, U. Basso, C. Becherini, R. Bellavita, F. Bergamaschi, S. Berlingheri, A. Berruti, M. Borghesi, R. Bortolus, V. Borzillo, D. Bosetti, G. Bove, P. Bove, M. Brausi, A. Bruni, G. Bruno, E. Brunocilla, A. Buffoli, M. Buglione, C. Buttigliero, G. Cacciamani, M. Caldiroli, G. Cardo, G. Carmignani, G. Carrieri, E. Castelli, E. Castrezzati, G. Catalano, S. Cattarino, F. Catucci, D. Cavallini Francolini, O. Ceccarini, A. Celia, F. Chiancone, T. Chini, C. Cianci, A. Cisternino, D. Collura, F. Corbella, M. Corinti, P. Corsi, F. Cortese, L. Corti, C. De Nunzio, O. Cristiano, R. D'angelillo, L. Da Pozzo, D. D'agostino, D. D'andrea, M. Dandrea, M. De Angelis, O. De Cobelli, B. De Concilio, A. De Lisa, S. De Luca, A. De Stefani, C. Deantoni, C. Degli Esposti, A. Destito, B. Detti, N. Di Muzio, A. Di Stasio, C. Di Stefano, D. Di Trapani, G. Difino, M. Fabiano, S. Falivene, G. Farullo, P. Fedelini, I. Ferrari, F. Ferrau, M. Ferro, A. Fodor, F. Fontana, F. Francesca, G. Francolini, P. Frata, G. Frezza, P. Gabriele, M. Galeandro, E. Garibaldi, P. Gennari, A. Gentilucci, A. Giacobbe, L. Giussani, G. Giusti, P. Gontero, A. Guarneri, C. Guida, A. Gurioli, D. Huqi, C. Imbimbo, G. Ingrosso, C. Iotti, C. Italia, P. La Mattina, E. Lamanna, L. Lastrucci, G. Lazzari, F. Liberale, G. Liguori, R. Lisi, F. Lohr, R. Lombardo, J. Lovisolo, G. Ludovico, N. Macchione, F. Maggio, M. Malizia, G. Manasse, G. Mandoliti, G. Mantini, L. Marafioti, L. Marciello, A. Marconi, A. Martillotta, S. Marzano, S. Masciullo, G. Maso, A. Massenzo, E. Mazzeo, L. Mearini, S. Medoro, R. Molè, G. Monesi, E. Montanari, F. Montefiore, G. Montesi, G. Morgia, G. Moro, G. Muscas, D. Musio, P. Muto, G. Muzzonigro, G. Napodano, C. Negro, M. Nidini, M. Ntreta, M. Orsatti, C. Palazzolo, I. Palumbo, A. Parisi, P. Parma, N. Pavan, M. Pericolini, F. Pinto, A. Pistone, V. Pizzuti, A. Platania, C. Polli, G. Pomara, E. Ponti, A. Porcaro, F. Porpiglia, D. Pugliese, A. Pycha, G. Raguso, A. Rampini, D. Randone, V. Roboldi, M. Roscigno, M. Ruggieri, G. Ruoppo, R. Sanseverino, A. Santacaterina, M. Santarsieri, R. Santoni, G. Scagliotti, M. Scanzi, M. Scarcia, R. Schiavina, A. Sciarra, C. Sciorio, T. Scolaro, S. Scuzzarella, O. Selvaggio, A. Serao, S. Serni, M. Signor, M. Silvani, G. Silvano, F. Silvestris, C. Simeone, V. Simone, G. Spagnoletti, M. Spinelli, L. Squillace, V. Tombolini, M. Toninelli, L. Triggiani, A. Trinchieri, L. Trodella, L. Trodella, C. Trombetta, L. Tronnolone, M. Tucci, D. Urzì, R. Valdagni, M. Valeriani, M. Vanoli, E. Vitali, S. Zaramella, G. Zeccolini, G. Zini. - In: MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA. - ISSN 1827-1758. - (2020). [Epub ahead of print] [10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03637-3]
Overview of potential determinants of radical prostatectomy versus radiation therapy in management of clinically localized prostate cancer: results from an Italian, prospective, observational study (the Pros-IT CNR study)
O. De Cobelli;A. Guarneri;E. Montanari;R. Valdagni;
2020
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We assessed patients and tumor characteristics, as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) items, associated with curative intent treatment decision-making in clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: Clinically localized PCa treated with either radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) within 12 months from diagnosis were abstracted from The PROState cancer monitoring in ITaly, from the National Research Council (Pros-IT CNR) database. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) models predicting RT vs. RP were fitted, after adjustment for HRQoL items, patients and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1 041 patients, 631 (60.2%) were treated with RP and 410 (39.8%) with RT. Relative to RT, RP patients were younger age (mean age 64.5±6.6 vs. 71.4±4.9, p<0.001) and had higher rates of D’Amico low-intermediate risk groups (31.8 vs. 21.9% low, 46.3 vs. 43.5% intermediate and 21.9 vs. 34.6% high risk, p<0.001). Overall, 93.2% of RP patients were enrolled by Urologists and 82.7% of RT patients by Radiation Oncologists. RP patients had generally higher means values of HRQoL items. In MLR models, higher RT rates were independently associated with more advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 6.14, p<0.001) and BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (OR 1.78, p<0.001). Conversely, lower rates of RT were independently associated with married (OR 0.55, p=0.01) and worker status (OR 0.52, p=0.004), enrollment in academic centers (OR 0.59, p=0.005) and higher physical composite score (OR 0.88, p=0.03) and baseline sexual function (OR 0.92, p<0.001) items. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing definitive treatment at Italian institutions receive RP instead of RT. Moreover, those who are younger, married, working, as well as those with better physical and sexual function are more likely to undergo surgery.
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Overview MINERVA.pdf
Open Access dal 08/01/2021
Tipologia:
Post-print, accepted manuscript ecc. (versione accettata dall'editore)
Dimensione
9.17 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
9.17 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
