Oncologic outcomes of radiation therapy following active surveillance for low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
42 Background: To evaluate the oncologic outcomes and potential impact of delayed radical treatment in the form of radiotherapy (RT), in men with localized prostate cancer progressing after active surveillance (AS). Methods: We identified patients on AS subsequently treated with state-of-the-art RT (either dose-escalated image-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy [IG-IMRT] or low-dose-rate brachytherapy [LDR-BT]). Based on the clinical characteristics at time of AS progression, we compared the oncologic outcomes to matched patients treated with upfront RT after diagnose. One to two matching patients per AS case were identified from existing RT databases based on: age (+/- 3 years), clinical prognostic factors (NCCN risk group; PSA +/- 2ng/mL; cT category; primary and secondary Gleason score; percentage of diagnostic cores involved dichotomized at < or > 50%), and treatment modality (IG-IMRT or LDR-BT). We aimed to determine whether patients on AS have potentially compromised outcomes. Results: We identified 215 patients (out of 1070 AS cohort) undergoing RT after a median of 26 months (IQR 16-52.5) on AS. Median follow-up post RT was 4.8 years (IQR 2.9-7.2). No patient died of prostate cancer. At 5-years, the biochemical relapse free-, metastases free- and overall-survival rate were respectively 98.6%, 99.1%, 98.6% in the AS cohort. Matched cohort comprised 400 patients treated with IG-IMRT (71%) or LDR-BT (29%). Adequate matching was confirmed. The median follow-up post RT was 8.2 years (IQR 4.7-10). At 5-years, biochemical relapse free-, metastases free- and overall-survival rates of 98.5%, 98.7%, 93.7% respectively, which were not statistically different compared to those patients treated upon AS progression. Conclusions: Curative-intent radiotherapy (i.e. dose-escalated IG-IMRT or LDR-BT) after a period of AS renders excellent oncologic outcomes at 5 years. Moreover, the delay of therapy after a period of AS does not appear to result in inferior oncologic outcomes compared to patients with similar risk characteristics undergoing upfront radical radiotherapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".