Outcomes of treatment for localized prostate cancer in a single institution: comparison of radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy by propensity score matching analysis

Can patients with low‐risk prostate cancer really benefit from radical treatment?: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

“…After removing the duplicates, we identified 2,334 records from the initial title and abstract screening process, retrieved and reviewed 74 articles in full‐text assessment for eligibility, among which 52 were excluded based on the following reasons: no original articles ( n = 4), not population of interest ( n = 7), 100 or fewer participants ( n = 6), no outcome of interest ( n = 22), insufficient data ( n = 6), studies focused only on high‐risk or intermediate‐risk prostate cancer ( n = 7). Finally, 22 RCTs and retrospective articles (Abdollah et al., 2012; Aizer et al., 2009; Albertsen et al., 2007; Arvold et al., 2011; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Colberg et al., 2007; Degroot et al., 2013; Fosså et al., 2014; Giberti et al., 2009; Hamdy et al., 2016; Hayashi et al., 2019; Hoffman et al., 2013; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Rice et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Taguchi et al., 2015; Tward et al., 2010; Wong et al., 2006) were included in our NMA with a total of 185,363 patients treated by at least one of the three treatment strategies. Sixteen trials (Aizer et al., 2009; Albertsen et al., 2007; Arvold et al., 2011; Degroot et al., 2013; Fosså et al., 2014; Giberti et al., 2009; Hamdy et al., 2016; Hayashi et al., 2019; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Rice et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Taguchi et al., 2015) investigated RP versus RT, whereas 11 trials (Abdollah et al., 2012; Albertsen et al., 2007; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Fosså et al., 2014; Hamdy et al., 2016; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Stattin et al., 2010; ...…”

“…Finally, 22 RCTs and retrospective articles (Abdollah et al., 2012; Aizer et al., 2009; Albertsen et al., 2007; Arvold et al., 2011; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Colberg et al., 2007; Degroot et al., 2013; Fosså et al., 2014; Giberti et al., 2009; Hamdy et al., 2016; Hayashi et al., 2019; Hoffman et al., 2013; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Rice et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Taguchi et al., 2015; Tward et al., 2010; Wong et al., 2006) were included in our NMA with a total of 185,363 patients treated by at least one of the three treatment strategies. Sixteen trials (Aizer et al., 2009; Albertsen et al., 2007; Arvold et al., 2011; Degroot et al., 2013; Fosså et al., 2014; Giberti et al., 2009; Hamdy et al., 2016; Hayashi et al., 2019; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Rice et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Taguchi et al., 2015) investigated RP versus RT, whereas 11 trials (Abdollah et al., 2012; Albertsen et al., 2007; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Fosså et al., 2014; Hamdy et al., 2016; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merglen et al., 2007; Stattin et al., 2010; Tward et al., 2010; Wilt et al., 2017; Wong et al., 2006) compared RP with AS. Table 1 demonstrates individual data and detail information on characteristics of the 22 included studies.…”

“…The median follow‐up period based on individual patient data (interquartile range) was 7.05 years (3.8–15). For the two types of outcome, 16 studies (Abdollah et al., 2012; Aizer et al., 2009; Albertsen et al., 2007; Arvold et al., 2011; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Degroot et al., 2013; Fosså et al., 2014; Giberti et al., 2009; Hamdy et al., 2016; Hoffman et al., 2013; Merglen et al., 2007; Merino et al., 2013; Resnick et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Tward et al., 2010; Wilt et al., 2017) provided CSM, 14 studies (Abdollah et al., 2012; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Fosså et al., 2014; Hayashi et al., 2019; Ladjevardi et al., 2010; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Rice et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Taguchi et al., 2015; Tward et al., 2010; Wilt et al., 2017; Wong et al., 2006) reported ACM, and nine studies (Abdollah et al., 2012; Bill‐Axelson et al., 2014; Fosså et al., 2014; Merino et al., 2013; Patrick & Walsh, 2005; Resnick et al., 2013; Stattin et al., 2010; Tward et al., 2010; Wilt et al., 2017) included both of them. Most of the studies (19 of 22) reported the mean or median ages of participants, which ranged from 50 to 74.1 (mean age: 65.2 years).…”

Treatment Outcomes of 125I Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy vs Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer

“…(3) The de nition of BF is different for the RP versus LDR groups. Although this de nition is commonly used in the world [15,23,24], there might be some bias in interpretation of the results. (4) There were fewer deaths in this study; therefore, whether higher bRFS rates observed in patients could translate into superior oncological endpoints is still undetermined.…”

Treatment outcomes of 125I low-dose-rate brachytherapy vs radical prostatectomy for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer

“…3The de nition of BF is different for the RP versus LDR groups. Although this de nition is commonly used in the world (15,23,24), it could cause some bias in interpretation of the results. (4) There were fewer deaths in this study; therefore, whether higher bRFS rates observed in patients could translate into superior oncological endpoints is still undetermined.…”