Retrospective Evaluation Reveals That Long-term Androgen Deprivation Therapy Improves Cause-Specific and Overall Survival in the Setting of Dose-Escalated Radiation for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To evaluate the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and duration for high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy (RT). Methods and Materials: A retrospective analysis of high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with dose-escalated RT (minimum 75 Gy) with or without ADT was performed. The relationship between ADT use and duration with biochemical failure (BF), metastatic failure (MF), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), non-prostate cancer death (NPCD), and overall survival (OS) was assessed as a function of pretreatment characteristics, comorbid medical illness, and treatment using Fine and Gray's cumulative incidence methodology. Results: The median follow-up time was 64 months. In men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network defined high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated RT, on univariate analysis, both metastasis (P<.0001; hazard ratio 0.34; 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.67; cumulative incidence at 60 months 13% vs 35%) and PCSM (P=.015; hazard ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.2-1.0; cumulative incidence at 60 months 6% vs 11%) were improved with the use of ADT. On multivariate analysis for all high-risk patients, Gleason score was the strongest negative prognostic factor, and long-term ADT (LTAD) improved MF (P=.002), PCSM (P=.034), and OS (P=.001). In men with prostate cancer and Gleason scores 8 to 10, on multivariate analysis after adjustment for other risk features, there was a duration-dependent improvement in BF, metastasis, PCSM, and OS, all favoring LTAD in comparison with STAD or RT alone. Conclusion: For men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated EBRT, this retrospective study suggests that the combination of LTAD and RT provided a significant improvement in clinical outcome, which was especially true for those with Gleason scores of 8 to 10. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.