prostatecancerfree.org

Similar documents
Comparing Treatment Results Of PROSTATE CANCER Prostate Cancer Results Study Group Updated June 2015

6 The Prostate Clinic, Utrecht, The Netherlands, Andersen Center, Houston, TX, USA,

2/14/09. Why Discuss this topic? Managing Local Recurrences after Radiation Failure. PROSTATE CANCER Second Treatment

18-Oct-16. Take home messages. An update for GPs on modern radiation therapy & hormones for prostate cancer. Session plan

No Other Company Discloses Higher Transplant Survival Rate. Infusions For Emerging Treatments. Date of Use. Recipient Age (yrs)

Supported by M. D. Anderson Cancer Center physician investigator funds. We thank Gerald E. Hanks, MD, for help and guidance with this project.

PROSTATE CANCER CONTENT CREATED BY. Learn more at

3/22/2014. Goals of this Presentation: in 15 min & 5 min Q & A. Radiotherapy for. Localized Prostate Cancer: What is New in 2014?

7/23/2014. SAM-HDR Brachytherapy II: Integration of Real Time Imaging. US-based prostate brachytherapy: are we there yet? No conflict of interest

CLINICAL TRIALS Open clinical uro-oncology trials in Canada George Rodrigues, MD, Eric Winquist, MD

Introduction. American Society of Clinical Oncology All rights reserved.

Would SBRT Hypofractionated Approach Be as Good? Then Why Bother With Brachytherapy?

Active surveillance for low-risk Prostate Cancer Compared with Immediate Treatment: A Canadian cost evaluation

2018 National Oncologists Workforce Study OCTOBER 2018

2015 myresearch Science Internship Program: Applied Medicine. Civic Education Office of Government and Community Relations

BLADDER PROSTATE PENIS TESTICLES BE YO ND YO UR CA NC ER

Radical Prostatectomy:

How to deal with patients who fail intracavitary treatment

Prostate brachytherapy, radical

SRO Tutorial: Prostate Cancer Clinics

Understanding the risk of recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer. Aditya Bagrodia, MD

High-Dose Rate Temporary Prostate Brachytherapy. Original Policy Date

Screening and Diagnosis Prostate Cancer

Your Guide to Prostate Cancer

Description. Section: Therapy Effective Date: October 15, 2015 Subsection: Therapy Original Policy Date: December 7, 2011 Subject:

Treating Prostate Cancer

Prostate Cancer Dashboard

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Compliments of. In Partnership with. NewsTalk WSB s Scott Slade, Neal Boortz and Captain Herb Emory

Prostate cancer: Update from the BCCA

Section: Therapy Effective Date: October 15, 2016 Subsection: Therapy Original Policy Date: December 7, 2011 Subject:

External Beam Radiation Therapy for Low/Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer

55 th Annual Meeting American Society for Radiation Oncology. Patients: Hope Guide Heal News Briefing

2008_Prostate_Awareness 12/22/08 1:47 PM Page 1

Overview of Radiotherapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

Open clinical uro-oncology trials in Canada Eric Winquist, MD, George Rodrigues, MD

PROSTATE CANCER, Radiotherapy ADVANCES in RADIOTHERAPY for PROSTATE CANCER

Consensus and Controversies in Cancer of Prostate BASIS FOR FURHTER STUDIES. Luis A. Linares MD FACRO Medical Director

Open clinical uro-oncology trials in Canada

2016 PQRS OPTIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL MEASURES: REGISTRY ONLY

Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy Post Procedure Evaluation

Date of preparation- January 2018 Janssen Biotech, Inc /18 em Reporter s guide to. prostate cancer

Salvage HDR Brachytherapy. Amit Bahl Consultant Clinical Oncologist The Bristol Cancer Institute, UK

Date Modified: May 29, Clinical Quality Measures for PQRS

A comparative study of radical prostatectomy and permanent seed brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer

PSA is rising: What to do? After curative intended radiotherapy: More local options?

Deciding on treatment: a step on your journey.

Erectile Dysfunction (ED) after Radiotherapy (RT) for Prostate Cancer. William M. Mendenhall, MD

Brachytherapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Using Permanently Implanted Seeds. Original Policy Date

How can we best use HDR brachytherapy to escalate dose in intermediate and high risk disease? Gerard Morton Associate Professor

Prostate Cancer Treatment

PSA nadir post LDR Brachytherapy and early Salvage Therapy. Dr Duncan McLaren UK & Ireland Users Group Meeting 2016

FOCAL THERAPY PROSTATE SEED BRACHYTHERAPY

Date Modified: March 31, Clinical Quality Measures for PQRS

Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer

High Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Should Start with RT

PCSANM 2015 Seminar. Basic Knowledge: Test for Prostate Cancer. Jerry Cross. 15 item quiz, no grades given

Genitourinary Oncology Fellowship for Physicians in China A Multidisciplinary Clinical and Research Training Opportunity at Massachusetts General

2018 OPTIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL MEASURES: REGISTRY ONLY. MEASURE TYPE: Process

D. Jeffrey Demanes M.D. FACRO, FACR, FASTRO Director UCLA Brachytherapy combined HDR + EBRT 574 HDR monotherapy Total Patients

Tanaka et al. BMC Cancer (2017) 17:573 DOI /s

The clinical and cost effectiveness of the use of brachytherapy to treat localised prostate cancer Health technology description

PROSTATE CANCER: Meeting a Community Need

PACGENE. A Research Project funded by the National Cancer Institute. Not for Patient Use (R01 CA 97075)

CLINICAL WORKSHOP IMAGE-GUIDED HDR BRACHYTHERAPY OF PROSTATE CANCER

Survival outcomes for men in rural and remote NSW. Trend in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates in Australia. The prostate cancer conundrum

LDR Monotherapy vs. HDR Monotherapy

Modern Dose Fractionation and Treatment Techniques for Definitive Prostate RT

JOINT STATEMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK PROSTATE CANCER GUIDELINES PANEL

New Technologies for the Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer

Prostate Cancer Registry: an update

Outcomes Following Negative Prostate Biopsy for Patients with Persistent Disease after Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Healthcare Professional Guide

Men s Health Topics. Jerome Baca, MS, PA-C. Albuquerque Urology Associates January 6 th, 2018

DCIS: Margins and the USC/VNPI

PPI Sponsored Golf Tourney, August 2nd. To register, go to Kitsap Cancer Services for more information.

SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY FOR PATIENTS WITH EARLY-STAGE BREAST CANCER

State Cd. PG1 Inst Name. Madigan Army Med Ctr

Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Resident Dept of Urology General Surgery Grand Round November 24, 2008

Central European Journal of Urology

MEDICAL POLICY. SUBJECT: BRACHYTHERAPY OR RADIOACTIVE SEED IMPLANTATION FOR PROSTATE CANCER POLICY NUMBER: CATEGORY: Technology Assessment

CYBERKNIFE SBRT FOR THE TREATMENT OF PROSTATE CANCER: 5 VS. 44 FRACTIONS THE PHILADELPHIA CYBERKNIFE CENTER EXPERIENCE

Prostate Cancer. David Wilkinson MD Gulfshore Urology

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING TESTOSTERONE THERAPY IN MEN WITH PROSTATE CANCER

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY

Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Information Background

Prostatectomy as salvage therapy. Cases. Paul Cathcart - Guy s & St Thomas NHS Trust, London

Embracing Technology & Timing of Salvage Hormones

MEDICAL POLICY SUBJECT: BRACHYTHERAPY OR RADIOACTIVE SEED IMPLANTATION FOR PROSTATE CANCER

2018 OPTIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL MEASURES: REGISTRY ONLY. MEASURE TYPE: Process

Prostate Cancer Questions?

LDR prostate brachytherapy

Prostate Cancer Incidence

Effective Health Care Program

University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 2 FROS Radiation Oncology and CyberKnife Center, Flushing, NY, 3

National Prostate Cancer Audit. Bill Cross June 2015

Medical Policy. MP High-Dose Rate Temporary Prostate Brachytherapy

Overview. What is Cancer? Prostate Cancer 3/2/2014. Davis A Romney, MD Ironwood Cancer and Research Centers Feb 18, 2014

Economic Implications of Advancements in Radiation Technology. Dramatic Growth of RT Capacity in the US

Department of Urology, Cochin hospital Paris Descartes University

Transcription:

The PROSTATE CANCER FREE FOUNDATION was established in 2010 to help those interested in, and affected by prostate cancer through education and research. The Foundation is supported by YOU and the members of the Prostate Cancer Results Study Group, an international team of experts in the field of prostate cancer. Visit www.prostatecancerfree.org for more information.

PROBLEM Patients, physicians and providers need simple, unbiased data by which to compare the effectiveness of modern prostate cancer treatment methods. The most effective treatments are those in which the patient remains Prostate Cancer Free for their lifetime.

SOLUTION The Prostate Cancer Treatment Study Group has evaluated over 51,000 prostate articles published between 2000 and 2017 to compare treatment results and offer that comparison to doctors and patients so they may make better treatment decisions. +51,800 prostate articles were published between 2000 and Dec 2016 1,604 of those articles featured TREATMENT RESULTS 243 articles have met PCRSG criteria to be included in this review study Some treatment methods are under-represented due to failure to meet criteria.

The Study Group The purpose of this work is to review all of the current literature on prostate cancer treatment and provide results to patients and their physicians. Peter Grimm, DO Prostate Cancer Center of Seattle, Seattle, WA (Founder, deceased Feb. 20, 2016)

Ignace Billiet, MD F.E.B.U.-Urologist, AZ Groeninge Teaching Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium David Bostwick, MD Bostwick Laboratories, Orlando, FL Luis Campos-Pinheiro, MD Univ. of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal Brian Davis, MD Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN D. Jeffrey Demanes, MD UCLA Medical Center, Santa Monica, CA Adam Dicker, MD Thomas Jefferson U., Philadelphia, PA Steven Frank, MD MD Andersen, Houston, TX Gustavo Guimaraes, MD AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil R. Alex Hsi, MD Peninsula Cancer Center, Poulsbo, WA Jos Immerzeel, MD De Prostaat Kliniek, Netherlands Mira Keyes, MD BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver BC, Canada Patrick Kupelian, MD UCLA Med Center, Los Angeles, CA Steven Kurtzman, MD Western Radiation Oncology, San Francisco, CA Stephen Langley, MD St Luke's Cancer Centre, Guildford, England W. Robert Lee, MD Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC Stefan Machtens, MD Marien-Krankenhaus Hospital, Bergisch-Gladbach, Germany Alvaro Martinez, MD William Beaumont, Royal Oak, MI

Gregory Merrick, MD Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling, WV Jeremy Millar, MD Alfred Health Medical Center & Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Brian Moran, MD Chicago Prostate Institute, Chicago, IL Peter F. Orio, DO Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women s Cancer Centers, Boston, MA Antonio Cassio Pellizzon, MD Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil Bradley R. Prestidge, MD, MS Bon Secours Cancer Institute, Norfolk, VA Thomas Pugh, MD University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO Mack Roach, MD UC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Mark Scholz, MD Prostate Cancer Research Institute, Marina del Ray, CA Katsuto Shinohara, MD UC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Janusz Skowronek, MD Greater Poland Cancer Center, Poznań, Poland Richard Stock, MD Mt. Sinai, New York, NY Frank Sullivan, MD College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, NUI, Galway, Ireland Jehan Titus, MD Calvary Hospital, St Josephs Collage, Adelaide, Australia Robyn Vera, DO Radiant Oncology, Lacey, WA Edward Weber, MD Prostate Cancer Center of Seattle, Seattle, WA Michael Zelefsky, MD Memorial Sloan Kettering, New York, NY Anthony Zietman, MD Harvard Joint Center, Boston, MA

About This Review Study The indicator of being Prostate Cancer Free is a low PSA level which does not rise. SUCCESS: Five to ten years after treatment, a low PSA level indicates cancer is controlled and there is a high likelihood the cancer will not return. FAILURE A consistent rise in PSA after treatment is generally considered a failure, requiring additional treatment or action.

About This Review Study PSA expectations, post treatment, result in dissimilar ways to review a man s PSA history to judge success. Therefore, results greater than five years are necessary to be able to compare treatment results. SURGERY PSA numbers usually fall after surgery rapidly to very low numbers and stay low. RADIATION PSA numbers usually come down after radiation slower than surgery, and may increase briefly, then subsequently fall (this is called a PSA Bump. )

Abbreviations A range of treatment options are available to treat prostate cancer. They are abbreviated as the following. BRACHY Seed Implantation (Brachytherapy, either permanent or temporary seeds) HIFU High Intensity Focused Ultrasound EBRT External Beam Radiation Therapy (includes IMRT = Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy) RP SURGERY Standard Open Radical Prostatectomy CRYO Cryotherapy PROTONS form of External Radiation using Protons ADT Hormone Therapy ROBOTIC SURGERY Robotic Radical Prostatectomy

Article Review Process Every Prostate Cancer article written since 2000 is reviewed and determined for inclusion within the study on a biannual basis. First to decide if it is a treatment article and secondly if it meets the expert panel's study criteria. The results of the accepted treatment articles are plotted together according to each risk group s Prostate Cancer Free status (in the professional literature this is known as PSA Progression Free status, meaning no evidence of a rising PSA.) +51,800 prostate articles were published between 2000 and June 2016 243 Articles have met PCRSG criteria to be included in this review study. +114,000 Participants are represented in all study accepted articles.

Criteria for Inclusion of Article* Articles must be published in a Major Medical Journal. Patients should be separated into Low-, Intermediate-, and High-Risk Groups Success must be determined by PSA analysis All major treatment types considered: Seeds (Brachy), Surgery (Standard or Robotic), EBRT (including IMRT), HIFU (High Intensity Frequency Ultrasound), CRYO (Cryotherapy), Protons, HDR (High dose Rate Brachytherapy) Low-Risk articles a minimum of 100 patients Intermediate-Risk articles a minimum of 100 patients High-Risk articles, because of fewer patients, a minimum of 50 patients Patients need to be followed for a median of 5 years For additional criteria information contact: l.grimm@pctrf.org * Expert panel consensus

% Articles Meeting Criteria by Treatment RP Surgery EBRT/IMRT Cryo Brachy/HDR Robotic +48,700 prostate articles were published between 2000 and June 2016. Surgery Proton HIFU 1,502 of those articles featured treatment results. 9.7% 16% 6% 25.5% 4.7% 24% 11% 223 articles have met PCRSG criteria to be included in this review study. 43/443 73/458 3/49 108/423 5/106 5/21 6/54 Some treatment methods are under-represented due to failure to meet criteria. Total of 1,604* Treatment Articles. Some articles addressed several treatments and were counted as separate articles for each treatment. *Some articles evaluated other/minor treatments that are not listed here and are therefore not included in these calculations.

COMPARE TREATMENTS

How to Use the Results The Risk groups are defined by a combination of factors provided by the diagnosing physician and include the stage of the cancer, the Gleason Score, and PSA level. LOW RISK INTERMEDIATE RISK HIGH RISK Stage: T1 or T2a,b Stage: T1-2 Stage: T1 or T1-2 Stage: T2c or T3 Gleason Score: < 6 Gleason Score: 6 OR Gleason Score: 7 Gleason Score: > 8 PSA: < 10 ng/ml PSA: 10-20 PSA: > 10 PSA: > 20 ng/ml Review the treatment outcomes and then ask a doctor in each discipline (Seeds, External Radiation, Surgery, etc.) to tell you where his/her own peer reviewed published Treatment Success % would fit on this plot.

Abbreviations Here is a list of all the major primary treatment options available for prostate cancer. BRACHY Seed Implantation (Brachytherapy, either permanent or temporary seeds) HIFU High Intensity Focused Ultrasound EBRT External Beam Radiation Therapy (includes IMRT = Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy) RP SURGERY Standard Open Radical Prostatectomy CRYO Cryotherapy PROTONS form of External Radiation using Protons ADT Hormone Therapy ROBOTIC SURGERY Robotic Radical Prostatectomy

LOW RISK Stage: T1 or T2a,b l Gleason Score: < 6 l PSA: < 10 ng/ml More than 80% of all Low Risk patients will do well with any treatment without fear of recurrence or their cancer returning. However, when selecting a course of action, consultations are recommended with a urologist or surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist. Different treatments have different results and side effects. It is important to understand the potential impact each treatment can have on your quality of life after treatment.

Low Risk Results Each Symbol is a different article for that treatment assemble at ProstateCancerFree.org. Example A: A green square positioned at 5 years along the 97% line indicates that, 97% of the patients, treated with EBRT alone in low-risk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free. A B Example B: A blue circle positioned at 5 years along the 84% line indicates that, 84% of the patients, treated with brachytherapy seeds alone in low-risk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free.

Low Risk Results The colored ellipses outline the results of multiple articles in the same treatment. These ellipses demonstrate 2 things: 1. Dividing the ellipses in half will give you the average result of the treatment. 2. The direction of the ellipse will give you an idea of the long term success. A downward direction of the ellipse indicates that some patients are failing over time. Ideally, if a treatment reaches a point where no or few patients fail, the ellipse pattern will look like this. *Ellipses can only be drawn if there are 4 or more accepted studies within that treatment.

INTERMEDIATE RISK Stage: T1-2 l Gleason Score: 6 l PSA: 10-20 OR Stage: T1 or T1-2 l Gleason Score: 7 l PSA: > 10 Intermediate Risk patients experience a wider range of results and approaches due to the risk of disease beyond the prostate. When selecting a course of action, consultations are recommended with a urologist or surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist. Different treatments have different results and side effects. It is important to understand the potential impact each treatment can have on your quality of life after treatment.

Intermediate Risk Results Each Symbol is a different article for that treatment assemble at ProstateCancerFree.org. A Example A: A blue circle positioned at 5 years along the 97% line indicates that, 97% of the patients, treated with brachytherapy seeds alone in intermediate-risk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free. Example B: A red triangle positioned at 5 years along the 59% line indicates that, 59% of the patients, treated with RP Surgery in intermediaterisk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free. B

Intermediate Risk Results The colored ellipses outline the results of multiple articles in the same treatment. These ellipses demonstrate 2 things: 1. Dividing the ellipses in half will give you the average result of the treatment. 2. The direction of the ellipse will give you an idea of the long term success. A downward direction of the ellipse indicates that some patients are failing over time. Ideally, if a treatment reaches a point where no or few patients fail, the ellipse pattern will look like this. *Ellipses can only be drawn if there are 4 or more accepted studies within that treatment.

HIGH RISK Stage: T2c or T3 l Gleason Score: > 8 l PSA: > 20 ng/ml High Risk prostate cancer patients experience the highest range of results and approaches as they are likely to have prostate cancer outside of the prostate. When selecting a course of action, consultations are recommended with a urologist or surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist. Different treatments have different results and side effects. It is important to understand the potential impact each treatment can have on your quality of life after treatment.

High Risk Results Each Symbol is a different article for that treatment assemble at ProstateCancerFree.org. A Example A: A green diamond positioned at 5 years along the 98% line indicates that, 98% of the patients, treated with EBRTand ADT in highrisk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free. Example B: A red triangle positioned at 5 years along the 38% line indicates that, 38% of the patients, treated with RP Surgery in high-risk patients at 5 years were free of disease progression and were Prostate Cancer Free. B

High Risk Results The colored ellipses outline the results of multiple articles in the same treatment. These ellipses demonstrate 2 things: 1. Dividing the ellipses in half will give you the average result of the treatment. 2. The direction of the ellipse will give you an idea of the long term success. A downward direction of the ellipse indicates that some patients are failing over time. Ideally, if a treatment reaches a point where no or few patients fail, the ellipse pattern will look like this. *Ellipses can only be drawn if there are 4 or more accepted studies within that treatment.

Study Observations

Observations For most low-risk patients, most therapies will be successful*. Treatments at the top of the results comparison graphs for the long periods of years, indicate that patients treated with these methods did not experience an increase in PSA after treatment. These patients are more likely to remain Prostate Cancer Free. Patients are encouraged to look at graphs and determine for themselves. Serious side-effect rates must be considered for any treatment. For additional criteria information contact: l.grimm@prosatecancerfree.org * Expert panel consensus

Talk to your doctor about your treatment options.

Record your treatment journey with the help of the Patient Worksheet.

Find the latest updates to this study at ProstateCancerFree.org.