Publications by authors named "Eyad I Abu-Isa"

7 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Comparison of Multimodal Therapies and Outcomes Among Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Adverse Clinicopathologic Features.

JAMA Netw Open 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2115312. Epub 2021 Jul 1.

Department of Urology, Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.

Importance: The optimal management strategy for high-risk prostate cancer and additional adverse clinicopathologic features remains unknown.

Objective: To compare clinical outcomes among patients with high-risk prostate cancer after definitive treatment.

Design, Setting, And Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients with high-risk prostate cancer (as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network [NCCN]) and at least 1 adverse clinicopathologic feature (defined as any primary Gleason pattern 5 on biopsy, clinical T3b-4 disease, ≥50% cores with biopsy results positive for prostate cancer, or NCCN ≥2 high-risk features) treated between 2000 and 2014 at 16 tertiary centers. Data were analyzed in November 2020.

Exposures: Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (BT) with ADT. Guideline-concordant multimodal treatment was defined as RP with appropriate use of multimodal therapy (optimal RP), EBRT with at least 2 years of ADT (optimal EBRT), or EBRT with BT with at least 1 year ADT (optimal EBRT with BT).

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary outcome was prostate cancer-specific mortality; distant metastasis was a secondary outcome. Differences were evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weight-adjusted Fine-Gray competing risk regression models.

Results: A total of 6004 men (median [interquartile range] age, 66.4 [60.9-71.8] years) with high-risk prostate cancer were analyzed, including 3175 patients (52.9%) who underwent RP, 1830 patients (30.5%) who underwent EBRT alone, and 999 patients (16.6%) who underwent EBRT with BT. Compared with RP, treatment with EBRT with BT (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.78, [95% CI, 0.63-0.97]; P = .03) or with EBRT alone (sHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53-0.92]; P = .01) was associated with significantly improved prostate cancer-specific mortality; there was no difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality between EBRT with BT and EBRT alone (sHR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.67-1.18]; P = .43). No significant differences in prostate cancer-specific mortality were found across treatment cohorts among 2940 patients who received guideline-concordant multimodality treatment (eg, optimal EBRT alone vs optimal RP: sHR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.52-1.09]; P = .14). However, treatment with EBRT alone or EBRT with BT was consistently associated with lower rates of distant metastasis compared with treatment with RP (eg, EBRT vs RP: sHR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.44-0.58]; P < .001).

Conclusions And Relevance: These findings suggest that among patients with high-risk prostate cancer and additional unfavorable clinicopathologic features receiving guideline-concordant multimodal therapy, prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes were equivalent among those treated with RP, EBRT, and EBRT with BT, although distant metastasis outcomes were more favorable among patients treated with EBRT and EBRT with BT. Optimal multimodality treatment is critical for improving outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.15312DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251338PMC
July 2021

Patterns of Clinical Progression in Radiorecurrent High-risk Prostate Cancer.

Eur Urol 2021 Aug 10;80(2):142-146. Epub 2021 May 10.

Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

The natural history of radiorecurrent high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) is not well-described. To better understand its clinical course, we evaluated rates of distant metastases (DM) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in a cohort of 978 men with radiorecurrent HRPCa who previously received either external beam radiation therapy (EBRT, n = 654, 67%) or EBRT + brachytherapy (EBRT + BT, n = 324, 33%) across 15 institutions from 1997 to 2015. In men who did not die, median follow-up after treatment was 8.9 yr and median follow-up after biochemical recurrence (BCR) was 3.7 yr. Local and systemic therapy salvage, respectively, were delivered to 21 and 390 men after EBRT, and eight and 103 men after EBRT + BT. Overall, 435 men developed DM, and 248 were detected within 1 yr of BCR. Measured from time of recurrence, 5-yr DM rates were 50% and 34% after EBRT and EBRT + BT, respectively. Measured from BCR, 5-yr PCSM rates were 27% and 29%, respectively. Interval to BCR was independently associated with DM (p < 0.001) and PCSM (p < 0.001). These data suggest that radiorecurrent HRPCa has an aggressive natural history and that DM is clinically evident early after BCR. These findings underscore the importance of further investigations into upfront risk assessment and prompt systemic evaluation upon recurrence in HRPCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: High-risk prostate cancer that recurs after radiation therapy is an aggressive disease entity and spreads to other parts of the body (metastases). Some 60% of metastases occur within 1 yr. Approximately 30% of these patients die from their prostate cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.04.035DOI Listing
August 2021

The Role of Facility Variation on Racial Disparities in Use of Hypofractionated Whole Breast Radiation Therapy.

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020 08 4;107(5):949-958. Epub 2020 May 4.

Rogel Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address:

Purpose: Hypofractionated radiation therapy is a less burdensome and less costly approach that is efficacious for most patients with early-stage breast cancer. Concerns about racial disparities in adoption of medical advances motivate investigation of the use of hypofractionated radiation in diverse populations. The goal of our study was to determine whether hypofractionated whole breast radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery was being similarly used across racial groups in the state of Michigan.

Methods And Materials: A prospectively collected statewide quality consortium database from 25 institutions was queried for patients with breast cancer who completed hypofractionated (HF) or conventionally fractionated whole breast radiation therapy from January 2012 to December 2018. We used patient-level multivariable modeling to evaluate associations between HF use and race, controlling for patient and facility factors, and multilevel modeling to account for patient clustering within facilities.

Results: Of 9634 patients analyzed, 81% self-reported race as white, 17% as black, and 2% as Asian, similar to statewide and national distributions. In addition, 31.7% of whites were treated at teaching centers compared with 66.7% of blacks and 64.8% of Asians. In 2018, HF was used in 72.7% of whites versus 56.7% of blacks and 67.6% of Asians (P = .0411). On patient-level multivariable analysis, black and Asian races were significantly associated with a lower likelihood of HF receipt (P < .001), despite accounting for treatment year, age, laterality, body mass index, breast volume, comorbidities, stage, triple-negative status, intensity modulated radiation therapy use, teaching center treatment, and 2011 American Society for Radiation Oncology Hypofractionation Guideline eligibility. On multilevel analysis, race was no longer significantly associated with HF receipt.

Conclusions: We observed that black and Asian patients receive hypofractionated whole breast radiation therapy less often than whites, despite more frequent treatment at teaching centers. Multilevel modeling eliminated this disparity, suggesting that differences in facility-specific HF use appear to have contributed. Further inquiry is needed to determine whether reduction of facility-level variation may reduce disparities in accessing HF treatment.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.04.035DOI Listing
August 2020

Prostate-only Versus Whole-pelvis Radiation with or Without a Brachytherapy Boost for Gleason Grade Group 5 Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.

Eur Urol 2020 01 13;77(1):3-10. Epub 2019 Apr 13.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Background: The role of elective whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) remains controversial. Few studies have investigated it in Gleason grade group (GG) 5 prostate cancer (PCa), known to have a high risk of nodal metastases.

Objective: To assess the impact of WPRT on patients with GG 5 PCa treated with external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or EBRT with a brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT).

Design, Setting, And Participants: We identified 1170 patients with biopsy-proven GG 5 PCa from 11 centers in the United States and one in Norway treated between 2000 and 2013 (734 with EBRT and 436 with EBRT+BT).

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were compared using Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score adjustment.

Results And Limitations: A total of 299 EBRT patients (41%) and 320 EBRT+BT patients (73%) received WPRT. The adjusted 5-yr bRFS rates with WPRT in the EBRT and EBRT+BT groups were 66% and 88%, respectively. Without WPRT, these rates for the EBRT and EBRT+BT groups were 58% and 78%, respectively. The median follow-up was 5.6yr. WPRT was associated with improved bRFS among patients treated with EBRT+BT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.9, p=0.02), but no evidence for improvement was found in those treated with EBRT (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.2, p=0.4). WPRT was not significantly associated with improved DMFS or PCSS in the EBRT group (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7-1.7, p=0.8 for DMFS and HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p=0.1 for PCSS), or in the EBRT+BT group (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.4, p=0.2 for DMFS and HR 0.5 95% CI 0.2-1.2, p=0.1 for PCSS).

Conclusions: WPRT was not associated with improved PCSS or DMFS in patients with GG 5 PCa who received either EBRT or EBRT+BT. However, WPRT was associated with a significant improvement in bRFS among patients receiving EBRT+BT. Strategies to optimize WPRT, potentially with the use of advanced imaging techniques to identify occult nodal disease, are warranted.

Patient Summary: When men with a high Gleason grade prostate cancer receive radiation with external radiation and brachytherapy, the addition of radiation to the pelvis results in a longer duration of prostate-specific antigen control. However, we did not find a difference in their survival from prostate cancer or in their survival without metastatic disease. We also did not find a benefit for radiation to the pelvis in men who received radiation without brachytherapy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.03.022DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521828PMC
January 2020

Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Gleason Score 10 Prostate Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Multi-institutional Consortium Study.

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018 07 5;101(4):883-888. Epub 2018 Apr 5.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California.

Purpose: Gleason score (GS) 10 disease is the most aggressive form of clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa). The long-term clinical outcomes and overall prognosis of patients presenting with GS 10 PCa are largely unknown because of its rarity.

Methods And Materials: The study included 112 patients with biopsy-determined GS 10 PCa who received treatment with radical prostatectomy (RP, n = 26), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT, n = 48), or EBRT with a brachytherapy boost (EBRT-BT, n = 38) between 2000 and 2013. Propensity scores were included as covariates for comparative analysis. Overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method with inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for confounding.

Results: The median follow-up period was 4.9 years overall (3.9 years for RP, 4.8 years for EBRT, and 5.7 years for EBRT-BT). Significantly more EBRT patients than EBRT-BT patients received upfront androgen deprivation therapy (98% vs 79%, P < .01 by χ test), though the durations were similar (median, 24 months vs 22.5 months). Of the RP patients, 34% received postoperative EBRT, and 35% received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. The propensity score-adjusted 5-year overall survival rate was 80% for the RP group, 73% for the EBRT group, and 83% for the EBRT-BT group. The corresponding adjusted 5-year prostate cancer-specific survival rates were 87%, 75%, and 94%, respectively. The EBRT-BT group trended toward superior DMFS when compared with the RP group (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% confidence interval 0.1-1.06; P = .06) and had superior DMFS when compared with the EBRT group (hazard ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval 0.1-0.99; P = .048).

Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest series ever reported on the clinical outcomes of patients with biopsy-determined GS 10 PCa. These data provide useful prognostic benchmark information for physicians and patients. Aggressive therapy with curative intent is warranted, as >50% of patients remain free of systemic disease 5 years after treatment.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.03.060DOI Listing
July 2018

Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, or External Beam Radiotherapy With Brachytherapy Boost and Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients With Gleason Score 9-10 Prostate Cancer.

JAMA 2018 03;319(9):896-905

Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Importance: The optimal treatment for Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer is unknown.

Objective: To compare clinical outcomes of patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer after definitive treatment.

Design, Setting, And Participants: Retrospective cohort study in 12 tertiary centers (11 in the United States, 1 in Norway), with 1809 patients treated between 2000 and 2013.

Exposures: Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy, or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT) with androgen deprivation therapy.

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary outcome was prostate cancer-specific mortality; distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival were secondary outcomes.

Results: Of 1809 men, 639 underwent RP, 734 EBRT, and 436 EBRT+BT. Median ages were 61, 67.7, and 67.5 years; median follow-up was 4.2, 5.1, and 6.3 years, respectively. By 10 years, 91 RP, 186 EBRT, and 90 EBRT+BT patients had died. Adjusted 5-year prostate cancer-specific mortality rates were RP, 12% (95% CI, 8%-17%); EBRT, 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%); and EBRT+BT, 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%). EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower prostate cancer-specific mortality than either RP or EBRT (cause-specific HRs of 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21-0.68] and 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]). Adjusted 5-year incidence rates of distant metastasis were RP, 24% (95% CI, 19%-30%); EBRT, 24% (95% CI, 20%-28%); and EBRT+BT, 8% (95% CI, 5%-11%). EBRT+BT was associated with a significantly lower rate of distant metastasis (propensity-score-adjusted cause-specific HRs of 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17-0.43] for RP and 0.30 [95% CI, 0.19-0.47] for EBRT). Adjusted 7.5-year all-cause mortality rates were RP, 17% (95% CI, 11%-23%); EBRT, 18% (95% CI, 14%-24%); and EBRT+BT, 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%). Within the first 7.5 years of follow-up, EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (cause-specific HRs of 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96] for RP and 0.61 [95% CI, 0.45-0.84] for EBRT). After the first 7.5 years, the corresponding HRs were 1.16 (95% CI, 0.70-1.92) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.57-1.32). No significant differences in prostate cancer-specific mortality, distant metastasis, or all-cause mortality (≤7.5 and >7.5 years) were found between men treated with EBRT or RP (cause-specific HRs of 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.26], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.14], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.80-1.44], and 1.34 [95% CI, 0.85-2.11]).

Conclusions And Relevance: Among patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer, treatment with EBRT+BT with androgen deprivation therapy was associated with significantly better prostate cancer-specific mortality and longer time to distant metastasis compared with EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy or with RP.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.0587DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5885899PMC
March 2018

Combination therapy improves prostate cancer survival for patients with potentially lethal prostate cancer: The impact of Gleason pattern 5.

Brachytherapy 2015 Jul-Aug;14(4):502-10. Epub 2015 Apr 22.

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Electronic address:

Purpose: To investigate the impact of Gleason pattern 5 (GP5) prostate cancer after either external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or the combination of EBRT with low-dose rate brachytherapy boost (combo).

Methods And Materials: Between 1998 and 2008, 467 patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk prostate cancer were treated with EBRT (n = 326) or combo (low-dose rate to 90-108 Gy using I-125 followed by EBRT) (n = 141). Freedom from biochemical failure, freedom from metastasis (FFM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival were evaluated.

Results: Combo patients were younger (66 vs. 72 years, p < 0.001) and had fewer comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index 3.7 vs. 4.4, p < 0.001). EBRT patients had higher tumor stages (T3-4: 30% vs. 21%, p = 0.03) and lower Gleason scores (8-10: 61% vs. 75%, p = 0.01). Androgen deprivation therapy use was similar between cohorts (85% vs. 87%, p = 0.5), but EBRT patients had longer androgen deprivation therapy use (median 14 vs. 12 months, p = 0.05). GP5 predicted worse FFM (p < 0.001, hazard ratio [HR] 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.8-6.2]) and CSS (p < 0.001, HR 5.9, 95% CI 2.7-12.9) for the EBRT group, but not for the combo group (p = 0.86, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.1-2.4 for metastasis and p = 0.5, HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.33-8.0 for CSS). In those with GP5 (n = 143), combo was associated with improved outcomes in all endpoints. On univariate analysis, 5-year outcomes for combo vs. EBRT were as follows: freedom from biochemical failure 89% vs. 65%, FFM 89% vs. 67%, CSS 93% vs. 78%, and overall survival 88% vs. 67% (p < 0.05 for all).

Conclusion: Combo was associated with improved outcomes for men with GP5 prostate cancer. This highlights the importance of local therapy, especially in patients with the highest pathologic grade disease.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2015.02.389DOI Listing
January 2016
-->