SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • prostate cancer;
  • radiation therapy;
  • androgen suppression therapy;
  • comorbidity;
  • prostate-specific antigen

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES

BACKGROUND

Optimal management remains unknown following prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure when considering comorbidity and PSA kinetics at recurrence. In order to define randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that can address this issue, this study examined factors associated with the risk of death following PSA failure.

METHODS

Of 206 men randomized to RT with or without 6 months of androgen suppression therapy (AST), 108 sustained PSA failure and began AST when PSA approached 10 ng/mL and formed the study cohort. Cox regression multivariable analysis was used to determine factors associated with death following PSA failure.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 10.3 years of 108 men with PSA failure, 64 (59%) died, with 22 (34%) dying of prostate cancer (PC). Increasing PSA velocity at recurrence was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.45; P = .03). Among men with no/minimal versus moderate/severe comorbidity, PC comprised 42% (20 of 48) versus 12.5% (2 of 16) of all deaths, respectively. Estimates of PC-specific and all-cause death were significantly higher when PSA velocity was greater than as compared with the median or less in men with no/minimal (P < .008) but not moderate/severe comorbidity (P > .15).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite unfavorable PSA kinetics at recurrence, unhealthy men may not benefit from AST; RCTs examining intermittent AST versus surveillance are needed. For healthy men with unfavorable PSA kinetics at recurrence, PC death rates are high despite AST, which warrants RCTs to evaluate the impact on death when adding agents that prolong survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant PC to AST. Cancer 2013;119:3280–6. © 2013 American Cancer Society.


INTRODUCTION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES

Men who have prostate cancer (PC) with unfavorable (intermediate- or high-risk) risk[1] can experience prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after definitive radiation therapy (RT) despite the addition of androgen suppression therapy (AST).[2, 3] Management of these recurrences generally involves AST if the PSA doubling time (DT) is short, suggesting systemic recurrence, or salvage local therapy or surveillance depending on comorbidity when the PSA DT is long, suggesting a local recurrence.[4] However, management in this setting is not standardized due to the lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these commonly used treatments to surveillance alone.

Given this uncertainty and the known adverse side effects related to AST,[5-8] some physicians have reservations about recommending AST to all men in this setting, particularly those with cardiac comorbidity. Specifically, studies suggest that among men with comorbidities, AST use may be associated with an increased risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events.[7-9] Therefore, there is a need to appropriately select patients for salvage AST based on comorbidity status and known adverse PC prognostic factors which include a short time to PSA recurrence, Gleason score of 8 to 10, and short PSA DT or rapid PSA velocity.[10, 11]

In 2009, it was shown that a rapid PSA velocity at post-RT PSA recurrence was associated with a significant increase in the risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) among men with no or minimal comorbidity (P < .001) using the 27-item Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 (ACE-27) metric.[12] However, among men with moderate to severe comorbidity, this risk was increased and approached but did not reach significance (P = .12).[6] Moreover, following PSA failure, intermittent AST has been recently shown to be noninferior to continuous AST[13] with respect to survival, raising the question of whether intermittent AST or surveillance is best in these men. Therefore, the optimal management of PSA failure following RT with or without AST remains unknown when considering comorbidity and PSA kinetics at recurrence. To define RCTs to address this issue, in this study, we examine factors associated with the risk of death following PSA failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES

Patient Eligibility and Treatment

Between December 1, 1995, and April 15, 2001, 206 patients were randomly assigned (ClinicalTrials.org identifier NCT00116220) to receive either 70 Gy by 3-dimensional conformal RT alone (n = 104) or in conjunction with 6 months of AST (n = 102), and as of November 20, 2012, 108 men sustained PSA failure and are subject of the current study. These patients were from 6 Harvard-affiliated hospitals and had been diagnosed with T1b to T2b, NX, M0 adenocarcinomas of the prostate (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] Staging Manual)[14] with at least 1 unfavorable prognostic factor. Unfavorable prognostic factors included PSA of more than 10 ng/mL and ≤ 40 ng/mL; a biopsy Gleason score of 7 or higher; radiographic evidence of extracapsular extension; or seminal vesicle invasion on endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging. AST included a luteinizing hormone–releasing hormone agonist and the anti-androgen flutamide. The exclusion criteria, registration, randomization, stratification, treatment, and quality assurance guidelines for this study have been described.[1]

Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27

The ACE-27 score is a validated 27-item comorbidity index for patients with cancer.[12] The senior author (A.V.D.) assigned an ACE-27 comorbidity score to each patient after detailed review of the patients' baseline medical conditions and comorbidities. The decision to use the ACE-27 index was based on its validation of comorbidities, specifically in the setting of newly diagnosed cancer and the selection of clinically significant comorbidities by experts.[15-17] By using the ACE-27 index, grades were assigned to diseases according to the degree of organ system decompensation and its prognostic impact (grade 0 = none, grade 1 = minimal, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe). Once an individual grade was given, an overall comorbidity score was assigned based on the highest ranked single ailment. If at least 2 moderate ailments were present in different organ systems, the overall comorbidity score was designated as severe. Additional information on the ACE-27 index can be found at http://oto.wustl.edu/clinepi/calc.html.

Follow-Up

Patient follow-up consisted of measuring a serum PSA level and performing a digital rectal examination every 3 months for the first 2 years, every 6 months for the next 3 years, and then annually subsequently. PSA failure was defined as 2 consecutive PSA value rises of more than 0.2 ng/mL obtained after a nadir value had been reached, which was the prior ASTRO (American Society for Radiation Oncology) consensus definition of PSA failure at the time this phase 3 RCT was initiated.[18] The time of PSA failure was defined as the time of the initial PSA rise. At time of PSA failure, patients had a routine follow-up assessment, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis, and a bone scan for evaluation of metastatic disease. Recommendations regarding PSA measurements and follow-up for patients with PSA failure were left to the discretion of the treating physician. Salvage AST was recommended for patients with PSA levels of approximately 10 ng/mL in both treatment arms. Patients were followed from the date of random assignment until death or last observation through the prespecified analysis date of November 20, 2012.

Description of Study Cohort at PSA Failure Stratified by ACE-27 Comorbidity Level

Descriptive statistics were used to demonstrate patient characteristics at PSA recurrence. Chi-square analysis was performed to compare the distributions of categorical covariates among men with ACE-27 comorbidity scores 2 and 3 (moderate or severe) versus ACE-27 comorbidity scores 0 and 1 (no or minimal). Fisher's exact test was used to analyze the distributions of categorical covariates in the case of a small sample size.[19] The nonparametric Wilcoxon test was performed to compare the continuous covariates of the median PSA velocity and age at PSA failure and distribution of median PSA level at the time of initial treatment stratified by the ACE-27 comorbidity score.[20] Table 1 summarizes these comparisons.

Table 1. Comparison of the Distribution of Patient and Treatment Factors for the 108 Men in the Study Cohort Observed to Experience PSA Failure Stratified by the Degree of Comorbidity Using the ACE-27 Metric
FactorNo or Minimal Comorbidity (N = 85)Moderate to Severe Comorbidity (N = 23)P
No. of Patients%No. of Patients%
  1. Abbreviations: ACE-27, Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27; AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; AST, androgen suppression therapy; IQR, interquartile range; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; RT, radiation therapy.

  2. a

    Fisher exact P value.

Age at PSA failure, y
Median75.6274.95.91
IQR(70.86, 79.62)(70.11,80.84) 
≤701821.2%521.7%.60a
71–751821.2%730.4% 
76–803035.3%521.7%
>801922.3%626.1%
PSA at initial treatment, ng/mL
Median12.2012.12.62
IQR(8.4, 17.79)(7.9, 19.18)
Gleason score    .01a
5–61922.4%521.7%
75362.4%934.8%
8–101315.3%1043.5%
1992 AJCC tumor category
T1b11.2%14.4%.61a
T1c3338.8%834.8%
T2a1922.4%417.4%
T2b3237.7%1043.4%
Interval to PSA failure, y
Median3.723.66.84
IQR(1.84, 5.49)(2.66, 4.76)
PSA velocity, ng/mL/y
Median0.650.63.63
IQR(0.25, 1.22)(0.36, 0.97)
AST use for PSA failure4350.6%1147.8%.82

Calculation of PSA Velocity

To ensure a normal distribution, PSA levels were log-transformed. PSA velocity at recurrence was defined as the value of PSA velocity obtained using a linear regression[21, 22] of all PSA values after the completion treatment and prior to the time of PSA failure.

Time to ACM Analyses

Cox regression multivariable analysis was used to determine whether PSA velocity at recurrence was associated with the risk of death, adjusting for initial and salvage treatment, ACE-27 comorbidity score,[23] pretreatment PSA level, Gleason score, tumor category, and age at and interval to PSA recurrence. Table 2 illustrates these results. Age, PSA velocity, and interval to PSA failure at PSA recurrence in addition to PSA level at initial treatment were treated as continuous variables. Gleason score (Gleason 7 versus Gleason 6 or less, Gleason 8 to 10 versus Gleason 6 or less), AJCC tumor category (T2 versus T1), treatment arm (RT alone versus RT and AST), and comorbidity ACE-27 score (moderate/severe versus no/minimal) were treated as categorical variables using established clinical cut-points. A significant interaction between comorbidity score and treatment arm was identified in a prior secondary analysis of these patients[24]; thus, an interaction term was included in the multivariable model. To adjust for the use of AST delivered for PSA failure, a time-dependent covariate AST2 was included in the model. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) were calculated for all covariates using the Cox proportional hazards model with associated 95% confidence interval (CI) and 2-sided P values.

Table 2. Unadjusted and Adjusted Hazard Ratios for All-Cause Mortality for Patient and Treatment Factors Following PSA Failure
Clinical FactorNo. of MenNo. of EventsUnadjusted HR (95% CI)PAdjusted HR (95% CI)P
  1. Abbreviations: ACE-27, Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27; AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; AST, androgen suppression therapy; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; ref, reference; RT, radiation therapy.

  2. a

    No salvage AST (N = 25); salvage AST (N = 39).

Age, y (at PSA failure, continuous)108641.08 (1.03, 1.14).0011.06 (1.01, 1.12).03
Treatment arm
RT and AST33201(ref)1 (ref)
RT alone75441.37 (0.71, 2.64).341.94 (0.85, 4.44).12
Log PSA, ng/mL108640.91 (0.61, 1.36).661.49 (0.99, 2.25).06
Gleason score
≤ 62471 (ref)1 (ref)
761393.02 (1.35, 6.76).0073.53 (1.51, 8.26).004
8–1023184.12 (1.72, 9.88).0024.51 (1.79, 11.38).001
1992 AJCC Tumor category
T143231(ref)1 (ref)
T265411.11 (0.67, 1.85).691.41 (0.79, 2.52).24
ACE-27 comorbidity score
No or minimal85481 (ref)1 (ref)
Moderate to severe23167.19 (2.82, 10.3)<.00117.71 (5.58, 56.2)<.001
Treatment arm × comorbiditya108640.13 (0.04, 0.44).0010.05 (0.01, 0.21)<.001
PSA velocity in ng/mL/y, continuous108641.21 (1.06, 1.38).0051.21 (1.02, 1.45).03
Interval to PSA failure in years, continuous108641.01 (0.998, 1.02).111.02 (1.004, 1.03).009
Time-dependent salvage AST10864a1.47 (0.88, 2.46).141.22 (0.68, 2.22).50

Estimates of PCSM and ACM

For the purpose of illustration, the impact of PSA velocity on estimates of prostate cancer–specific mortality (PCSM) and ACM for each comorbidity subgroup (no/minimal versus moderate/severe) is displayed in Figures 1 through 4. PCSM and ACM were calculated from the date of PSA failure. The cumulative incidence method and the Kaplan-Meier method[25] were used to estimate PCSM and ACM, respectively. ACM (%) was defined as 1 minus overall survival (%). The threshold for statistical significance was a 2-sided P value < .05. In estimating ACM stratified by PSA velocity among men stratified by comorbidity levels, a Bonferroni correction was used to adjust for multiple comparisons, and thus, a 2-sided P value < .025 was deemed statistically significant for this analysis.[22] SAS version 9.3 was used for all statistical analyses (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) except for the cumulative incidence analysis, which was performed using R version 2.15.2 9 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

RESULTS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES

Description of Study Cohort at PSA Failure Stratified by ACE-27 Comorbidity Level

As of November 11, 2012, 108 (52%) of 206 men entered on the randomized trial of RT with or without 6 months of AST developed PSA failure, including 85 (79%) men with no or minimal comorbidity and 23 (21%) men with moderate or severe comorbidity. Compared with men who had no or minimal comorbidity, men who had moderate or severe comorbidity were more likely to have PC with Gleason score 8 to 10 and less likely to have PC with Gleason score 7 (P = .01) (Table 1). The rest of the comparisons of the distribution of age at PSA failure (median of 75.62 years versus 74.95 years; P = .91), PSA at initial treatment (median of 12.20 ng/mL versus 12.12 ng/mL; P = .62), AJCC tumor category (P = .61), interval to PSA failure (median of 3.72 years versus 3.66 years; P = .84), PSA velocity (median of 0.65 versus 0.63; P = .63), and AST use for PSA failure (50.6% versus 47.8%; P = .82) were not significantly different in men with no or minimal comorbidity as compared to men with moderate or severe comorbidity.

Time to ACM Analyses

After a median follow-up of 10.3 years (interquartile range = 8.0-11.9), of the 108 men who experienced PSA failure, 64 (59%) men died, 22 (34%) of PC. Increasing PSA velocity at recurrence was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death (AHR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.02-1.45; P = .03) (Table 2). Other clinical factors that were associated with a significantly increased risk of death include Gleason score of 8 to 10 (AHR = 4.51; 95% CI = 1.79-11.38; P = .001) and Gleason score of 7 (AHR = 3.53; 95% CI = 1.51-8.26; P = .004) as compared to Gleason score of 6 or less. In addition, increasing age at the time of PSA recurrence was also associated with increased risk of death (AHR = 1.06; 95% CI = 1.01-1.12; P = .03) as was an increasing interval to PSA failure (AHR = 1.02; 95% CI = 1.004-1.03; P = .009). As demonstrated in earlier studies, there was a significant interaction between initial treatment arm (RT versus RT and 6 months of AST) and comorbidity level (P < .001). Moreover, within the interaction model, men who underwent RT and AST had a significantly increased risk of death if they had moderate/severe versus no/minimal comorbidity (AHR = 17.71; 95% CI = 5.58-56.2; P < .001).

Estimates of PCSM and ACM

Among men with no or minimal versus moderate to severe comorbidity, PC comprised 42% (20 of 48) versus 12.5% (2 of 16) of all deaths, respectively. Estimates of both PCSM and ACM were significantly higher in men whose PSA velocity was greater than the median or less in men with no or minimal (P ≤ .008; Figs. 1 and 2, respectively) but not moderate or severe comorbidity (P ≥ .15; Figs. 3 and 4, respectively).

image

Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival or all-cause mortality following prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure are shown, stratified about the median value of PSA velocity at recurrence for men with no or minimal comorbidity (P = .008).

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 2. Cumulative incidence estimates of prostate cancer–specific mortality following prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure are shown, stratified about the median value of PSA velocity at recurrence for men with no or minimal comorbidity (P < .001).

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival or all-cause mortality following prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure are shown, stratified about the median value of PSA velocity at recurrence for men with moderate to severe comorbidity (P = .91).

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 4. Cumulative incidence estimates of prostate cancer–specific mortality following prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure are shown, stratified about the median value of PSA velocity at recurrence for men with moderate to severe comorbidity (P = .15).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Specifically, for men with no or minimal comorbidity, the 5-year estimates of PCSM and ACM were 26.8% (14.33, 41.03) versus 0% (0, 0) and 39.0% (26.03, 55.58) versus 25.0% (13.82, 42.74), respectively, in men whose PSA velocity was greater than the median as compared to the median or less. These respective estimates were 18.2% (2.31, 46.24) versus 0% (0, 0) and 54.5% (29.31, 83.34) versus 54.5% (29.31, 83.34) in men with moderate or severe comorbidity.

DISCUSSION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES

In this study, we found that men with moderate or severe comorbidity did not have significantly higher estimates of PCSM or ACM following PSA failure, despite having a rapid as compared with a slow increase in their PSA level during the year prior to PSA failure. Conversely, men with no or minimal comorbidity had significantly higher estimates of both PCSM and ACM following PSA failure when their PSA rise leading to PSA failure was rapid as compared with slow. Therefore, the increase in ACM among men in otherwise good health can be explained by the marked increase in estimates of PCSM among men with a rapid as compared to a slow increase in PSA (Fig. 2). The clinical significance of these findings is 2-fold. First, given the recent RCT[13] finding that intermittent AST was noninferior to continuous AST for men who experienced PSA failure following RT, one could justify the next RCT comparing the impact of intermittent AST as compared to surveillance in men with moderate or severe comorbidity with a prerandomization stratification for rapid versus a slow rise in PSA. It remains unclear whether any AST is beneficial in men with moderate to severe comorbidity, particularly those with a slow rise in their PSA, and therefore such a trial would be justified. Second, given the survival benefit observed in men undergoing either abiraterone[26] or enzalutamide[27] therapy for castration-resistant metastatic PC and the high death rate from PC in men with no or minimal comorbidity and a rapid PSA rise despite continuous AST, one could consider a randomized trial in which these men could be randomized to conventional continuous AST with or without abiraterone and/or enzalutamide.

Several points require further discussion. First, the analyses performed in this study were not prespecified and therefore are hypothesis-generating and require prospective validation. Second, men with no or minimal comorbidity were less likely to have PC with Gleason score of 8 to 10 compared to men who had moderate to severe comorbidity, as shown in Table 1, which likely reflects the practice by primary care physicians to obtain PSA for screening more often in men who are otherwise in good health as compared with those in poor health, allowing healthy men to be diagnosed earlier and therefore with lower grade disease as shown with PSA use in the PSA screening studies.[23-30] Third, a longer interval to PSA failure was associated with an increased risk of death (Table 2). Given that increased time to PSA failure is a favorable prognostic factor,[10] one would not expect this to be due to PC deaths but competing risks. Specifically, among men with a longer interval to PSA failure (ie, > 3 years) versus a shorter interval (ie, 3 years or less, a clinically accepted cut-point) more deaths occurred (36 and 28, respectively). However, the proportion of these deaths due to PC were 5 of 36 (13.9%) patients versus 17 of 28 (60.7%) patients, respectively, indicating that most men with the longer interval to PSA failure died from causes other than PC. Fourth, men in this study received salvage AST at a PSA level of approximately 10 ng/mL, as per protocol guidelines. Whether the results of our study would have differed if salvage AST was administered at a lower PSA level or administered at the time of PSA failure requires further study. It is conceivable that earlier administration of salvage AST in men in good health may have led to lower death rate from PC; however, the significant difference in the estimates of PCSM when stratified by the median value of the PSA velocity would likely remain. Fifth, the use of salvage AST when examined as a time-dependent covariate was not significantly associated with an increased risk of death, as noted in the earlier analysis of this data.[9] This may be explained by limited power in that of the 108 men who experienced PSA failure, 54 (50%) received salvage AST and of these 54 men, 39 died (Table 2) representing only 39 of the 64 (61%) of all observed deaths in the current study. Finally, given the advanced median age of men at PSA failure being approximately 75 and the significant toxicities associated with salvage local therapy for PSA failure, only three men with a slowly rising PSA were medically able to undergo salvage local therapy following PSA failure. In conclusion, despite unfavorable PSA kinetics at recurrence, men with moderate to severe comorbidity may not benefit from AST. RCTs examining the impact on death following intermittent AST versus surveillance are needed in these men. For men in good health and unfavorable PSA kinetics at recurrence, PC death rates are high despite continuous AST, which warrants RCTs to evaluate the impact on death of adding agents that prolong survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant PC to AST.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. FUNDING SOURCES
  8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE
  9. REFERENCES
  • 1
    D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969974.
  • 2
    D'Amico AV, Manola J, Loffredo M, et al. 6-Month androgen suppression plus radiation therapy vs radiation therapy alone for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:821827.
  • 3
    Bolla M, de Reijke TM, Van Tienhoven G, et al. Duration of androgen suppression in the treatment of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:25162527.
  • 4
    Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, et al. Death in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: prostate-specific antigen doubling time subgroups and their associated contributions to all-cause mortality. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:17651771.
  • 5
    Shahinian VB, Kuo YF, Freeman JL, et al. Risk of fracture after androgen deprivation for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:154164.
  • 6
    Braga-Basaria M, Dobs AS, Muller DC, et al. Metabolic syndrome in men with prostate cancer undergoing long-term androgen-deprivation therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:39793983.
  • 7
    D'Amico AV, Denham, JW, Crook J, et al. Influence of androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer on frequency and timing of fatal myocardial infarction. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:24202425.
  • 8
    Keating NL, O'Malley AJ, Smith MR. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:44484456.
  • 9
    Wo JY, Chen MH, Nguyen PL, et al. Evaluating the combined effect of comorbidity and prostate-specific antigen kinetics on the risk of death in men after prostate-specific antigen recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:60006005.
  • 10
    Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2005;294:433439.
  • 11
    Zhou P, Chen MH, McLeod D, et al. Predictors of prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:69926998.
  • 12
    Piccirillo JF, Tierney RM, Costas I, et al. Prognostic importance of comorbidity in a hospital-based cancer registry. JAMA. 2004;291:24412447.
  • 13
    Crook JM, O'Callaghan CJ, Duncan G, et al. Intermittent androgen suppression for rising PSA after radiotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:895903.
  • 14
    Beahrs OH, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Kennedy BJ. American Joint Committee on Cancer: Manual for Staging of Cancer. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott; 1992.
  • 15
    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373383.
  • 16
    Keyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:613619.
  • 17
    Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:827.
  • 18
    American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel. Consensus statement: guidelines for PSA following radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:10351041.
  • 19
    Agresti A. Inference for contingency tables. In: Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2002:70114.
  • 20
    Hollander M, Wolfe DA. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1999:106–140.
  • 21
    Kutner MH, Nachtshein CJ, Neter J, et al. Chapter 1: Linear regression with one predictor variable, in Applied Linear Regression Models (McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, NY), edition 5, pp 239, 2005.
  • 22
    Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Neter J, et al. Chapter 17: Analysis of factor level means–Section 17.5 Bonferroni multiple comparison procedure. In: Applied Linear Regression Models. 5th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin; 2005:756759.
  • 23
    Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Chapter 9: Refinements of the semiparametric proportional hazards model. In: Survival Analysis: Technique for Censored and Truncated Data. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2003:295328.
  • 24
    D'Amico AV, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, Loffredo M, Kantoff PW. Androgen suppression and radiation vs radiation alone for prostate cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;299:289295.
  • 25
    Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457500.
  • 26
    de Bono JS, Logothetis CJ, Molina A, et al; COU-AA-301 Investigators. Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;465:19952005.
  • 27
    Scher HI, Fizazi K, Saad F, et al; AFFIRM Investigators. Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:11871197.
  • 28
    Pinsky PF, Miller A, Kramer BS, et al. Evidence of a healthy volunteer effect in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165:874881.
  • 29
    Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, et al;PLCO Project Team. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:125132.
  • 30
    Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al; ERSPC Investigators. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:981990.