European Urology Open Science (Mar 2024)

Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Nomogram Predicting the Outcome of Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy in Patients without Metastases on Restaging Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography

  • Dennie Meijer,
  • Pim J. van Leeuwen,
  • Wietse S.C. Eppinga,
  • Ben G.L. Vanneste,
  • Philip Meijnen,
  • Laurien A. Daniels,
  • Roderick C.N. van den Bergh,
  • Anne P. Lont,
  • Yves J.L. Bodar,
  • Rosemarijn H. Ettema,
  • Katelijne C.C. de Bie,
  • Frederik H.K. Oudshoorn,
  • Jakko A. Nieuwenhuijzen,
  • Henk G. van der Poel,
  • Maarten L. Donswijk,
  • Martijn W. Heymans,
  • Daniela E. Oprea-Lager,
  • Eva E. Schaake,
  • André N. Vis

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 61
pp. 37 – 43

Abstract

Read online

Background and objective: Owing to the greater use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), patient selection for local salvage radiation therapy (sRT) has changed. Our objective was to determine the short-term efficacy of sRT in patients with BCR after RARP, and to develop a novel nomogram predicting BCR-free survival after sRT in a nationwide contemporary cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT before sRT for BCR of PCa, without evidence of metastatic disease. Methods: All 302 eligible patients undergoing PCa sRT in four reference centers between September 2015 and August 2020 were included. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis using a backward elimination procedure to develop a nomogram for predicting biochemical progression of PCa, defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥0.2 ng/ml above the post-sRT nadir within 1 yr after sRT. Key findings and limitations: Biochemical progression of disease within 1 yr after sRT was observed for 56/302 (19%) of the study patients. The final predictive model included PSA at sRT initiation, pathological grade group, surgical margin status, PSA doubling time, presence of local recurrence on PSMA PET/CT, and the presence of biochemical persistence (first PSA result ≥0.1 ng/ml) after RARP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.64–0.79). Using our nomogram, patients with a predicted risk of >20% had a 30.8% chance of developing biochemical progression within 1 yr after sRT. Conclusions: Our novel nomogram may facilitate better patient counseling regarding early oncological outcome after sRT. Patients with high risk of biochemical progression may be candidates for more extensive treatment. Patient summary: We developed a new tool for predicting cancer control outcomes of radiotherapy for patients with recurrence of prostate cancer after surgical removal of their prostate. This tool may help in better counseling of these patients with recurrent cancer regarding their early expected outcome after radiotherapy.

Keywords