Medizinische Universität Graz - Research portal

Go directly to the nagivation.
Go directly to the content.

Navigation/Search

Selected Publication:

SHR Neuro Cancer Cardio Lipid Metab Microb

Wenzel, M; Wagner, N; Hoeh, B; Siech, C; Koll, F; Cano, Garcia, C; Ahrens, M; Tilki, D; Steuber, T; Graefen, M; Banek, S; Chun, FKH; Mandel, P.
Survival of patients with lymph node versus bone versus visceral metastases according to CHAARTED/LATITUDE criteria in the era of intensified combination therapies for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.
Prostate. 2024; 84(14): 1320-1328. Doi: 10.1002/pros.24767
Web of Science PubMed FullText FullText_MUG

Co-authors Med Uni Graz: Koll Florestan Johannes
Altmetrics:
Dimensions Citations:
Plum Analytics:
Scite (citation analytics):
Abstract:: BACKGROUND: The first approvals of novel systemic therapies within recent years for metastatic hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) were mainly based on improved overall survival (OS) and time to castration resistance (ttCRPC) in mHSPC patients stratified according to CHAARTED low (LV) versus high volume (HV) and LATITUDE low (LR) versus high-risk (HR) disease. METHODS: Relying on our institutional tertiary-care database we identified all mHSPC stratified according to CHAARTED LV versus HV, LATITUDE LR versus HR and the location of the metastatic spread (lymph nodes (M1a) versus bone (M1b) versus visceral/others (M1c) metastases. OS and ttCRPC analyses, as well as Cox regression models were performed according to different metastatic categories. RESULTS: Of 451 mHSPC, 14% versus 27% versus 48% versus 12% were classified as M1a LV versus M1b LV versus M1b HV versus M1c HV with significant differences in median OS: 95 versus 64 versus 50 versus 46 months (p < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression models HV M1b (Hazard Ratio: 2.4, p = 0.03) and HV M1c (Hazard Ratio: 3.3, p < 0.01) harbored significant worse than M1a LV mHSPC. After stratification according to LATITUDE criteria, also significant differences between M1a LR versus M1b LR versus M1b HR versus M1c HR mHSPC patients were observed (p < 0.01) with M1b HR (Hazard Ratio: 2.7, p = 0.03) and M1c HR (Hazard Ratio: 3.5, p < 0.01), as predictor for worse OS. In comparison between HV M1b and HV M1c, as well as HR M1b versus HR M1c no differences in ttCRPC or OS were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist between different metastatic patterns of HV and LV and HR and LR criteria. Best prognosis is observed within M1a LV and LR mHSPC patients.
Find related publications in this database (using NLM MeSH Indexing): Humans - administration & dosage; Male - administration & dosage; Bone Neoplasms - secondary, drug therapy, mortality; Aged - administration & dosage; Lymphatic Metastasis - administration & dosage; Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology, drug therapy, mortality; Middle Aged - administration & dosage; Retrospective Studies - administration & dosage; Lymph Nodes - pathology; Viscera - pathology
Find related publications in this database (Keywords): mCRPC; metastatic prostate cancer; mHSPC; overall survival; PFS