Abstract 206P
Background
To compare discriminant ability of risk stratifications for prostate cancer in three authoritative guidelines: National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guideline (NCCN-g), American Urological Association / American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology/ Society of Urologic Oncology Guideline(AUA-g) and European Association of Urology- European association of nuclear medicine- European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology- European Society of Urogenital Radiology- International Society of Geriatric Oncology guideline(EAU-g).
Methods
511916 patients with one primary prostate cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2016 were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER, submitted in) database of the National Cancer Institute. Patients were excluded from analysis if < 18 years of age, not adenocarcinoma, diagnosed at autopsy or death certificate only, with an unknown follow-up, incomplete clinical and demographic information, leaving 287333 patients in this cohort. Patients were categorized as different risk stratifications by three latest guidelines (NCCN-g, AUA-g and EAU-g) respectively. Follow-up endpoint was prostate cancer specific mortality (PCSM), cutoff date was December 31, 2016. Kaplan–Meier analysis, multivariable Cox regression and area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) analyses were performed.
Results
The 287333 patients are all from 2004 to 2015. Median follow-up was 69 months (IQR: 39-104). For the three risk stratification modalities, all 6 risk groups in NCCN-g, 5 risk groups in AUA-g and 5 risk groups in EAU-g independently predicted PCSM. NCCN-g yielded 3.1-fold HR differences between low risk group and intermediate risk group, 14.8-fold HR differences between low risk group and high risk group, 33.0-fold HR differences between low risk group and very high risk group, 56.2-fold HR differences between low risk group and regional group, and 148.9-fold HR differences between low risk group and metastatic group. AUC is 0.8332, 0.8309 and 0.7868 in NCCN-g, AUA-g and EAU-g.
Conclusions
This large population-based analysis confirms the better discriminant properties of the risk stratification method in NCCN guideline.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Peking University First Hospital radiation oncology department.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
The author has declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
74TiP - Phase I study of BI 836880, a VEGF/Ang2-blocking nanobody®, as monotherapy and in combination with BI 754091, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in Japanese patients (pts) with advanced solid tumours
Presenter: Kentaro Yamazaki
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
75P - A parallel deep learning network framework for whole-body bone scan image analysis
Presenter: Xiaorong Pu
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
76P - Perception and satisfaction of cancer patients in clinical trials
Presenter: Jukyung Jeon
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
77P - A prognostic nomogram for the prediction of neuroblastoma
Presenter: Jian-Guo Zhou
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
80P - The clinical usefulness of a new fat-dissociation method to detect lymph nodes from surgically resected specimen in colorectal cancer: Prospective randomized study
Presenter: Shiki Fujino
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
81P - Concurrent or consolidation chemotherapy during radiation as neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer: A propensity score analysis from two prospective study
Presenter: JianWei Zhang
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
82P - Body mass index, tumour location, and colorectal cancer survival
Presenter: Dake Chu
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
83P - Helicobacter bilis may play a role in the carcinogenesis of colitis associated colon cancer correlating to increased number of CD4+CD45RB+ T cells
Presenter: Xiangsheng Fu
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
84P - Comprehensive evaluation of relapse risk (CERR) score for colorectal liver metastases development and validation
Presenter: Jianmin Xu
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
85P - Which is the best partner for capecitabine-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer? A retrospective analysis of a comprehensive cancer center
Presenter: Jingwen Wang
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract