Brachytherapy versus radical prostatectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer

Abstract

In an effort to help physicians offer their patients unbiased advice on the best alternatives for treatment of localized prostate cancer, we present a retrospective comparison of the effectiveness of brachytherapy and radical retropubic prostatectomy in 1305 men with stage T1 and T2 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Data from 1305 patients treated in our community-based private practice urology group from 1993 to 2002 were reviewed, and patients were classified by initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and risk grouping. Risk grouping was defined by preoperative PSA levels and Gleason scores. We used time to PSA-indicated recurrence as the measure of efficacy. Brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy provided similar responses to treatment (no significant differences given the sample size, length of follow-up, and numerical differences observed) for localized prostate cancers. A prospective study is presently underway to evaluate the respective outcome of these procedures (including incidence of incontinence and impotence), and assess their impact on patient quality of life. The results presented here fail to show any superiority of prostatectomy over brachytherapy with palladium-103 (TheraSeed; Theregenics Corp., Buford, GA) with respect to time until relapse indicated by PSA level increase (> 0.2 ng/mL for prostatectomy and >1.5 ng/mL and rising for brachytherapy). In fact, any differences between treatments favor brachytherapy, particularly for intermediate- and high-risk groups. We conclude that both brachytherapy and prostatectomy should be offered, equally and without bias, to men with stage T1 or T2 organ-confined prostate cancer.