Prognostic Factors for Survival in Noncastrate Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Validation of the Glass Model and Development of a Novel Simplified Prognostic Model

Gwenaelle Gravis, Jean Marie Boher, Karim Fizazi, Florence Joly, Franck Priou, Patricia Marino, Igor Latorzeff, Remy Delva, Ivan Krakowski, Brigitte Laguerre, Jochen Walz, Fréderic Rolland, Christine Théodore, Gael Deplanque, Jean Marc Ferrero, Damien Pouessel, Loïc Mourey, Philippe Beuzeboc, Sylvie Zanetta, Muriel HabibianJean François Berdah, Jerome Dauba, Marjorie Baciuchka, Christian Platini, Claude Linassier, Jean Luc Labourey, Jean Pascal Machiels, Claude El Kouri, Alain Ravaud, Etienne Suc, Jean Christophe Eymard, Ali Hasbini, Guilhem Bousquet, Michel Soulie, Stéphane Oudard

    Résultats de recherche: Contribution à un journalArticleRevue par des pairs

    106 Citations (Scopus)

    Résumé

    Background The Glass model developed in 2003 uses prognostic factors for noncastrate metastatic prostate cancer (NCMPC) to define subgroups with good, intermediate, and poor prognosis. Objective To validate NCMPC risk groups in a more recently diagnosed population and to develop a more sensitive prognostic model. Design, setting, and participants NCMPC patients were randomized to receive continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without docetaxel in the GETUG-15 phase 3 trial. Potential prognostic factors were recorded: age, performance status, Gleason score, hemoglobin (Hb), prostate-specific antigen, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), metastatic localization, body mass index, and pain. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis These factors were used to develop a new prognostic model using a recursive partitioning method. Before analysis, the data were split into learning and validation sets. The outcome was overall survival (OS). Results and limitations For the 385 patients included, those with good (49%), intermediate (29%), and poor (22%) prognosis had median OS of 69.0, 46.5 and 36.6 mo (p = 0.001), and 5-yr survival estimates of 60.7%, 39.4%, and 32.1%, respectively (p = 0.001). The most discriminatory variables in univariate analysis were ALP, pain intensity, Hb, LDH, and bone metastases. ALP was the strongest prognostic factor in discriminating patients with good or poor prognosis. In the learning set, median OS in patients with normal and abnormal ALP was 69.1 and 33.6 mo, and 5-yr survival estimates were 62.1% and 23.2%, respectively. The hazard ratio for ALP was 3.11 and 3.13 in the learning and validation sets, respectively. The discriminatory ability of ALP (concordance [C] index 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.71) was superior to that of the Glass risk model (C-index 0.59, 95% CI 0.52-0.66). The study limitations include the limited number of patients and low values for the C-index. Conclusion A new and simple prognostic model was developed for patients with NCMPC, underlying the role of normal or abnormal ALP. Patient summary We analyzed clinical and biological factors that could affect overall survival in noncastrate metastatic prostate cancer. We showed that normal or abnormal alkaline phosphatase at baseline might be useful in predicting survival.

    langue originaleAnglais
    Pages (de - à)196-204
    Nombre de pages9
    journalEuropean Urology
    Volume68
    Numéro de publication2
    Les DOIs
    étatPublié - 1 août 2015

    Contient cette citation