Risk of recurrent disease 6 years after open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in the prospective controlled trial LAPPRO Journal Article


Authors: Nyberg, M.; Akre, O.; Bock, D.; Carlsson, S. V.; Carlsson, S.; Hugosson, J.; Lantz, A.; Steineck, G.; Stranne, J.; Tyritzis, S.; Wiklund, P.; Haglind, E.; Bjartell, A.
Article Title: Risk of recurrent disease 6 years after open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in the prospective controlled trial LAPPRO
Abstract: Robot-assisted and open retropubic radical prostatectomy have comparable oncological outcome 6 yr after surgery. However, for high-risk patients, we observed a significant benefit for robotics regarding recurrence rate. Longer follow-up time is needed to make a firm conclusion and to evaluate a possible survival benefit for either of the surgical approaches. © 2020 Background: Conclusive evidence of superiority in oncological outcome for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) over retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) is lacking. Objective: To compare RALP and RRP regarding recurrent disease and to report the mortality rate 6 yr after surgery. Design, setting, and participants: A total of 4003 men with localized prostate cancer were enrolled between 2008 and 2011 in Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open (LAPPRO)— a prospective, controlled, nonrandomized trial performed at 14 Swedish centers. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Data were collected at visits and by patient questionnaires at 3, 12, and 24 mo, and through a structured telephone interview at 6 yr. Cause of death was retrieved from the National Cause of Death Register in Sweden. The modified Poisson regression approach was used for analyses. Results and limitations: After adjustment for patient-, tumor-, and surgeon-related confounders, no statistically significant difference was observed between RALP and RRP in biochemical recurrence rate (14 vs 16%, relative risk [RR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–1.06) or in not cured endpoint (22% vs 23%, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.6–1.11). Stratified by D'Amico risk group, a significant benefit for RALP existed for recurrent disease in high-risk patients (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26–0.86, p = 0.02). All-cause mortality was 3% (n = 96). Prostate cancer–specific mortality was 0.6% (n = 21) overall, 0.3% (n = 8) after RALP, and 1.5% (n = 13) after RRP. The nonrandomized design is a limitation. Conclusions: No significant difference was observed for cancer recurrence rate between RALP and RRP 6 yr after surgery. However, in a subgroup analysis, we found a significant benefit for RALP regarding recurrence rate in the high-risk group. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to make a firm conclusion and to evaluate a possible survival benefit. Patient summary: In general, the oncological outcome is comparable between robotic and open radical prostatectomy 6 yr after surgery. For high-risk patients, our findings indicate that there is an advantage for robotics, but further studies with longer follow-up time is needed to make a firm conclusion. © 2020
Keywords: prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; biochemical recurrence; prostate cancer-specific mortality; robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
Journal Title: European Urology Open Science
Volume: 20
ISSN: 2666-1691
Publisher: Elsevier BV  
Date Published: 2020-07-01
Start Page: 54
End Page: 61
Language: English
DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2020.06.005
PROVIDER: scopus
PUBMED: 34337458
PMCID: PMC8317794
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 1 September 2020 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Sigrid Viktoria Carlsson
    221 Carlsson