Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95. A community-based randomised controlled trial of three different educational resources for men about prostate cancer screening.
Local failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) is common in patients with cancer extending beyond the capsule. Two randomized trials demonstrated an advantage for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) compared with a wait-and-see policy. We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial to compare RP followed by immediate RT with RP alone for patients with pT3 prostate cancer and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level after RP.
                After RP, 192 men were randomly assigned to a wait-and-see policy, and 193 men were assigned to immediate postoperative RT. Eligible patients had pT3 pN0 tumors. Patients who did not achieve an undetectable PSA after RP were excluded from treatment according to random assignment (n = 78; 20%). Of the remaining 307 patients, 34 patients on the RT arm did not receive RT and five patients on the wait-and-see arm received RT. Therefore, 114 patients underwent RT and 154 patients were treated with a wait-and-see policy. The primary end point was biochemical progression-free survival.
                Biochemical progression-free survival after 5 years in patients with undetectable PSA after RP was significantly improved in the RT group (72%; 95% CI, 65% to 81%; v 54%, 95% CI, 45% to 63%; hazard ratio = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P = .0015). On univariate analysis, Gleason score more than 6 and less than 7, PSA before RP, tumor stage, and positive surgical margins were predictors of outcome. The rate of grade 3 to 4 late adverse effects was 0.3%.
                Adjuvant RT for pT3 prostate cancer with postoperatively undetectable PSA significantly reduces the risk of biochemical progression. Further follow-up is needed to assess the effect on metastases-free and overall survival. Randomised evaluations of resources to facilitate informed decisions about prostate cancer screening are rarely conducted. In this study, 421 men recruited from the community were randomly allocated to receive a leaflet (n = 140) or one of two resources meeting criteria for a decision-aid: a video (n = 141) or an evidence-based booklet, developed by the authors (n = 140). Men in all three groups demonstrated significant increases in knowledge scores from pre to post-test. Scores were significantly higher at post-test amongst those who had received our evidence-based booklet compared with men who received the leaflet or video (P < 0.001). Scores were significantly modified by men's preferences for decisional control (P = 0.002). Decisional conflict was significantly lower amongst men receiving the evidence-based booklet (P = 0.038). Men receiving the evidence-based booklet also were less likely to accept a recommendation by a GP to undergo prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) screening (P = 0.003). Men require detailed information about the pros and cons of PSA screening in order to make an informed decision. Resources are not equivalent in achieving these outcomes.
The existing trials provide insufficient evidence to allow confident statements to be made about the relative beneficial and harmful effects of RP and WW for patients with localised prostate cancer. The results of ongoing trials should help to inform treatment decisions for men with screen-detected localised prostate cancer.