- Email: [email protected]
Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (≤60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis
Brachytherapy 16 (2017) 916e918
Corrigendum
Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (#60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis Hani Ashamalla1, Adel Guirguis1, Kyle McCool1, Shauna McVorran1, Malcolm Mattes1, Daniel Metzger1, Clara Oromendia2, Karla V. Ballman2, Bahaa Mokhtar1, Mounzer Tchelebi1, Evangelia Katsoulakis1, Sameer Rafla1 1
Department of Radiation Oncology, NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, NY 2 Department of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
The authors regret that the following details in the published paper need to be corrected. The corrections in texts and revised Tables 1-5 shown below.
In the Abstract, Materials and Methods, and first Sentence, the sample size of 15,505 should be changed to 15,055. The revised sentence is as follows: Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database, 15,055 patients #60 years of age diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009 and treated with radiation therapy alone were identified. In the Results section, first paragraph, and first sentence, the sample size of 15,505 should be changed to 15,055. The revised sentence is as follows: Our population included 15,055 men. The corrected Tables 1-5 are shown below. In the Supplementary Material, eTable1a, and heading of last column, %t should be changed to %. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2016.12.010 1538-4721/$ - see front matter Ó 2017 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2017.05.002
H. Ashamalla et al. / Brachytherapy 16 (2017) 916e918
917
Table 1 Demographic and tumor characteristics of study population (n 5 15,055) Characteristic
EBRT (%)
BRT EBRT (%)
Overall Outcome Alive Deaddprostate Deaddnonprostate Months of follow-up Months of follow-up among survivors Age (median [IQR]) Age (mean SD) Age categorical #45 years 46e60 years Grade III/IV NA Gleasondrisk category Low risk 5 6/7 High risk 5 8+ Marital status Married Nonmarried NA Race Black Other NA Region North central Northeast South West Tumor (T) stagea T1 T2+
6555 (43.5)
8500 (56.5)
p-Value
Overall (%) 15,055
!0.001 7382 (91.4) 119 (1.8) 484 (7.4) 66 (49, 83) 68 (51, 85) 56 (53, 58) 55.4 3.4
8099 (95.0) 65 (0.8) 358 (4.2) 70 (53, 87) 70 (54, 87) 56 (53, 58) 55.0 3.7
86 (1.3) 6469 (98.7)
182 (2.1) 8318 (97.9)
3087 (47.1) 0 (0.0)
2153 (25.3) 1 (0.0)
5747 (87.7) 808 (12.3)
8080 (95.1) 420 (4.9)
3809 (58.1) 2248 (34.3) 498 (7.6)
5948 (70.0) 2091 (34.3) 461 (5.4)
1975(30.1) 4473 (68.2) 107 (1.6)
1927 (22.7) 6491 (76.4) 882 (1.0)
758 1173 1502 3122
567 1282 2917 3734
!0.001 !0.001 !0.001 !0.001 !0.001
14,029 (93.2) 184 (1.2) 842 (5.6) 68 (51, 85) 69 (53, 86) 56 (53, 58) 55.2 3.6 268 (1.8) 14,787 (98.2)
!0.001 5643 (37.5) 1 (0.0) !0.001 13,827 (91.8) 1228 (8.2) !0.001 9757 (64.8) 4339 (28.8) 959 (6.4) !0.001 3902 (25.9) 10,964 (72.8) 189 (1.3) !0.001 (11.6) (17.9) (22.9) (47.6)
(6.7) (15.1) (34.3) (43.9)
1325 2455 4419 6856
(8.8) (16.3) (29.4) (45.5)
!0.001 4316 (65.8) 2239 (34.2)
5955 (70.1) 2545 (29.9)
10,271 (68.2) 4784 (31.8)
EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam; IQR 5 interquartile range. Categorical variables present count (percent) whereas continuous measures present median (interquartile range) unless otherwise stated. a N+, M1 were excluded.
918
H. Ashamalla et al. / Brachytherapy 16 (2017) 916e918
Table 2 Univariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variable Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #7) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
Table 4 Multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks with interactions between Gleason risk category and treatment modality Variables
0.40 (0.30.0e0.54)
!0.001
9.26 (6.92e12.39)
!0.001
0.98 (0.94e1.01)
0.200
1.47 (1.08e2.00)
0.013
1.35 (0.99e1.85)
0.055
2.05 (1.54e2.74)
!0.001
7.25 (5.06e10.39)
!0.001
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #67) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV Interactions BRT EBRT and High Risk $8
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.70 (0.46e1.07)
0.100
4.80 (3.27e7.05)
!0.001
0.96 (0.92e1.00)
0.051
1.18 (0.84e1.65)
0.330
1.10 (0.80e1.53)
0.550
3.83 (2.47e5.95)
!0.001
0.78 (0.40e1.54)
0.480
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Table 5 Univariable and multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality stratified by Gleason risk category using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variables
Table 3 Multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variables Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #7) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.65 (0.47e0.89)
0.008
4.46 (3.19e6.23)
!0.001
0.96 (0.92e1.00)
0.051
1.21 (0.87e1.69)
0.260
1.09 (0.79e1.52)
0.600
1.31 (0.96e1.78)
0.085
3.67 (2.438e5.65)
!0.001
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Univariable Low risk # 7 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT High risk $ 8 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Multivariable Low risk # 7 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ High risk $ 8 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.56 (0.38e0.82)
0.003
0.53 (0.32e0.90)
0.018
0.63 (0.42e0.96)
0.031
1.02 (0.96e1.08)
0.570
1.62 (1.03e2.56)
0.038
1.27 (0.82e1.98)
0.3280
1.82 (1.22e2.72)
0.003
0.53 (0.32e0.890)
0.018
0.91 (0.86e0.96)
0.001
1.01 (0.62e1.65)
0.970
0.97 (0.60e1.56)
0.900
1.03 (0.66e1.61)
0.900
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Corrigendum
Brachytherapy improves outcomes in young men (#60 years) with prostate cancer: A SEER analysis Hani Ashamalla1, Adel Guirguis1, Kyle McCool1, Shauna McVorran1, Malcolm Mattes1, Daniel Metzger1, Clara Oromendia2, Karla V. Ballman2, Bahaa Mokhtar1, Mounzer Tchelebi1, Evangelia Katsoulakis1, Sameer Rafla1 1
Department of Radiation Oncology, NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, NY 2 Department of Healthcare Policy & Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
The authors regret that the following details in the published paper need to be corrected. The corrections in texts and revised Tables 1-5 shown below.
In the Abstract, Materials and Methods, and first Sentence, the sample size of 15,505 should be changed to 15,055. The revised sentence is as follows: Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database, 15,055 patients #60 years of age diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2009 and treated with radiation therapy alone were identified. In the Results section, first paragraph, and first sentence, the sample size of 15,505 should be changed to 15,055. The revised sentence is as follows: Our population included 15,055 men. The corrected Tables 1-5 are shown below. In the Supplementary Material, eTable1a, and heading of last column, %t should be changed to %. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2016.12.010 1538-4721/$ - see front matter Ó 2017 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2017.05.002
H. Ashamalla et al. / Brachytherapy 16 (2017) 916e918
917
Table 1 Demographic and tumor characteristics of study population (n 5 15,055) Characteristic
EBRT (%)
BRT EBRT (%)
Overall Outcome Alive Deaddprostate Deaddnonprostate Months of follow-up Months of follow-up among survivors Age (median [IQR]) Age (mean SD) Age categorical #45 years 46e60 years Grade III/IV NA Gleasondrisk category Low risk 5 6/7 High risk 5 8+ Marital status Married Nonmarried NA Race Black Other NA Region North central Northeast South West Tumor (T) stagea T1 T2+
6555 (43.5)
8500 (56.5)
p-Value
Overall (%) 15,055
!0.001 7382 (91.4) 119 (1.8) 484 (7.4) 66 (49, 83) 68 (51, 85) 56 (53, 58) 55.4 3.4
8099 (95.0) 65 (0.8) 358 (4.2) 70 (53, 87) 70 (54, 87) 56 (53, 58) 55.0 3.7
86 (1.3) 6469 (98.7)
182 (2.1) 8318 (97.9)
3087 (47.1) 0 (0.0)
2153 (25.3) 1 (0.0)
5747 (87.7) 808 (12.3)
8080 (95.1) 420 (4.9)
3809 (58.1) 2248 (34.3) 498 (7.6)
5948 (70.0) 2091 (34.3) 461 (5.4)
1975(30.1) 4473 (68.2) 107 (1.6)
1927 (22.7) 6491 (76.4) 882 (1.0)
758 1173 1502 3122
567 1282 2917 3734
!0.001 !0.001 !0.001 !0.001 !0.001
14,029 (93.2) 184 (1.2) 842 (5.6) 68 (51, 85) 69 (53, 86) 56 (53, 58) 55.2 3.6 268 (1.8) 14,787 (98.2)
!0.001 5643 (37.5) 1 (0.0) !0.001 13,827 (91.8) 1228 (8.2) !0.001 9757 (64.8) 4339 (28.8) 959 (6.4) !0.001 3902 (25.9) 10,964 (72.8) 189 (1.3) !0.001 (11.6) (17.9) (22.9) (47.6)
(6.7) (15.1) (34.3) (43.9)
1325 2455 4419 6856
(8.8) (16.3) (29.4) (45.5)
!0.001 4316 (65.8) 2239 (34.2)
5955 (70.1) 2545 (29.9)
10,271 (68.2) 4784 (31.8)
EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam; IQR 5 interquartile range. Categorical variables present count (percent) whereas continuous measures present median (interquartile range) unless otherwise stated. a N+, M1 were excluded.
918
H. Ashamalla et al. / Brachytherapy 16 (2017) 916e918
Table 2 Univariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variable Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #7) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
Table 4 Multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks with interactions between Gleason risk category and treatment modality Variables
0.40 (0.30.0e0.54)
!0.001
9.26 (6.92e12.39)
!0.001
0.98 (0.94e1.01)
0.200
1.47 (1.08e2.00)
0.013
1.35 (0.99e1.85)
0.055
2.05 (1.54e2.74)
!0.001
7.25 (5.06e10.39)
!0.001
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #67) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV Interactions BRT EBRT and High Risk $8
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.70 (0.46e1.07)
0.100
4.80 (3.27e7.05)
!0.001
0.96 (0.92e1.00)
0.051
1.18 (0.84e1.65)
0.330
1.10 (0.80e1.53)
0.550
3.83 (2.47e5.95)
!0.001
0.78 (0.40e1.54)
0.480
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Table 5 Univariable and multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality stratified by Gleason risk category using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variables
Table 3 Multivariable analysis examining prostate cancerespecific mortality using the Fine and Gray proportional subhazards model for competing risks Variables Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Gleason (vs. #7) High risk $ 8 Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ Grade (vs. I/II) III/IV
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.65 (0.47e0.89)
0.008
4.46 (3.19e6.23)
!0.001
0.96 (0.92e1.00)
0.051
1.21 (0.87e1.69)
0.260
1.09 (0.79e1.52)
0.600
1.31 (0.96e1.78)
0.085
3.67 (2.438e5.65)
!0.001
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.
Univariable Low risk # 7 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT High risk $ 8 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Multivariable Low risk # 7 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+ High risk $ 8 Radiation type (vs. EBRT) BRT EBRT Age at diagnosis Years Race (vs. non-black) Black Marital status (vs. married) Unmarried TNM stage (vs. T1) T2+
HR (95% CI)
p-Value
0.56 (0.38e0.82)
0.003
0.53 (0.32e0.90)
0.018
0.63 (0.42e0.96)
0.031
1.02 (0.96e1.08)
0.570
1.62 (1.03e2.56)
0.038
1.27 (0.82e1.98)
0.3280
1.82 (1.22e2.72)
0.003
0.53 (0.32e0.890)
0.018
0.91 (0.86e0.96)
0.001
1.01 (0.62e1.65)
0.970
0.97 (0.60e1.56)
0.900
1.03 (0.66e1.61)
0.900
HR 5 hazard ratio; CI 5 confidence interval; EBRT 5 external beam radiation therapy; BRT EBRT 5 brachytherapy with or without external beam.