Six-year outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus volumetric modulated arc therapy for localized prostate cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

Abstract

Abstract Background Although robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy are the leading respective techniques of prostatectomy and radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer, almost no study has directly compared their outcomes; none have compared mortality outcomes. Methods We compared 6‑year outcomes of RARP (n = 500) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT, a rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy, n = 360) in patients with cT1-4N0M0 prostate cancer. We assessed oncological outcomes, namely overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), radiological recurrence-free survival (rRFS), and biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), using propensity score matching (PSM). We also assessed treatment-related complication outcomes of prostatectomy and radiotherapy. Results The median follow-up duration was 79 months (> 6 years). PSM generated a matched cohort of 260 patients (130 per treatment group). In the matched cohort, RARP and VMAT showed equivalent results for OS, CSS, and rRFS: both achieved excellent 6‑year outcomes for OS (> 96%), CSS (> 98%), and rRFS (> 91%). VMAT had significantly longer bRFS than RARP, albeit based on different definitions of biochemical recurrence. Regarding complication outcomes, patients who underwent RARP had minimal (2.6%) severe perioperative complications and achieved excellent continence recovery (91.6 and 68.8% of the patients achieved ≤ 1 pad/day and pad-free, respectively). Patients who underwent VMAT had an acceptable rate (20.0%) of grade ≥ 2 genitourinary complications and a very low rate (4.4%) of grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal complications. Conclusion On the basis of PSM after a 6-year follow-up, RARP and VMAT showed equivalent and excellent oncological outcomes, as well as acceptable complication profiles.