Objective To study the prognostic value of the University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score to predict biochemical failure (bF) after various doses of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or permanent seed low‐dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (PB). Patients and Methods We retrospectively analysed 345 patients with intermediate‐risk prostate cancer, with PSA levels of 10–20 ng/mL and/or Gleason 7 including 244 EBRT patients (70.2–79.2 Gy) and 101 patients treated with LDR PB. The minimum follow‐up was 3 years. No patient received primary androgen‐deprivation therapy. bF was defined according to the Phoenix definition. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the differences between CAPRA groups. Results The overall bF rate was 13% (45/345). The CAPRA score, as a continuous variable, was statistically significant in multivariate analysis for predicting bF (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10–1.72, P = 0.006). There was a trend for a lower bF rate in patients treated with LDR PB when compared with those treated by EBRT ≤ 74 Gy (HR 0.234, 95% CI 0.05–1.03, P = 0.055) in multivariate analysis. In the subgroup of patients with a CAPRA score of 3–5, CAPRA remained predictive of bF as a continuous variable (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.01–2.27, P = 0.047) in multivariate analysis. Conclusion The CAPRA score is useful for predicting biochemical recurrence in patients treated for intermediate‐risk prostate cancer with EBRT or LDR PB. It could help in treatment decisions.

Background: Studies have shown that aggressive treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with oligometastatic disease improves the overall survival (OS) compared to a palliative approach and some immunotherapy checkpoint inhibitors, such as anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and T-Lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors are now part of the standard of care for advanced NSCLC. However, the prognostic impact of PD-L1 expression in the oligometastatic setting remains unknown. Methods: Patients with oligometastatic NSCLC were identified from the patient database of the Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CHUM). “Oligometastatic disease” definition chosen is one synchronous metastasis based on the M1b staging of the eight IASLC (The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer) Classification (within sixth months of diagnosis) or up to three cerebral metastasis based on the methodology of the previous major phase II randomized study of Gomez et al. We compared the OS between patients receiving aggressive treatment at both metastatic and primary sites (Group A) and patients receiving non-aggressive treatment (Group B). Subgroup analysis was performed using tumor PD-L1 expression. Results: Among 643 metastatic NSCLC patients, we identified 67 patients with oligometastasis (10%). Median follow-up was 13.3 months. Twenty-nine patients (43%) received radical treatment at metastatic and primary sites (Group A), and 38 patients (57%) received non-aggressive treatment (Group B). The median OS (mOS) of Group A was significantly longer than for Group B (26 months vs. 5 months, p = 0.0001). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) of Group A was superior than Group B (17.5 months vs. 3.4 months, p = 0.0001). This difference was still significant when controlled for primary tumor staging: stage I (p = 0.316), stage II (p = 0.024), and stage III (p = 0.001). In the cohort of patients who were not treated with PD-L1 inhibitors, PD-L1 expression negatively correlated with mOS. Conclusions: Aggressive treatments of oligometastatic NSCLC significantly improve mOS and mPFS compared to a more palliative approach. PD-L1 expression is a negative prognostic factor which suggests a possible role for immunotherapy in this setting.

No abstract