Population-based Comparative Effectiveness of Salvage Radical Prostatectomy vs Cryotherapy

ObjectiveTo characterize population-based practice patterns, disease-specific and overall mortality, and cost associated with salvage cryotherapy (SCT) vs salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP).MethodsWe retrospectively identified 440 men who failed primary radiation therapy and subsequently underwent SCT (n = 341, 77.5%) or SRP (n = 99, 22.5%) between 1992 and 2009 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked data. Propensity score analyses were used to compare overall and prostate cancer-specific mortality and associated Medicare expenditures for SRP vs SCT.ResultsMen undergoing SCT were more likely to be white (P <.001), less likely to be high school graduates (P = .008), and experienced shorter median time from diagnosis to salvage therapy (44.1 vs 60.1, P <.001) and from primary radiotherapy to salvage therapy (38.7 vs 55.8 months, P <.001). In adjusted analyses, overall mortality was higher (21.6 vs 6.1 deaths/100 person years, P <.001) for SRP vs SCT. There was a trend for higher prostate cancer-specific death rates with SRP vs SCT (6.5 vs 1.4 deaths/100 person years, P = .061). Medicare expenditures for SRP vs SCT were more than 2-fold higher ($19,543 vs $8,088, P <.001).ConclusionSRP vs SCT is associated with higher overall mortality and greater health care expenditures. However, longer follow-up is needed to assess long-term functional outcomes and cancer control.