Skip to main content

Effect of demographic characteristics on the outcome of prostate cancer salvage radiotherapy: Analysis from a randomized controlled trial

In brief

African American men see 14% higher failure-free survival after salvage radiotherapy

In a randomized trial of post-prostatectomy patients, African American men achieved a 72.8% failure-free survival rate versus 58.7% in men of other races, despite lower socioeconomic status and greater metabolic stress. The advantage persisted across conventional and fluciclovine-guided imaging arms, suggesting race-related factors may influence radiotherapy response, though reasons remain unclear.

Journal
Cancer (Q1)
Published
15 September 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Ismaheel O Lawal, Ashesh B Jani, Subir Goyal, Olayinka Abiodun-Ojo, Vishal Dhere, Sarah Bell, et al.
PMID
42743317
DOI
10.1002/cncr.70602

Why clinicians should know about it

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the impact of advanced molecular imaging, race, socioeconomic status, and metabolic dysregulation on the outcome of salvage radiotherapy (sRT) for prostate cancer recurrence in a clinical trial setting. METHODS: The authors randomized post-prostatectomy men with detectable prostate-specific antigen to sRT guided by conventional imaging (arm A) or 18F-fluciclovine-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (arm B) and followed them up for up to 48 months to determine failure-free survival (FFS). The authors computed socioeconomic status (SES) and allostatic load (AL) scores to quantify socioeconomic status and level of metabolic dysregulation. They stratified patients by race as African American men (AAM) versus men of other races (MOR) and compared FFS between them using the z-test. RESULTS: Eighty-one (AAM = 29, MOR = 52) and 76 (AAM = 26, MOR = 50) men completed per-protocol sRT in arms A and B, respectively. Across study arms, AAM showed a higher FFS rate than MOR (72.8% [95% CI, 53.8%-85.0%] vs. 58.7% [95% CI, 46.6%-68.9%]; p = .002). In arm A, FFS rate was better for AAM than MOR, (64.0% [95% CI, 34.4%-82.9%] vs. 45.3% [95% CI, 28.8%-60.4%]; p = .008). In arm B, FFS improved for both groups but less so for AAM, (81.5% [95% CI, 57.2%-92.7%] vs. 73.0% [95% CI, 56.3%-84.1%]; p = .131). The authors found lower SES scores and higher AL scores for AAM in both study arms than MOR. CONCLUSION: Despite lower socioeconomic status and higher burden of metabolic dysregulation, in a clinical trial setting that controls for disparities in health care access, AAM have a more favorable sRT outcome than MOR.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.