Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jun 14.
Published in final edited form as: Eur Urol. 2020 Dec 11;80(3):280–292. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.010

Table 3 –

Covariate-adjusted meta-regression comparing efficacy and toxicity between salvage modalities and radical prostatectomy

2-yr RFS 5-yr RFS Severe GU toxicity Severe GI toxicity

Radical prostatectomy
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 72% (66–78%) 53% (46%–59%) 21% (16%–26%) 1.5% (0.4%–3.2%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 1.0 1.0 NA NA
p value Reference Reference Reference Reference
 R2 (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Cryotherapy
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 66% (59–72%) 57% (49–65%) 15% (8–23%) 0.9% (0.3–1.8%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 0.74 (0.49–1.12) 1.20 (0.80–1.79) NA NA
p value 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.5
 R2 (%) 25 0.0 8.2 27
HIFU
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 52% (45%–59%) 46% (37%–55%) 23% (17%–30%) 0.8% (0.1%–2.1%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 0.42 (0.28–0.64) 0.76 (0.48–1.21) NA NA
p value <0.001 0.2 0.5 0.4
 R2 (%) 0.0 41 15 22
SBRT
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 58% (46–69%) 56% (37–73%) 5.6% (1.4–12%) 0.0% (0.0–1.2%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 0.52 (0.30–0.93) 1.13 (0.50–2.58) NA NA
p value 0.03 0.8 <0.001 0.07
 R2 (%) 55 4.2 0.00 0.0
HDR
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 77% (69–83%) 58% (52–64%) 9.6% (6.0–13.9%) 0.0% (0.0–0.3%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 1.26 (0.77–2.09) 1.25 (0.88–1.78) NA NA
p value 0.4 0.2 0.002 0.003
 R2 (%) 0.0 91 0.0 0.0
LDR
 Adjusted percenta (95% CI) 79% (72–85%) 53% (43–63%) 9.1% (5.2–14%) 2.1% (0.6–4.0%)
 Odds ratio (95% CI) 1.49 (0.89–2.50) 1.02 (0.63–1.67)
p value 0.13 0.9 0.001 0.6
 R2 (%) 4.3 5.2 12 20%

CI = confidence interval; GI = gastrointestinal; GU = genitourinary; HDR=high-dose-rate brachytherapy; HIFU = high-intensity focused ultrasound; LDR=low-dose-rate brachytherapy; NA = not available; RFS = recurrence-free survival; SBRT = stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Significant p-values after Bonferroni correction appear in bold.

a

Back-transformed regression coefficients for ease of interpretation.