Role of androgen deprivation therapy for node-positive prostate cancer

EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013

CONTEXT

The most recent summary of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on prostate cancer (PCa) was published in 2011.

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2013 version of the EAU guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent of clinically organ-confined PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature review of the new data emerging from 2011 to 2013 has been performed by the EAU PCa guideline group. The guidelines have been updated, and levels of evidence and grades of recommendation have been added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A full version of the guidelines is available at the EAU office or online (www.uroweb.org). Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population-based screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for PCa. Systematic prostate biopsies under ultrasound guidance and local anesthesia are the preferred diagnostic method. Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy. A biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention, whereas the role of PSA doubling time is controversial. In men with locally advanced PCa for whom local therapy is not mandatory, watchful waiting (WW) is a treatment alternative to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), with equivalent oncologic efficacy. Active treatment is recommended mostly for patients with localized disease and a long life expectancy, with radical prostatectomy (RP) shown to be superior to WW in prospective randomized trials. Nerve-sparing RP is the approach of choice in organ-confined disease, while neoadjuvant ADT provides no improvement in outcome variables. Radiation therapy should be performed with ≥ 74 Gy in low-risk PCa and 78 Gy in intermediate- or high-risk PCa. For locally advanced disease, adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior rates for disease-specific and overall survival and is the treatment of choice. Follow-up after local therapy is largely based on PSA and a disease-specific history, with imaging indicated only when symptoms occur.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarize the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A summary is presented of the 2013 EAU guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent of clinically organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). Screening continues to be done on an individual basis, in consultation with a physician. Diagnosis is by prostate biopsy. Active surveillance is an option in low-risk PCa and watchful waiting is an alternative to androgen-deprivation therapy in locally advanced PCa not requiring immediate local treatment. Radical prostatectomy is the only surgical option. Radiation therapy can be external or delivered by way of prostate implants. Treatment follow-up is based on the PSA level.

Androgen-deprivation therapy versus radical prostatectomy as monotherapy among clinically localized prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The most recent randomized controlled trial in a predominantly prostate-specific antigen-detected prostate cancer (PC) population found a nonsignificant reduction in mortality from radical prostatectomy (RP) compared to conservative management. The optimal treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer is anything but clear. The PC-specific mortality and all-cause mortality were compared between primary androgen-deprivation treatment (PADT) and RP, both as monotherapy, among clinically localized PC patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study among PC patients in Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data with a median follow up of 2.87 years in the PADT cohort and 2.95 years in the RP cohort. Propensity score-matching was employed to adjust for the observed selection bias. PC-specific mortality and all-cause mortality were modeled using the Fine and Gray competing risk model and Cox proportional hazards model, respectively. The independent variables in these models included age, race, Gleason score risk groups, T-score, prostate-specific antigen, Charlson comorbidity, and index year of treatment initiation.

RESULTS

After propensity score-matching, there were 1624 in the PADT cohort and 1624 in the RP cohort. All baseline values were comparable (all P-values >0.35). There were a total of 266 deaths (16.38%) and 60 (3.69%) PC-specific deaths among PADT recipients, while there were 56 (3.45%) deaths and four (0.25%) PC-specific deaths among RP recipients. According to the Kaplan-Meier estimation, the 8-year survival rate was 43.39% in the PADT cohort and 79.62% in the RP cohort. PADT was associated with increased risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio = 2.98, 95% confidence interval 2.35-3.79; P < 0.001) and increased risk of PC-specific mortality (hazard ratio = 12.47, 95% confidence interval 4.48-34.70; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

With adjustment for the observed selection bias, PADT was associated with increased all-cause mortality and PC-specific mortality when compared to RP.

Early versus deferred androgen suppression therapy for patients with lymph node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy with curative intent: a systematic review

Background

There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal timing for androgen suppression therapy in patients with prostate cancer that have undergone local therapy with curative intent but are proven to have node-positive disease without signs of distant metastases at the time of local therapy. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the benefits and harms of early (at the time of local therapy) versus deferred (at the time of clinical disease progression) androgen suppression therapy for patients with node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy.

Methods

The protocol was registered prospectively (CRD42011001221; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, as well as reference lists, the abstracts of three major conferences, and three trial registers, to identify randomized controlled trials (search update 04/08/2012). Two authors independently screened the identified articles, assessed trial quality, and extracted data.

Results

Four studies including 398 patients were identified for inclusion. Early androgen suppression therapy lead to a significant decrease in overall mortality (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.84), cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18-0.64), and clinical progression at 3 or 9 years (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.52 at 3 years and RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.67 at 9 years). One study showed an increase of adverse effects with early androgen suppression therapy. All trials had substantial methodological limitations.

Conclusions

The data available suggest an improvement in survival and delayed disease progression but increased adverse events for patients with node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy treated with early androgen suppression therapy versus deferred androgen suppression therapy. However, quality of data is low. Randomized controlled trials with blinding of outcome assessment, planned to determine the timing of androgen suppression therapy in node-positive prostate cancer using modern diagnostic imaging modalities, biochemical testing, and standardized follow-up schedules should be conducted to confirm these findings.

Impact of adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy on disease progression in patients with node-positive prostate cancer

Purpose

The survival benefits of adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer and lymph node metastasis remain unclear. We assessed the role of ADT in disease progression after radical prostatectomy (RP).

Materials and Methods

Of 937 patients who underwent RP, we identified 40 (4.2%) who had lymph node metastasis. A total of 18 received adjuvant ADT (ADT group) and 22 were observed (observation group). Clinical progression-free survival (PFS), cancer- specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared in the 2 groups. Prognostic factors for clinical progression and biochemical recurrence (BCR) were analyzed.

Results

The 5-year PFS, CSS, and OS of the entire cohort were 75.0%, 85.0%, and 72.5%, respectively. In the ADT group, 6 patients (33.3%) showed clinical progression at a median 42.7 months. The 5-year PFS, CSS, and OS rates of this group were 72.2%, 83.3%, and 72.2%, respectively. In the observation group, 14 patients (63.6%) received salvage therapy owing to BCR. Nine patients (40.9%) with BCR in the observation group showed clinical progression at a median 43.4 months after RP. The 5-year PFS, CSS, and OS rates of this group were 77.2%, 86.4%, and 72.8%, respectively. In the observation group, the BCR rate was lower in patients with pT3a or less disease than in those with pT3b disease.

Conclusions

Adjuvant ADT in node-positive prostate cancer did not reduce or delay disease progression or improve survival. Because a substantial number of untreated patients with pT3a or less disease did not experience recurrence, administration of ADT should be initiated carefully. However, in patients with pT3b disease, adjuvant ADT and radiotherapy could be considered.

[EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer]

OBJECTIVES

Our aim is to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

METHODS

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and the levels of evidence (LEs) and/or grades of recommendation (GR) were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.

RESULTS

Luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Although LHRH antagonists decrease testosterone without any testosterone surge, their clinical benefit remains to be determined. Complete androgen blockade has a small survival benefit of about 5%. Intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) results in equivalent oncologic efficacy when compared with continuous androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in well-selected populations. In locally advanced and metastatic PCa, early ADT does not result in a significant survival advantage when compared with delayed ADT. Relapse after local therapy is defined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values > 0.2 ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and > 2 ng/ml above the nadir after radiation therapy (RT). Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage RT at PSA levels < 0.5 ng/ml and salvage RP or cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in radiation failures. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT) are of limited importance if the PSA is < 2.5 ng/ml; bone scans and CT can be omitted unless PSA is >20 ng/ml. Follow-up after ADT should include screening for the metabolic syndrome and an analysis of PSA and testosterone levels. Treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) includes second-line hormonal therapy, novel agents, and chemotherapy with docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) every 3 wk. Cabazitaxel as a second-line therapy for relapse after docetaxel might become a future option. Zoledronic acid and denusomab can be used in men with CRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge in the field of advanced, metastatic, and CRPC is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice. A full version is available at the EAU office or online at www.uroweb.org.

Sense and nonsense of an extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer

Lymph node metastases associated with prostate cancer (PCa) has been shown to be a poor prognostic factor. The role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) itself in relation to survival remains unclear, however. A Medline search was conducted to address this issue. The following conclusions were drawn. Only recently, improved survival due to completion of radical prostatectomy (RP) (compared to abandoning RP) in known or presumed lymph-node-positive patients has been shown. Lymph node sampling can only be considered representative if an adequate number of nodes is removed. While several authors have suggested that a therapeutic benefit in patients undergoing RP is not provided by PLND, the reliability of these studies is uncertain. Contrary to this, several studies have indicated the possibility of long-term survival even in the presence of limited lymph node metastases. The role and timing of initiation of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients who have node-positive disease after RP is controversial. Recent studies suggest that delaying ADT may not adversely impact survival.

[EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease]

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised cancer of the prostate (PCa).

METHODS

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and level of evidence and grade of recommendation were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.

RESULTS

A full version is available at the EAU office or Web site (www.uroweb.org). Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population-based screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for PCa. A systematic prostate biopsy under ultrasound guidance and local anaesthesia is the preferred diagnostic method. Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy. PSA doubling time in < 3 yr or a biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention. In men with locally advanced PCa in whom local therapy is not mandatory, watchful waiting (WW) is a treatment alternative to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with equivalent oncologic efficacy. Active treatment is mostly recommended for patients with localised disease and a long life expectancy with radical prostatectomy (RP) shown to be superior to WW in a prospective randomised trial. Nerve-sparing RP represents the approach of choice in organ-confined disease; neoadjuvant androgen deprivation demonstrates no improvement of outcome variables. Radiation therapy should be performed with at least 74Gy and 78Gy in low-risk and intermediate/high-risk PCa, respectively. For locally advanced disease, adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior disease-specific and overall survival rates and represents the treatment of choice. Follow-up after local therapy is largely based on PSA, and a disease-specific history with imaging is indicated only when symptoms occur.

CONCLUSIONS

The knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice.

A critical assessment of the value of lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy: A population-based study

OBJECTIVE

We tested relationship between pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) status at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP) and survival in prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

METHODS

Overall, 127,824 PCa patients treated with RP between 1988 and 2006 were included. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the impact of PLND status (pN0 vs. pNx vs. pN1) on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) rates.

RESULTS

In pT2 patients, the 5-, 10-, and 15-year CSM rates were: 0.4%, 1.7%, and 3.9% for pN0, 0.6%, 2.5%, and 4.7% for pNx, 2.7%, 11.9%, and 20.6% for pN1 patients (all P < 0.001). The 5-, 10-, and 15-year OM rates were: 5.4%, 16.3%, and 34.5% for pN0, 6.1%, 18.2%, and 35.3% for pNx, 11.5%, 32.7%, and 53.4% for pN1 (all P < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, pNx and pN1 stage increased CSM rate, respectively by 1.3- and 3.8-fold (both P < 0.001) relative to pN0. Similarly, pNx and pN1 increased OM rate respectively by 1.1- and 1.6-fold (both P < 0.001) relative to pN0. In pT3 patients, pNx stage did not significantly increase CSM or OM rates relative to pN0 (both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with localized PCa treated with RP without a PLND (pNx) have less favorable survival rate than their counterparts that do not harbor lymph node invasion at PLND. However, the difference is modest (0.8% at 10 years). In consequence, the related costs and benefits of this procedure should be weighted carefully. In addition, the survival benefit of PLND was not observed in locally advanced PCa patients.

The timing and extent of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: weighing the clinical evidence

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is an effective means of palliating symptoms of prostate cancer but is associated with significant toxicities that increase with treatment duration. Primary ADT in men with localized disease provides no survival advantage. Neoadjuvant ADT, when combined with external beam radiation, improves survival for men with locally advanced disease. Immediate adjuvant androgen deprivation does not seem to benefit most men undergoing radical prostatectomy. No evidence supports combined androgen blockade or monotherapy with nonsteroidal antiandrogens for locally advanced prostate cancer. ADT with orchiectomy or gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or antagonists is standard care for men with metastatic prostate cancer.

EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: Treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Our aim is to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

METHODS

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and the levels of evidence (LEs) and/or grades of recommendation (GR) were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.

RESULTS

Luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Although LHRH antagonists decrease testosterone without any testosterone surge, their clinical benefit remains to be determined. Complete androgen blockade has a small survival benefit of about 5%. Intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) results in equivalent oncologic efficacy when compared with continuous androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in well-selected populations. In locally advanced and metastatic PCa, early ADT does not result in a significant survival advantage when compared with delayed ADT. Relapse after local therapy is defined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values >0.2 ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and >2 ng/ml above the nadir after radiation therapy (RT). Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage RT at PSA levels <0.5 ng/ml and salvage RP or cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in radiation failures. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and (11)C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT) are of limited importance if the PSA is <2.5 ng/ml; bone scans and CT can be omitted unless PSA is >20 ng/ml. Follow-up after ADT should include screening for the metabolic syndrome and an analysis of PSA and testosterone levels. Treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) includes second-line hormonal therapy, novel agents, and chemotherapy with docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) every 3 wk. Cabazitaxel as a second-line therapy for relapse after docetaxel might become a future option. Zoledronic acid and denusomab can be used in men with CRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge in the field of advanced, metastatic, and CRPC is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice. A full version is available at the EAU office or online at www.uroweb.org.

Contemporary treatment of high-risk localized prostate cancer

High-risk prostate cancer poses a significant challenge to the treating physician and much debate exists regarding the ideal treatment approach. The purpose of this article is to enable physicians to identify patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer and evaluate whether monotherapy is sufficient for these patients. We review the current data on use of surgery, radiation therapy and hormonal therapy independently and in combination. We also discuss emerging therapeutics for high-risk disease including neoadjuvant chemotherapy and protocols under current and future investigation.

EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised cancer of the prostate (PCa).

METHODS

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and level of evidence and grade of recommendation were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.

RESULTS

A full version is available at the EAU office or Web site (www.uroweb.org). Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population-based screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for PCa. A systematic prostate biopsy under ultrasound guidance and local anaesthesia is the preferred diagnostic method. Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy. PSA doubling time in <3 yr or a biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention. In men with locally advanced PCa in whom local therapy is not mandatory, watchful waiting (WW) is a treatment alternative to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with equivalent oncologic efficacy. Active treatment is mostly recommended for patients with localised disease and a long life expectancy with radical prostatectomy (RP) shown to be superior to WW in a prospective randomised trial. Nerve-sparing RP represents the approach of choice in organ-confined disease; neoadjuvant androgen deprivation demonstrates no improvement of outcome variables. Radiation therapy should be performed with at least 74 Gy and 78 Gy in low-risk and intermediate/high-risk PCa, respectively. For locally advanced disease, adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior disease-specific and overall survival rates and represents the treatment of choice. Follow-up after local therapy is largely based on PSA, and a disease-specific history with imaging is indicated only when symptoms occur.

CONCLUSIONS

The knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice.

Survival benefit of radical prostatectomy in lymph node-positive patients with prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Positive lymph node (LN) status is considered a systemic disease state. In prostate cancer, LN-positive diagnosis during pelvic LN dissection (PLND) potentially leads to the abandonment of radical prostatectomy (RP).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the overall survival (OS) and relative survival (RS; as an estimate for cancer-specific survival) in LN-positive patients with or without RP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between 1988 and 2007, a total of 35 629 men with prostate cancer were identified at the Munich Cancer Registry; of those, 1413 patients had positive LNs.

INTERVENTION

Of these 1413 LN-positive patients, prostatectomy was abandoned in 456 LN-positive patients, whereas 957 underwent RP despite the LN-positive finding.

MEASUREMENTS

Crucial analyses are based on 938 LN-positive patients (688 with RP and 250 without RP) with complete data regarding age, grade, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). OS (Kaplan-Meier estimates) and RS are presented, and Cox regression analysis was used to show the influence of predictors such as clinical stage, age at surgery, number of positive LNs, PSA level, grade, and extent of surgery.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 5.6 yr. OS of patients at 5 yr and 10 yr was 84% and 64%, respectively, with RP and was 60% and 28%, respectively, with aborted RP. The RS of patients at 5 yr and 10 yr was 95% and 86%, respectively, with RP and was 70% and 40%, respectively, with abandoned surgery. There was an imbalance, however, in the number of positive LNs: 17.2% with RP had four or more positive nodes versus 28% in the patient group without RP. In the multivariate model, RP was a strong independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio: 2.04 [95% confidence interval, 1.59-2.63; p<0.0001]).

CONCLUSION

LN-positive patients with complete RP had improved survival compared to patients with abandoned RP. These results suggest that RP may have a survival benefit and the abandonment of RP in node-positive cases may not be justified.

[First line indications for hormonal therapy in prostate cancer]

The utilization of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer has evolved over time. Unquestionably considered first line treatment in metastatic cancers or in case of lymph node involvement, it is increasingly used in locally advanced and high-risk cancers, combined with radiation therapy. However, the practical modalities of treatment are still controversial (neoadjuvant, concomitant/adjuvant) and should be discussed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account tumor stage and risk level, which depends mainly on Gleason score and PSA levels and kinetics. Hormone therapy is also indicated in case of systemic relapse, especially if PSA doubling time is less than 12 months. LHRH agonists have become the standard care; antiandrogens can be added at the beginning of the LHRH agonist therapy to obtain a complete androgen blockade. Intermittent androgen deprivation therapy has recently proved efficacious and might be more widely used in the future, provided that strict prescription and follow-up recommendations are clearly established.

Helical Tomotherapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for High-Risk and Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: Early Report on Acute and Late Toxicity

The use of whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) for high-risk and lymph node-positive prostate cancer (PC) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute toxicity associated with helical tomotherapy in the treatment of high-risk and lymph node-positive prostate cancer. To do so, twenty-eight patients were treated to a dose of 54 Gy in daily fractions of 1.8 Gy to the pelvic lymph node area, while the prostate and the seminal vesicles received a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to a dose of 70.5 Gy. A SIB to a dose of 60 Gy was delivered to the involved lymph node region(s) in 8 patients with pelvic lymph node metastases. All patients received concurrent hormonal treatment. The incidence of grade 2 and 3 acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 7% and 0% respectively. Grade 2 and 3 acute genito-urinary (GU) side effects were observed in 14% and 4% of the patients respectively. No grade 4 side effects occurred. No increased toxicity was observed in the 8 lymph node-positive patients receiving a simultaneous pelvic nodal dose escalation. In conclusion, WPRT with a SIB to the prostate and seminal vesicles by helical tomotherapy resulted in a favourable toxicity profile. Pelvic nodal dose escalation in node-positive patients is feasible without increasing toxicity.

Diagnostic evaluation of PSA recurrence and review of hormonal management after radical prostatectomy

The aim of this review is to provide a discussion of the diagnostic evaluation of biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy (RP) and an overview of the postoperative hormonal treatment (HT) options. As no randomized trials in the clinical setting of postoperative prostate-specific antigen recurrence have been reported, there is no conclusive evidence that HT after RP will prolong survival or reduce morbidity. Non-traditional approaches, such as intermittent androgen deprivation, non-steroidal anti-androgens and combination of finasteride and non-steroidal anti-androgen, are investigated and may be acceptable options. Combinations of HT with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy for treatment of recurrent prostate cancer are under study.