1
|
Dee EC, Todd R, Ng K, Aidoo-Micah G, Amen TB, Moon Z, Vince R, Muralidhar V, Mutsvangwa K, Funston G, Mounce LTA, Pintus E, Yamoah K, Spratt DE, Mahal BA, Shamash J, Horne R, Nguyen PL. Racial disparities in prostate cancer in the UK and the USA: similarities, differences and steps forwards. Nat Rev Urol 2024:10.1038/s41585-024-00948-x. [PMID: 39424981 DOI: 10.1038/s41585-024-00948-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/10/2024] [Indexed: 10/21/2024]
Abstract
In the USA, Black men are approximately twice as likely to be diagnosed with and to die of prostate cancer than white men. In the UK, despite Black men having vastly different ancestral contexts and health-care systems from Black men in the USA, the lifetime risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer is two-to-three times higher among Black British men than among white British men and Black British men are twice as likely to die of prostate cancer as white British men. Examination of racial disparities in prostate cancer in the USA and UK highlights systemic, socio-economic and sociocultural factors that might contribute to these differences. Variation by ancestry could affect incidence and tumour genomics. Disparities in incidence might also be affected by screening guidelines and access to and uptake of screening. Disparities in treatment access, continuity of care and outcomes could contribute to survival differences. In both localized and metastatic settings, equal access could diminish the observed disparities in both the USA and the UK. An understanding of behavioural medicine, especially an appreciation of cultural beliefs about illness and treatment, could inform and improve the ways in which health systems can engage with and deliver care to patients in minoritized groups affected by prostate cancer. Methods of promoting equity include targeting systemic barriers including systemic racism, proportional recruitment of patients into clinical trials, diversifying the health-care workforce and facilitating care informed by cultural humility. Actively engaging patients and communities in research and intervention might enable the translation of research into increasingly equitable care for patients with prostate cancer in the UK, the USA and globally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Rebecca Todd
- Department of Practice and Policy, Centre for Behavioural Medicine, University College London School of Pharmacy, London, UK
| | - Kenrick Ng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Barts Cancer Centre, London, UK
| | - Gloryanne Aidoo-Micah
- Department of Medical Oncology, Royal Free Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Troy B Amen
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA
| | - Zoe Moon
- Department of Practice and Policy, Centre for Behavioural Medicine, University College London School of Pharmacy, London, UK
| | - Randy Vince
- Case Western Reserve University, University Hospital Urology Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Vinayak Muralidhar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA
| | | | - Garth Funston
- Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Luke T A Mounce
- Department of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, UK
| | - Elias Pintus
- Guy's Cancer Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Great Maze Pond, London, UK
| | - Kosj Yamoah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institutes, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Brandon A Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Robert Horne
- Department of Practice and Policy, Centre for Behavioural Medicine, University College London School of Pharmacy, London, UK
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dee EC, Ng K, Shamash J, Nguyen PL. Prostate Cancer Survivorship and Global Health-Related Quality of Life. JCO Oncol Pract 2024; 20:879-882. [PMID: 38626365 DOI: 10.1200/op.24.00173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2024] [Accepted: 03/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Dee, Ng, Shamash, and Nguyen respond to the work of Potosky et al, highlighting the importance of global quality of life in prostate cancer care. Factors such as companionship and spirituality must be considered in providing equitable and whole-person care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kenrick Ng
- Department of Medical Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Bart's Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jonathan Shamash
- Department of Medical Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Bart's Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kwak L, Ravi P, Armstrong JG, Beckendorf V, Chin JL, D'Amico AV, Dearnaley DP, Di Stasi SM, Gillessen S, Lukka H, Mottet N, Pommier P, Seiferheld W, Sydes MR, Tombal B, Zapatero A, Regan MM, Xie W, Sweeney CJ. Prognostic Impact of Prostate-Specific Antigen at 6 Months After Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: An Individual Patient Data Analysis of Randomized Trials. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:2132-2138. [PMID: 38471051 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.00762] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 10/30/2023] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to evaluate the prognostic impact of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at 6 months after completion of radiotherapy (RT) in patients treated with RT alone, RT plus short-term (st; 3-6 months), and RT plus long-term (lt; 24-36 months) androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Individual patient data were obtained from 16 randomized trials evaluating RT ± ADT for localized prostate cancer (PCa) between 1987 and 2011. The lowest PSA recorded within 6 months after RT completion was identified and categorized as < or ≥0.1 ng/mL. The primary outcomes were metastasis-free survival (MFS), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM), and overall survival (OS), from 12 months after random assignment. RESULTS Ninety-eight percent (n = 2,339/2,376) of patients allocated to RT alone, 84% (n = 4,756/5,658) allocated to RT + stADT, and 77% (n = 1,258/1,626) allocated to RT + ltADT had PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after completing RT. PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL was associated with lower MFS and OS and higher PCSM among patients allocated to RT ± ADT (RT - MFS: hazard ratio [HR], 2.24 [95% CI, 1.21 to 4.16]; PCSM: subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.82 [0.51 to 6.49]; OS: HR, 1.72 [0.97 to 3.05]; RT + stADT - MFS: HR, 1.27 [1.12 to 1.44]; PCSM: sHR, 2.10 [1.52 to 2.92]; OS: HR, 1.26 [1.11 to 1.44]; RT + ltADT - MFS: HR, 1.58 [1.27 to 1.96]; PCSM: sHR, 1.97 [1.11 to 3.49]; OS: HR, 1.59 [1.27 to 1.99]). Five-year MFS rates among patients allocated to RT, RT + stADT, and RT + ltADT were 91% versus 79%, 83% versus 76%, and 87% versus 74%, respectively, based on PSA < or ≥0.1 ng/mL. CONCLUSION PSA ≥0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after RT completion was prognostic for lt outcomes in patients treated with RT ± ADT for localized PCa. This can be used to counsel patients treated with RT ± ADT and in guiding clinical trial design evaluating novel systemic therapies with RT + ADT as well as (de)intensification strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucia Kwak
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | | | - John G Armstrong
- Radiation Oncology Department, Cancer Trials Ireland, St Luke's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | | | | | - David P Dearnaley
- The Institute of Cancer Research, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Himanshu Lukka
- McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Almudena Zapatero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, La Princesa University Hospital, Health Research Institute, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Christopher J Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dee EC, Chino F, Johnson MN. Disparities in Cardio-Oncology Care Among Patients With Prostate Cancer. JACC CardioOncol 2024; 6:402-404. [PMID: 38983374 PMCID: PMC11229540 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccao.2024.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/11/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Fumiko Chino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Michelle N. Johnson
- Cardiology Service, Division of Subspecialty Medicine, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ravi P, Xie W, Buyse M, Halabi S, Kantoff PW, Sartor O, Attard G, Clarke N, D'Amico A, Dignam J, James N, Fizazi K, Gillessen S, Parulekar W, Sandler H, Spratt DE, Sydes MR, Tombal B, Williams S, Sweeney CJ. Refining Risk Stratification of High-risk and Locoregional Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials. Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02380-7. [PMID: 38777647 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Revised: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Radiotherapy (RT) and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ltADT; 18-36 mo) is a standard of care in the treatment of high-risk localized/locoregional prostate cancer (HRLPC). We evaluated the outcomes in patients treated with RT + ltADT to identify which patients have poorer prognosis with standard therapy. METHODS Individual patient data from patients with HRLPC (as defined by any of the following three risk factors [RFs] in the context of cN0 disease-Gleason score ≥8, cT3-4, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] >20 ng/ml, or cN1 disease) treated with RT and ltADT in randomized controlled trials collated by the Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate group. The outcome measures of interest were metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), time to metastasis, and prostate cancer-specific mortality. Multivariable Cox and Fine-Gray regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for the three RFs and cN1 disease. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 3604 patients from ten trials were evaluated, with a median PSA value of 24 ng/ml. Gleason score ≥8 (MFS HR = 1.45; OS HR = 1.42), cN1 disease (MFS HR = 1.86; OS HR = 1.77), cT3-4 disease (MFS HR = 1.28; OS HR = 1.22), and PSA >20 ng/ml (MFS HR = 1.30; OS HR = 1.21) were associated with poorer outcomes. Adjusted 5-yr MFS rates were 83% and 78%, and 10-yr MFS rates were 63% and 53% for patients with one and two to three RFs, respectively; corresponding 10-yr adjusted OS rates were 67% and 60%, respectively. In cN1 patients, adjusted 5- and 10-yr MFS rates were 67% and 36%, respectively, and 10-yr OS was 47%. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS HRLPC patients with two to three RFs (and cN0) or cN1 disease had the poorest outcomes on RT and ltADT. This will help in counseling patients treated in routine practice and in guiding adjuvant trials in HRLPC. PATIENT SUMMARY Radiotherapy and long-term hormone therapy are standard treatments for high-risk and locoregional prostate cancer. In this report, we defined prognostic groups within high-risk/locoregional prostate cancer and showed that outcomes to standard therapy are poorest in those with two or more "high-risk" factors or evidence of lymph node involvement. Such patients may therefore be the best candidates for intensification of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Praful Ravi
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Wanling Xie
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Marc Buyse
- International Drug Development Institute, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium
| | | | - Philip W Kantoff
- Convergent Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, USA; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | - Noel Clarke
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Anthony D'Amico
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Nicholas James
- The Institute of Cancer Research & The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Karim Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Daniel E Spratt
- University Hospitals Siedman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Matthew R Sydes
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Christopher J Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Luu J, Antar RM, Farag C, Simmens S, Whalen MJ. Delaying Surgery in Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients: An NCDB Analysis of Oncologic Outcomes. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2024; 22:102092. [PMID: 38697001 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2023] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 04/06/2024] [Indexed: 05/04/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Concern for overtreatment in very low-, low-, and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer has promoted a more conservative approach through active surveillance (AS) with comparable survival outcomes. We analyzed the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to determine if delaying radical prostatectomy greater than 6 months is associated with an increase in the rate of adverse pathology or secondary treatment (adjuvant or salvage) at radical prostatectomy. METHODS Utilizing the NCDB from 2004 to 2019, 40 to 75-year-old men with very low-, low-, and favorable-intermediate-risk prostate cancer, as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, were identified for this study. These individuals received radical prostatectomy either before or after 6 months following diagnosis. Clinical, demographic, and pathologic characteristics were obtained. Adverse pathologic outcomes were defined as pT3-4N0-1 and/or positive surgical margins. Multiple logistic regression models were used to predict delays in treatment, adverse pathologic outcomes, and receipt of secondary therapy. Survival analysis was performed using the Cox Proportional Hazards Model and the Kaplan-Meier Method. RESULTS Of the 195,397 patients who met inclusion criteria, only 13,393 patients received surgery 6 months after diagnosis. The median time of delay was 7.5 months compared to 2.3 months in the immediate treatment group. Overall, delaying surgery had no statistically significant impact on adverse pathologic outcomes, regardless of risk category. However, when accounting for the interaction between race and delayed treatment, non-Hispanic black patients who received a delay in treatment were more likely to experience adverse features (OR 1.12, 95%CI 1.00-1.26, P = .041). Conversely, patients who had delayed surgery were less likely to receive additional therapy (either adjuvant or salvage) (OR 0.60, 95%CI 0.52-0.68, P < .001). Survival analysis showed that both groups fared well, with a 5-year survival of 97% for both groups. The treatment group was not predictive of survival. CONCLUSION Overall, delaying surgery more than 6 months following diagnosis did not have a significant impact on adverse pathologic features or overall survival. However, when specifically looking at non-Hispanic black patients with a treatment delay, these patients were at increased risk for adverse features, suggesting that the negative impact of treatment delay depends on the patient's race. As race is a social construct, this finding likely points to the complex socioeconomic factors that contribute to overall health outcomes rather than any inherent disease characteristics. Lastly, delayed treatment patients were actually less likely to require secondary therapy, regardless of race, possibly reflecting high clinician acumen in selecting patients appropriate for treatment delay. The results suggest that patients who ultimately "fail" AS and require subsequent surgery have overall comparable survival outcomes. However, pathologic outcomes are dependent on the patient's underlying race, with non-Hispanic black patients experiencing an increased risk of adverse outcomes if treatment is delayed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennica Luu
- George Washington University School of Medicine, 2300 I St NW, Washington, DC 20052.
| | - Ryan M Antar
- George Washington University School of Medicine, 2300 I St NW, Washington, DC 20052
| | - Christian Farag
- George Washington University School of Medicine, 2300 I St NW, Washington, DC 20052
| | - Sam Simmens
- George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, 950 New Hampshire Ave NW #2, Washington, DC 20037
| | - Michael J Whalen
- Department of Urology, George Washington University School of Medicine, 2300 I St NW, Washington, DC 20052
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gómez-Aparicio MA, López-Campos F, Lozano AJ, Maldonado X, Caballero B, Zafra J, Suarez V, Moreno E, Arcangeli S, Scorsetti M, Couñago F. Novel Approaches in the Systemic Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:e485-e494. [PMID: 37453915 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2023.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
Locally advanced prostate cancer comprises approximately 20% of new prostate cancer diagnoses. For these patients, international guidelines recommend treatment with radiotherapy (RT) to the prostate in combination with long-term (2-3 years) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), or radical prostatectomy in combination with extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) as another treatment option for selected patients as part of multimodal therapy. Improvements in overall survival with docetaxel or an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor have been achieved in patients with metastatic castration sensitive or castration resistant prostate cancer. However, the role of systemic therapy combinations for high risk and/or unfavorable prostate cancer is unclear. In this context, the aim of this review is to assess the current evidence for systemic treatment combinations as part of primary definitive therapy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Fernando López-Campos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
| | - Antonio José Lozano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain
| | - Xavier Maldonado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Vall d´Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Begoña Caballero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Fuenlabrada, Spain
| | - Juan Zafra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Virgen de la Victoria, Malaga, Spain
| | - Vladamir Suarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Malaga, Malaga, Spain
| | - Elena Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Stefano Arcangeli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Milan, Bicocca, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Madrid, Madrid, Spain; Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Madrid Clinical Director, Hospital San Francisco de Asís and Hospital Vithas La Milagrosa, National Chair of Research and Clinical Trials, GenesisCare, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Padhani AR, Schoots IG. Prostate cancer screening-stepping forward with MRI. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:6670-6676. [PMID: 37154952 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09673-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Revised: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 04/10/2023] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To comprehensively review the literature on the integration of MRI as a diagnostic tool in prostate cancer screening and offer practical recommendations for optimising its use. METHODS Existing research studies, clinical guidelines and expert opinions were reviewed to support the optimisation standards for MRI use in screening. Consolidated screening principles were used to make appropriate recommendations regarding the integration of MRI into the diagnostic pathway. RESULTS To strike a balance between the potential benefits of early detection on mortality and minimising the harm of over-diagnosing indolent cancers, it is necessary to have a clear understanding of the context of MRI use. The key to optimisation is patient selections and MRI-targeted biopsies. For men at higher-than-average risk, it is essential to use screening-specific MRI protocols and establish accuracy levels and interpretation criteria. Optimisation of readings by the automation of data acquisition, image quality monitoring, post-processing, radiologist certification and deep-learning computer-aided software is needed. The optimal utilisation of MRI involves its integration into a multistep diagnostic pathway, supported by a quality-assured and cost-effective infrastructure that ensures community-wide access to imaging. CONCLUSION MRI in the prostate cancer screening pathway can bring substantial diagnostic benefits. By carefully considering its advantages, limitations and safety concerns and integrating it into a multistep diagnostic pathway, clinicians can improve outcomes while minimising harm to screening participants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT The manuscript discusses the role of MRI in prostate cancer screening, highlighting its potential to improve accuracy and reduce overdiagnosis. It emphasises the importance of optimising protocols and integrating MRI into a multistep diagnostic pathway for successfully delivering screening benefits. KEY POINTS • Population screening for prostate cancer is a new indication for prostate MRI that allows the detection of high-risk cancers while reducing the need for biopsies and associated harm. • To optimise prostate cancer screening using MRI, it is essential to redefine MRI protocols; establish accuracy levels, reliability and interpretation criteria; and optimise reading (including post-processing, image quality, radiologist certification, and deep-learning computer-aided software). • The optimal utilisation of MRI for prostate cancer screening would involve its integration into a multistep diagnostic pathway, supported by a quality-assured and cost-effective infrastructure that ensures community-wide access to imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anwar R Padhani
- Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
| | - Ivo G Schoots
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pattenden TA, Samaranayke D, Morton A, Ong WL, Murphy DG, Pritchard E, Evans S, Millar J, Chalasani V, Rashid P, Winter M, Vela I, Pryor D, Mark S, Lawrentschuk N, Thangasamy IA. Modern Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:115-123. [PMID: 36443163 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2022.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 08/29/2022] [Accepted: 09/03/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
The use of PSA screening has led to downstaging and downgrading of prostate cancer at diagnosis, increasing detection of indolent disease. Active surveillance aims to reduce over-treatment by delaying or avoiding radical treatment and its associated morbidity. However, there is not a consensus on the selection criteria and monitoring schedules that should be used. This article aims to summarize the evidence supporting the safety of active surveillance, the current selection criteria recommended and in use, the incidence of active surveillance, barriers existing to its uptake and future developments in patient selection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dhanika Samaranayke
- Department of Urology, Ipswich Hospital, QLD, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, QLD, Australia
| | - Andrew Morton
- Department of Urology, Ipswich Hospital, QLD, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, QLD, Australia
| | - Wee Loon Ong
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology Service, VIC, Australia; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, VIC, Australia; School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK
| | - Declan G Murphy
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, VIC, Australia
| | - Elizabeth Pritchard
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, VIC, Australia
| | - Susan Evans
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, VIC, Australia
| | - Jeremy Millar
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology Service, VIC, Australia; Central Clinical School, Monash University, VIC, Australia
| | - Venu Chalasani
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Prem Rashid
- Rural Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Australia
| | - Matthew Winter
- Nepean Urology Research Group, Nepean Hospital, NSW, Australia
| | - Ian Vela
- Department of Urology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, QLD, Australia; Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Queensland and The Queensland Bladder Cancer Initiative, School of Biomedical Science, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, QLD, Australia
| | - David Pryor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, QLD, Australia
| | - Stephen Mark
- Department of Urology, Christchurch Hospital, New Zealand
| | - Nathan Lawrentschuk
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, VIC, Australia; EJ Whitten Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Epworth, VIC, Australia
| | - Isaac A Thangasamy
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, QLD, Australia; Nepean Urology Research Group, Nepean Hospital, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Dee EC, Taunk NK, Chino FL, Deville C, McClelland S, Muralidhar V, McBride SN, Gillespie EF, Yamoah K, Nguyen PL, Mahal BA, Winkfield KM, Vapiwala N, Santos PMG. Shorter Radiation Regimens and Treatment Noncompletion Among Patients With Breast and Prostate Cancer in the United States: An Analysis of Racial Disparities in Access and Quality. JCO Oncol Pract 2023; 19:e197-e212. [PMID: 36399692 PMCID: PMC9970278 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 09/14/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Compared with conventional external-beam radiation therapy (cEBRT) for patients with breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC), shorter radiation regimens may be associated with lower treatment noncompletion rates. We assess disparities in receipt of shorter radiation regimens and treatment noncompletion for BC and PC. PATIENTS AND METHODS The 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was queried for adjuvant cEBRT or hypofractionated EBRT (hEBRT) for nonmetastatic BC; and definitive cEBRT, moderate hypofractionation (mEBRT), or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized PC. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with treatment noncompletion and receipt of shorter regimens. FINDINGS We identified 170,386 men with PC (median age [interquartile range], 70 [64-75] years; Black, 17.5%; White, 82.5%) and 306,846 women with BC (61 [52-69] years; Black, 12.3%; White, 87.7%). Among patients who received cEBRT for PC, Black men had higher treatment noncompletion rates compared with White (14.1% v 13.0%; odds ratio [95% CI] 1.07 [1.03 to 1.12]; P < .001). In contrast, treatment noncompletion was not disparate with SBRT (Black 1.6% v White 1.3%; 1.20 [0.72 to 2.00], P = .49) or mEBRT (Black 9.0% v White 7.1%; 1.05 [0.72 to 1.54], P = .79). From 2004 to 2017, SBRT (0.07% to 11.8%; 1.32 [1.31 to 1.33]) and mEBRT (0.35% to 9.1%; 1.27 [1.25 to 1.28]) increased (both P < .001); however, Black men were consistently less likely to receive SBRT (7.4% v White, 8.3%; 0.84 [0.79 to 0.89], P < .001). Among women with BC, there were no racial differences in treatment noncompletion; however, hEBRT was associated with lower treatment noncompletion rates (1.0% v cEBRT 2.3%; 0.39 [0.35 to 0.44], P < .001). Although hEBRT for BC increased (0.8% to 35.6%) between 2004 and 2017, Black women were less likely to receive hEBRT (10.4% v 15.3%; 0.78 [0.75 to 0.81], P < .001). INTERPRETATION Black patients were consistently less likely to receive hypofractionated radiation for PC or BC, despite evidence suggesting that shorter regimens may lower rates of treatment noncompletion with similar oncologic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Neil K. Taunk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Fumiko L. Chino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Affordability Working Group, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Shearwood McClelland
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Neurological Surgery, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH
| | - Vinayak Muralidhar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Sean N. McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Erin F. Gillespie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Kosj Yamoah
- Cancer Epidemiology Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Brandon A. Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL
| | - Karen M. Winkfield
- Meharry-Vanderbilt Alliance, Nashville, TN
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN
- Department of Medicine, Meharry Medical College; Nashville, TN
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Devos G, Tosco L, Baldewijns M, Gevaert T, Goffin K, Petit V, Mai C, Laenen A, Raskin Y, Van Haute C, Goeman L, De Meerleer G, Berghen C, Devlies W, Claessens F, Van Poppel H, Everaerts W, Joniau S. ARNEO: A Randomized Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Degarelix with or Without Apalutamide Prior to Radical Prostatectomy for High-risk Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2022; 83:508-518. [PMID: 36167599 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.09.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 09/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients have a high risk of biochemical recurrence and metastatic progression following radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy of neoadjuvant degarelix plus apalutamide before RP compared with degarelix with a matching placebo. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS ARNEO was a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II neoadjuvant trial before RP performed between March 2019 and April 2021. Eligible patients had high-risk PCa and were amenable to RP. INTERVENTION Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to degarelix (240-80-80 mg) + apalutamide (240 mg/d) versus degarelix + matching placebo for 3 mo followed by RP. Prior to and following neoadjuvant treatment, pelvic 18F-PSMA-1007 positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was the difference in proportions of patients with minimal residual disease (MRD; = residual cancer burden (RCB) ≤0.25 cm3 at final pathology). Secondary endpoints included differences in prostate-specific antigen responses, pathological staging, and change in TNM stage on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/MRI following hormonal treatment. Biomarkers (immunohistochemical staining on prostate biopsy [PTEN, ERG, Ki67, P53, GR, and PSMA] and PSMA PET/MRI-derived characteristics) associated with pathological response (MRD and RCB) were explored. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Patients were randomized to neoadjuvant degarelix + apalutamide (n = 45) or degarelix + matching placebo (n = 44) for 12 wk and underwent RP. Patients in the degarelix + apalutamide arm achieved a significantly higher rate of MRD than those in the control arm (38% vs 9.1%; relative risk [95% confidence interval] = 4.2 [1.5-11], p = 0.002). Patients with PTEN loss in baseline prostate biopsy attained significantly less MRD (11% vs 43%, p = 0.002) and had a higher RCB at final pathology (1.6 vs 0.40 cm3, p < 0.0001) than patients without PTEN loss. Following neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, PSMA PET-estimated tumor volumes (1.2 vs 2.5 ml, p = 0.01) and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax; 4.3 vs 5.7, p = 0.007) were lower in patients with MRD than in patients without MRD. PSMA PET-estimated volume and PSMA PET SUVmax following neoadjuvant treatment correlated significantly with RCB at final pathology (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In high-risk PCa patients, neoadjuvant degarelix plus apalutamide prior to RP results in a significantly improved pathological response (MRD and RCB) compared with degarelix alone. Our trial results provide a solid hypothesis-generating basis for neoadjuvant phase 3 trials, which are powered to detect differences in long-term oncological outcome following neoadjuvant androgen receptor signaling inhibitor therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY In this study, we looked at the difference in pathological responses in high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with degarelix plus apalutamide or degarelix plus matching placebo prior to radical prostatectomy. We demonstrated that patients treated with degarelix plus apalutamide achieved a significantly better tumor response than patients treated with degarelix plus matching placebo. Long-term follow-up is required to determine whether improved pathological outcome translates into better oncological outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gaëtan Devos
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lorenzo Tosco
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Thomas Gevaert
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Karolien Goffin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Valentin Petit
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Cindy Mai
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Annouschka Laenen
- Leuven Biostatistics and Statistical Bioinformatics Center, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Yannic Raskin
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Carl Van Haute
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lieven Goeman
- Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Charlien Berghen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Wout Devlies
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Frank Claessens
- Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Wouter Everaerts
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dee EC, Pierce LJ, Winkfield KM, Lam MB. In pursuit of equity in cancer care: moving beyond the Affordable Care Act. Cancer 2022; 128:3278-3283. [PMID: 35818772 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2022] [Revised: 04/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Although Medicaid Expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been associated with many improvements for patients with cancer, Snyder et al. provide evidence demonstrating the persistence of racial disparities in cancer. This Editorial describes why insurance coverage alone does not ensure access to health care, highlights various manifestations of structural racism that constitute barriers to access beyond the direct costs of care, and calls for not just equality, but equity, in cancer care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Lori J Pierce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rogel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Karen M Winkfield
- Meharry-Vanderbilt Alliance, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Miranda B Lam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Localized prostate cancer disparities in risk group at presentation and access to treatment for Hispanic men. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022:10.1038/s41391-022-00526-5. [DOI: 10.1038/s41391-022-00526-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Revised: 02/04/2022] [Accepted: 03/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|
14
|
Jain B, Ng K, Santos PMG, Taparra K, Muralidhar V, Mahal BA, Vapiwala N, Trinh QD, Nguyen PL, Dee EC. Prostate Cancer Disparities in Risk Group at Presentation and Access to Treatment for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: A Study With Disaggregated Ethnic Groups. JCO Oncol Pract 2022; 18:e204-e218. [PMID: 34709962 PMCID: PMC8758129 DOI: 10.1200/op.21.00412] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2021] [Revised: 07/16/2021] [Accepted: 09/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We identified (1) differences in localized prostate cancer (PCa) risk group at presentation and (2) disparities in access to initial treatment for Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) men with PCa after controlling for sociodemographic factors. METHODS We assessed all patients in the National Cancer Database with localized PCa with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease who identified as Thai, White, Asian Indian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Laotian, Pakistani, Kampuchean, and Hmong. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CI of (1) presenting at progressively higher risk group and (2) receiving treatment or active surveillance with intermediate- or high-risk disease, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS Among 980,889 men (median age 66 years), all AANHPI subgroups with the exception of Thai (AOR = 0.84 [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.21], P > .05), Asian Indian (AOR = 1.12 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.25], P > .05), and Pakistani (AOR = 1.34 [95% CI, 0.98 to 1.83], P > .05) men had greater odds of presenting at a progressively higher PCa risk group compared with White patients (Chinese AOR = 1.18 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.25], P < .001; Japanese AOR = 1.36 [95% CI, 1.26 to 1.47], P < .001; Filipino AOR = 1.37 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.46], P < .001; Korean AOR = 1.32 [95% CI, 1.18 to 1.48], P < .001; Vietnamese AOR = 1.20 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.35], P = .002; Laotian AOR = 1.60 [95% CI, 1.08 to 2.36], P = .018; Hmong AOR = 4.07 [95% CI, 1.54 to 10.81], P = .005; Kampuchean AOR = 1.55 [95% CI, 1.03 to 2.34], P = .036; Asian Indian or Pakistani AOR = 1.15 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.24], P < .001; Native Hawaiians AOR = 1.58 [95% CI, 1.38 to 1.80], P < .001; and Pacific Islanders AOR = 1.58 [95% CI, 1.37 to 1.82], P < .001). Additionally, Japanese Americans (AOR = 1.46 [95% CI, 1.09 to 1.97], P = .013) were more likely to receive treatment compared with White patients. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that there are differences in PCa risk group at presentation by race or ethnicity among Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander subgroups and that there exist disparities in treatment patterns. Although AANHPI are often studied as a homogenous group, heterogeneity upon subgroup disaggregation underscores the importance of further study to assess and address barriers to PCa care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bhav Jain
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Kenrick Ng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
- UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Kekoa Taparra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | - Vinayak Muralidhar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Brandon A. Mahal
- University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Quoc-Dien Trinh
- Division of Urological Surgery, Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Dee EC, Arega MA, Yang DD, Butler SS, Mahal BA, Sanford NN, Nguyen PL, Muralidhar V. Disparities in Refusal of Locoregional Treatment for Prostate Adenocarcinoma. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17:e1489-e1501. [PMID: 33630666 PMCID: PMC9810147 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.00839] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We assessed sociodemographic factors associated with and survival implications of refusal of potentially survival-prolonging locoregional treatment (LT, including radiotherapy and surgery) despite provider recommendation among men with localized prostate adenocarcinoma. METHODS The National Cancer Database (2004-2015) identified men with TxN0M0 prostate cancer who either received or refused LT despite provider recommendation. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CI of refusing LT, with sociodemographic and clinical covariates. Models were stratified by low-risk and intermediate- or high-risk (IR or HR) disease, with a separate interaction analysis between race and risk group. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard ratios compared overall survival (OS) among men who received versus refused LT. RESULTS Of 887,839 men (median age 64 years, median follow-up 6.14 years), 2,487 (0.28%) refused LT. Among men with IR or HR disease (n = 651,345), Black and Asian patients were more likely to refuse LT than White patients (0.35% v 0.29% v 0.17%; Black v White AOR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.52 to 2.01; P < .001; Asian v White AOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.06; P = .027, race * risk group interaction P < .001). Later year of diagnosis, community facility type, noninsurance or Medicaid, and older age were also associated with increased odds of LT refusal, overall and when stratifying by risk group. For men with IR or HR disease, LT refusal was associated with worse OS (5-year OS 80.1% v 91.5%, HR, 1.65, P < .001). CONCLUSION LT refusal has increased over time; racial disparities were greater in higher-risk disease. Refusal despite provider recommendation highlights populations that may benefit from efforts to assess and reduce barriers to care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | - David D. Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Santino S. Butler
- Department of Internal Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Northern California, Oakland Medical Center, Oakland, CA
| | - Brandon A. Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL,Office of Community Outreach and Engagement, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL
| | - Nina N. Sanford
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Vinayak Muralidhar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA,Vinayak Muralidhar, MD, MSc, Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115; e-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Metabolic regulation of prostate cancer heterogeneity and plasticity. Semin Cancer Biol 2020; 82:94-119. [PMID: 33290846 DOI: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2020.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2020] [Revised: 11/12/2020] [Accepted: 12/03/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Metabolic reprogramming is one of the main hallmarks of cancer cells. It refers to the metabolic adaptations of tumor cells in response to nutrient deficiency, microenvironmental insults, and anti-cancer therapies. Metabolic transformation during tumor development plays a critical role in the continued tumor growth and progression and is driven by a complex interplay between the tumor mutational landscape, epigenetic modifications, and microenvironmental influences. Understanding the tumor metabolic vulnerabilities might open novel diagnostic and therapeutic approaches with the potential to improve the efficacy of current tumor treatments. Prostate cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease harboring different mutations and tumor cell phenotypes. While the increase of intra-tumor genetic and epigenetic heterogeneity is associated with tumor progression, less is known about metabolic regulation of prostate cancer cell heterogeneity and plasticity. This review summarizes the central metabolic adaptations in prostate tumors, state-of-the-art technologies for metabolic analysis, and the perspectives for metabolic targeting and diagnostic implications.
Collapse
|