External validation of the "optimal PSA follow-up schedule after radical prostatectomy" in a new cohort

Validation of schedules for optimal prostate-specific antigen monitoring after radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Early detection of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is crucial for early treatment and improving survival outcomes. The optimal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) monitoring remains unclear, and several models have been proposed. We aimed to externally validate four models for optimal PSA monitoring after RP and propose modifications to improve them.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinicopathological data of 896 patients who underwent robot-assisted RP between 2009 and 2022. We examined all PSA values and estimated the PSA value for four monitoring schedules at each time point in the virtual follow-up. We defined the ideal PSA for BCR detection between 0.2 and 0.4 ng/mL.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 21.4 months, 128 (14.3%) patients presented BCR. The original and modified Keio models, National Cancer Center Hospital model, and American Urological Association/American Society for Radiation Oncology model detected BCR in 14 (10.9%), three (2.3%), 12 (9.4%), and 11 (8.6%) patients with PSA >0.4 ng/mL. Most patients experienced BCR detected with PSA >0.4 ng/mL during the first year postoperative. The modification of interval within 6 months postoperative avoided BCR detection with PSA >0.4 ng/mL within the first year postoperative in 8/9 (88.9%), 1/2 (50.0%), 5/6 (83.3%), and 4/4 (100%) for the original and modified Keio models, National Cancer Center Hospital model, and American Urological Association/American Society for Radiation Oncology model, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We validated four models for PSA monitoring after RP to detect BCR and suggested modifications to avoid detections out of the desired range of PSA. These modifications could help to establish an optimal PSA monitoring schedule after RP.

Practice Patterns of Korean Urologists Regarding Positive Surgical Margins after Radical Prostatectomy: a Survey and Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus on the optimal treatment with curative intent for patients with positive surgical margins (PSMs) following radical prostatectomy (RP). The aim of this study was to investigate the perceptions and treatment patterns of Korean urologists regarding the resection margin after RP.

METHODS

A preliminary questionnaire was prepared by analyzing various studies on resection margins after RP. Eight experienced urologists finalized the 10-item questionnaire. In July 2019, the final questionnaire was delivered via e-mail to 105 urologists in Korea who specialize in urinary cancers.

RESULTS

We received replies from 91 of the 105 urologists (86.7%) in our sample population. Among them, 41 respondents (45.1%) had performed more than 300 RPs and 22 (24.2%) had completed 500 or more RPs. In the question about whether they usually performed an additional biopsy beyond the main specimen, to get information about surgical margin invasion during surgery, the main opinion was that if no residual cancer was suspected, it was not performed (74.7%). For PSMs, the Gleason score of the positive site (49.5%) was judged to be a more important prognostic factor than the margin location (18.7%), multifocality (14.3%), or margin length (17.6%). In cases with PSMs after surgery, the prevailing opinion on follow-up was to measure and monitor prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels rather than to begin immediate treatment (68.1%). Many respondents said that they considered postoperative radiologic examinations when PSA was elevated (72.2%), rather than regularly (24.4%). When patients had PSMs without extracapsular extension (pT2R1) or a negative surgical margin with extracapsular extension (pT3aR0), the response 'does not make a difference in treatment policy' prevailed at 65.9%. Even in patients at high risk of PSMs on preoperative radiologic screening, 84.6% of the respondents said that they did not perform neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Most respondents (75.8%) indicated that they avoided nerve-sparing RP in cases with a high risk of PSMs, but 25.7% said that they had tried nerve-sparing surgery. Additional analyses showed that urologists who had performed 300 or more prostatectomies tended to attempt more nerve-sparing procedures in patients with a high risk of PSMs than less experienced surgeons (36.6% vs. 14.0%; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The most common response was to monitor PSA levels without recommending any additional treatment when PSMs were found after RP. Through this questionnaire, we found that the perceptions and treatment patterns of Korean urologists differed considerably according to RP resection margin status. Refined research and standard practice guidelines are needed.

Negative impact of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy on detecting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy

Background

Routine use of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) before radical prostatectomy (RP) is not recommended, but it is sometimes performed to reduce the prostate size and tumor volume or to prevent tumor progression during the wait times for surgery in clinical practice. On the other hand, the impact of NHT on the pattern of biochemical recurrence (BCR) is unknown.

Methods

We retrospectively examined 1749 consecutive patients who underwent RP between 1996 and 2017. Among the patients who met the inclusion criteria, BCR developed in 240 of non-NHT patients and in 120 of NHT patients during the mean follow-up period of 6.9 years. We examined the impact of NHT on the PSA-doubling time (DT) following BCR at different times after RP.

Results

The median PSA-DTs in non-NHT patients who experienced BCR in the first year after surgery, between 1 and 2 years, between 2 and 3 years, between 3 and 4 years, between 4 and 5 years, and at > 5 years were 5.5, 8.8, 11.3, 17.7, 18.2, and 18.4 months, respectively. On the other hand, those in NHT patients were 1.4, 4.1, 9.1, 13.4, 27.2, and 19.3 months, respectively. The differences of PSA-DTs in the first year after surgery (p < 0.001) and between 1 and 2 years (p = 0.005) were significant between non-NHT and NHT patients.

Conclusion

Patients who received NHT had a higher risk of a rapid PSA increase when they experienced BCR, especially within 2 years after RP. In order to not miss the optimal timing of salvage treatment for BCR, intensive PSA follow-up is necessary.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10147-021-01942-8.