Survival after radical prostatectomy vs. radiation therapy in ductal carcinoma of the prostate

Rare histological prostate cancer subtypes: Cancer-specific and other-cause mortality

BACKGROUND

To assess cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates in patients with rare histological prostate cancer subtypes.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2020), we applied smoothed cumulative incidence plots and competing risks regression (CRR) models.

RESULTS

Of 827,549 patients, 1510 (0.18%) harbored ductal, 952 (0.12%) neuroendocrine, 462 (0.06%) mucinous, and 95 (0.01%) signet ring cell carcinoma. In the localized stage, five-year CSM vs. OCM rates ranged from 2 vs. 10% in acinar and 3 vs. 8% in mucinous, to 55 vs. 19% in neuroendocrine carcinoma patients. In the locally advanced stage, five-year CSM vs. OCM rates ranged from 5 vs. 6% in acinar, to 14 vs. 16% in ductal, and to 71 vs. 15% in neuroendocrine carcinoma patients. In the metastatic stage, five-year CSM vs. OCM rates ranged from 49 vs. 15% in signet ring cell and 56 vs. 16% in mucinous, to 63 vs. 9% in ductal and 85 vs. 12% in neuroendocrine carcinoma. In multivariable CRR, localized neuroendocrine (HR 3.09), locally advanced neuroendocrine (HR 9.66), locally advanced ductal (HR 2.26), and finally metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma patients (HR 3.57; all p < 0.001) exhibited higher CSM rates relative to acinar adenocarcinoma patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to acinar adenocarcinoma, patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma of all stages and locally advanced ductal carcinoma exhibit higher CSM rates. Conversely, CSM rates of mucinous and signet ring cell adenocarcinoma do not differ from those of acinar adenocarcinoma.

Trial Participation is Not Associated with Better Biochemical Recurrence-free Survival in a Large Cohort of External Beam Radiotherapy-Treated Intermediate- and High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients

AIMS

There is a widespread belief that outcomes of cancer patients treated within clinical trials might not be representative of the outcomes obtained within standard clinical settings. We sought to investigate the effect of trial participation on biochemical recurrence (BCR) in localised, D'Amico intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We relied on a study population treated with EBRT between January 2001 and January 2021 at a single tertiary care centre, stratified according to trial enrolment. Separate Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models tested BCR-free survival at 60 months within intermediate- and high-risk EBRT patients, after adjustment for covariables. Additionally, the analyses were refitted after inverse probability treatment weighting was performed separately for both risk subgroups.

RESULTS

Of 932 eligible patients, 635 (68%) and 297 (32%) had intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer, respectively. Overall, 53% of patients were trial participants. BCR rates were 11 versus 5% (P = 0.27) and 12 versus 14% (P = 0.08) in trial participants versus non-participants for intermediate- and high-risk subgroups, respectively. Differences in patient and clinical characteristics were recorded. Trial participation status failed to reach predictor status in multivariable Cox regression models for BCR in both intermediate-risk (hazard ratio 1.34; 95% confidence interval 0.71-2.49; P = 0.4) and high-risk patients (hazard ratio 1.03; 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.34; P = 0.9). Virtually the same results were recorded in inverse probability treatment weighting cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Relying on a large cohort of EBRT-treated intermediate- and high-risk patients, no BCR differences were recorded between trial participants and non-participants after accounting for confounders.

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate or seminal vesicle adenocarcinoma: An multi-disciplinary team (MDT) case report and literature review

We introduced a 61-year-old male with ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate who underwent a tortuous diagnosis and treatment. Multi-disciplinary team meetings organized by our hospital have shown great value in the whole process. The patient presented with gross hematuria accompanied by frequent urination initially, and was diagnosed with ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate involving right seminal vesicle gland and urethra by urethroscopy biopsy. The clinical stage of tumor was T3bN0M0. After 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the tumor shrank significantly and the patient underwent a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. But the patient declined to continue chemotherapy postoperatively. After 10 months, the serum prostatic specific antigen increased to 0.05 ng/mL, and multiple metastases were found in the patient's bilateral lungs. However, an unexpected diagnosis of seminal vesicle adenocarcinoma was put forward from another hospital after supplementary pathologic immunohistochemical examination. Then, after careful discussion and demonstration by our multi-disciplinary team experts, we insisted on the diagnosis of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate and suggested that the original regimen of chemotherapy should be continued. Up-to-date, 14 months after the operation, the patient continues to survive while undergoing ongoing active treatment as recommended.