Role of Radical Prostatectomy in Clinically Non-Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer

Improved survival of patients with newly diagnosed oligometastatic prostate cancer through intensified multimodal treatment

Background and objectives

The standard of care for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) includes androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), novel antihormonal therapies (NHT) and/or chemotherapy. Patients with newly diagnosed oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) represent a distinct subgroup of mHSPC, for which the optimal treatment, particularly the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) and metastasis-directed therapy (MDT), is currently under debate.

Materials and methods

In this single center, retrospective analysis, 43 patients with newly diagnosed omPCa were included. All patients underwent RP as part of a multimodal, personalized treatment approach. Other treatments included ADT, NHT, MDT (surgery or radiotherapy), adjuvant radiotherapy (prostatic fossa and/or pelvic lymph nodes) or chemotherapy in various combinations. Clinical endpoints were progression free and cancer specific survival (PFS, CSS).

Results

No patient with omPCa died from prostate cancer during an up to ten years follow-up period after intensified multimodal treatment i.e., RP, ADT, adjuvant radiation therapy and MDT (n=13). In contrast, patients requiring chemotherapy (n=10) showed a significantly worse PFS (p<0.001) and CSS (p<0.001). Patients receiving various combinations (<4 therapeutic modalities; n=20) showed a more favorable outcome than patients receiving chemotherapy, but differences in PFS and CSS were not statistically significant compared to patients receiving an intensified multimodal treatment.

Conclusions

An intensified, multimodal treatment approach including RP can lead to excellent survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed omPCa. Patients requiring chemotherapy have most likely a more aggressive disease and therefore a more rapid tumor progression. Future studies to identify markers for risk stratification in patients with omPCa are therefore needed.

Is there a role for radical prostatectomy in the management of oligometastatic prostate cancer? A systematic review

CONTEXT

There is a growing interest about the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in local cancer control in oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa).

PURPOSE

To evaluate the oncological and functional outcomes of RP in the management of oligometastatic PCa through a systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review search was performed and the following bibliographic databases were accessed: PubMed, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched from January 2000 to November 2022. This was carried out by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Based on the literature search of 384 articles, 11 (511 patients) met the inclusion criteria (mean age: 65.5 yr.). Positive surgical margins were 59%. Median follow-up ranged from 13 to 64 months. Clinical progression-free survival ranged from 56% at 3 years to 45% at 7 years. Specific and overall survival rates ranged from 60 to 80.5% and 78 to 80% at 5 years, respectively. Clavien ≥3 complications ranged from 0 to 21%. The urinary incontinence rate was 14.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to published studies, RP of oligometastatic PCa appears to be safe with acceptable morbidity in selected patients. The lack of a consensual definition, the low level of evidence and the bias of the comparative and retrospective studies available do not allow practical recommendations to be made. There is currently no place for metastatic surgery outside of participation in a clinical trial.

Cytoreductive prostatectomy improves survival outcomes in patients with oligometastases: a systematic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) should be performed in patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OPC) remains controversial. The goal of this systematic meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of CRP as a treatment for OPC.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. Data sources included publications in the PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, EBSCO, and Web of Science (SCI) databases as of May 2022. Eligible articles included prospective studies comparing the efficacy of CRP to a lack of CRP in patients with OPC.

RESULTS

In total, 10 publications incorporating 888 patients were analyzed. Tumor-reducing prostatectomy was found to have no significant effect on long-term or short-term OS [OR = 2.26, 95% CI (0.97, 5.28), P = 0.06] and [OR = 1.73, 95% CI (0.83, 3.58), P = 0.14], but it significantly improved patient long-term or short-term CSS [OR = 1.77, 95% CI (1.01, 310), P = 0.04] and [OR = 2.71, 95% CI (1.72, 4.29), P < 0.0001] and PFS [OR = 1.93, 95% CI (1.25, 2.97), P = 0.003].

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that cytoreductive prostatectomy can confer survival benefits to OPC patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

INPLASY protocol 202260017 https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2022.6.0017 .

Role of surgery in oligometastatic prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy as single modality therapy was the standard management for oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Current paradigm shifts toward a multimodality therapy approach, targeting all sites of disease, including treatment of the primary in the form of radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. The objective of this article was to reveiw the literature regarding the role of surgery in oligometastatic PCa. PubMed and MEDLINE electronic databases were queried for English language articles from January 1, 1980 to March 31, 2019. Keywords use included oligometastatic PCa, metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa), radical prostatectomy, and cytoreductive prostatectomy. Preclinical, prospective, and retrospective studies were included. There is no published randomized controlled trials, evaluating the role of surgery in mPCa. Preclinical and retrospective data suggest benefit of primary tumor treatment in mPCa. Current literature supports the concept of cytoreductive surgery as it can prevent late symptomatic local progression, has acceptable complications, and may prolong survival in patients with mPCa. Surgery is a feasible procedure in mPCa which may improve outcome in mPCa. However, there is no Level 1 evidence, yet that support the role of surgery in mPCa. The results from well-organized prospective, randomized controlled trials are awaited before performing radical prostatectomy for mPCa in clinical practice.

Radical Prostatectomy for High-risk Localized or Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: Removing the Primary

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the literature to determine what role, if any, radical prostatectomy should play in the treatment of high-risk and/or node-positive prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

The AUA, NCCN, and EAU all include radical prostatectomy as a treatment option for high-risk prostate cancer based on evidence that has shown improvements in biochemical-free and disease-specific survival. Lymph node-positive patients may also derive benefit from radical prostatectomy with lymph node dissection, however, only retrospective studies with high risk of selection bias have been published to date. High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease representing a wide range of disease characteristics. Radical surgery, historically avoided in such patients, may now be considered a valid treatment option for select cases. The adverse effects of surgery using modern techniques lead to similar quality of life outcomes as radiation therapy, and treatment of the primary tumor is likely beneficial when compared to ADT alone.

Cytoreductive Prostatectomy for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: First Lessons Learned From the Multicentric Prospective Local Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer (LoMP) Trial

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively evaluate patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer in the context of the LoMP trial (which investigates the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy [cRP] in addition to standard of care [SoC]) and to provide a preliminary analysis of patient's characteristics, safety of cRP, and early local symptoms.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

cRP was performed in asymptomatic patients with a resectable tumor and who were fit to undergo surgery (group A, n = 17). Only SoC was administered to patients with metastatic prostate cancer ineligible or unwilling to undergo cRP (group B, n = 29). At 3 months, surgical complications related to cRP and local symptoms for both groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

Median operation time, blood loss, and hospital stay for cRP were 215 minutes (150-290), 250 mL (100-900), and 4 days (2-7), respectively. Respectively 5 (29.4%) and 2 (11.8%) patients suffered grades 1 and 2 complications within 3 months postoperatively. When compared with Group B, patients in group A were younger (64 vs 72 years, P = .005), had lower initial prostate-specific antigen (15.9 vs 156 µg/L, P = .002), and less high-volume metastatic disease (5.9% vs 69%, P <.001). At 3 months, 5 (29.4%) patients in group A reported stress urinary incontinence without any further local symptoms. In group B, respectively 2 (6.8%), 11 (37.9%), and 2 (6.8%) patients suffered urge incontinence, obstructive voiding needing medical intervention, and ureteric obstruction.

CONCLUSION

In a group of well-selected patients, cRP is safe. These patients have more favorable characteristics compared with patients treated with only SoC. If only SoC can be offered, patients are at risk to suffer from local symptoms.

Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: Results of a Single-institution Series with Long-term Follow-up

In the absence of data from randomized trials, the role of local treatment in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is gaining interest. Our study aimed to assess perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) in a selected cohort of 11 patients with oligometastatic disease treated with RP and extended pelvic lymph node dissection between 2006 and 2011. Oligometastatic disease was defined as the presence of five or fewer bone lesions at bone scan with or without suspicious pelvic or retroperitoneal nodal involvement at preoperative imaging. The minimum follow-up for survivors was 5 yr. Perioperative outcomes, clinical progression, and cancer-specific mortality (CSM) were evaluated. Median age was 72 yr. Median operative time, blood loss, and length of hospitalization were 170min, 750ml, and 13 d, respectively. Overall, two patients (18%) experienced grade 3 complications in the postoperative period, and eight (73%) received blood transfusions. Overall, 10 (91%) and 8 (73%) patients had lymph node invasion and positive surgical margins, respectively. Adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy was administered to 10 patients (91%). Median follow-up for survivors was 63 mo. The 7-yr clinical progression- and CSM-free survival rates were 45% and 82%, respectively. Our findings support the safety and effectiveness of RP in a highly selected cohort of PCa patients with bone metastases and long-term follow-up.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the outcomes of patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy with a minimum of 5-yr follow-up. This surgical procedure performed with a multimodal approach might represent a safe and feasible option in selected men and provide acceptable oncologic outcomes at long-term follow-up.

[Oncological principles for local control of primary tumor]

OBJECTIVE

Review of the databases of carcinogenesis and the principles of local control of the primary tumor in order to decrease the risk of tumor progression and predict metastatic behavior.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of the literature using Medline databases based on scientific relevance. Research was centered on the characteristics of solid tumor development, the basics of local control of the primary tumor, latest advance in genomics and the oncological principles applied on prostate cancer surgery.

RESULTS

The cornerstone in order to cure a local or locally advanced cancer is to eradicate the primary tumor. This should be done using effective methods that can assure local control, decrease the risk of progression and metastasis. The oncological surgery is the most important step in order to have this tumor control, beside radiotherapy and systemic therapy associated. In localized prostate cancer, surgery remains the gold standard between the multiple therapeutic modalities proposed.

CONCLUSION

The local control of solid malignant tumor is primordial in order to change the natural history of the disease and decrease its risk of progression. This is the goal of oncological surgery, and starting from these principles radical prostatectomy was favored.

[Oncological outcomes of prostate cancer surgery]

OBJECTIVE

Review of the oncological results of the radical prostatectomy as initial treatment of prostate cancer, according to the surgical approach and the risk stratification using D'Amico risk groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of literature using Medline databases and MedScience based on scientific relevance. Research focused on the oncological results of the radical prostatectomy in series and meta-analysis published since 10 years, taking into consideration the surgical approach if mentioned.

RESULTS

The characteristics of the operated tumor highly impact the local control authenticated by the pathologic stage and the rates of positive surgical margins (PSM), in addition to the survival and the biochemical recurrence. Surgical technique adapted according to the tumor treated, was a constant challenge to the urologist, who counter balance between the oncological control and the conservation of urinary and sexual function by conditioning the type of radical prostatectomy. Results of radical prostatectomy acceptable in terms of PSM and survival are not influenced by the surgical approach but by the degree of surgical experience.

CONCLUSION

Results of radical prostatectomy show the efficient local control of prostate cancer, taking into consideration the oncological rules and indications validated by multidisciplinary meetings, based on the national (CCAFU) and European oncological guidelines. Tendency is going toward considering radical prostatectomy indicated for patients with higher risk of disease progression, so integrating surgery in a multidisciplinary personalized approach.

A Multi-institutional Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes in 106 Men Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy for Distant Metastatic Prostate Cancer at Presentation

BACKGROUND

Current trials are investigating radical intervention in men with metastatic prostate cancer. However, there is a lack of safety data for radical prostatectomy as therapy in this setting.

OBJECTIVE

To examine perioperative outcomes and short-term complications after radical prostatectomy for locally resectable, distant metastatic prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective case series from 2007 to 2014 comprising 106 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic (M1) prostate cancer from the USA, Germany, Italy, and Sweden.

INTERVENTION

Radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics were used to present margin status, continence, and readmission, reoperation, and overall complication rates at 90 d, as well as for 21 specific complications. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to estimate survival function. Intercenter variability and M1a/ M1b subgroups were examined.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Some 79.2% of patients did not suffer any complications; positive-margin (53.8%), lymphocele (8.5%), and wound infection (4.7%) rates were higher in our cohort than in a meta-analysis of open radical prostatectomy performed for standard indications. At a median follow-up of 22.8 mo, 94/106 (88.7%) men were still alive. The study is limited by its retrospective design, differing selection criteria, and short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Radical prostatectomy for men with locally resectable, distant metastatic prostate cancer appears safe in expert hands for meticulously selected patients. Overall and specific complication rates related to the surgical extirpation are not more frequent than when radical prostatectomy is performed for standard indications, and the use of extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in all of this cohort compared to its selective use in localized/locally advanced prostate cancer accounts for any extra morbidity.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Men presenting with advanced prostate cancer that has spread beyond the prostate are increasingly being considered for treatments directed at the prostate itself. On the basis of results for our international series of 106 men, surgery appears reasonably safe in this setting for certain patients.