Does local treatment of the prostate in advanced and/or lymph node metastatic disease improve efficacy of androgen-deprivation therapy? A systematic review

Ten‐year outcomes of whole‐pelvic intensity‐modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer with regional lymph node metastasis

BACKGROUND

Management of pelvic node-positive prostate cancer has been challenging and controversial. We conducted a study to evaluate the outcomes of whole-pelvic (WP) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

METHODS

A total of 67 consecutive patients with cT1c-4N1M0 prostate cancer were definitively treated by WP SIB-IMRT. Neoadjuvant ADT (median: 8.3 months) was administered in all cases. WP SIB-IMRT was designed to simultaneously deliver 78, 66.3, and 58.5 Gy in 39 fractions to the prostate plus seminal vesicles, metastatic lymph nodes (LNs), and the pelvic LN region, respectively. Adjuvant ADT (median: 24.7 months) was administered in 66 patients.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 81.6 months (range: 30.5-160.7). Biochemical relapse-free, overall, and prostate cancer-specific survival rates at 10 years were 59.8%, 79.6%, and 86.3%, respectively. Loco-regional recurrence was not observed. Being in International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 5 and having a posttreatment detectable nadir prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (≥0.010 ng/ml) were significantly associated with worse prostate cancer-specific survival and progression of castration resistance. The 10-year cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 and 3 late toxicities were, respectively, 1.5% and 0% for genitourinary, 0% and 1.5% for gastrointestinal events. No grade 4 acute or late toxicities were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

WP SIB-IMRT can be safely administered to patients with pelvic node-positive prostate cancer. Since grade group 5 and detectable nadir PSA levels are risks for castration resistance, we may need to increase the intensity of treatment for such cases.

Comparing the Survival Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiotherapy for Patients With De Novo Metastasis Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Study

Purpose

The efficacy of local treatments (LTs) in selected patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) had been demonstrated. However, the comparative effectiveness between LTs is unclear. Here, we compared the impact of radical prostatectomy (RP) and brachytherapy (RT) on the survival outcomes of mPCa patients.

Materials and Methods

mPCa patients who received RT or RP between 2004 and 2016 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to evaluate the comparative risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM) between LTs. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) and adjusted standardized mortality ratio weighting (SMRW) were performed to balance the clinicopathological characteristics of the groups.

Results

Of 684 mPCa patients, 481 underwent RP and 203 received RT. After PSM, both groups included 148 cases, and RT resulted in comparable CSM versus RP [CSM: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, p = 0.325; ACM: HR = 0.73, p = 0.138], which was consistent with the SMRW model [CSM: HR = 0.83, p = 0.138; overall survival (OS): HR = 0.75, p = 0.132]. However, RP was associated with a lower CSM in the T_1–2 subgroup (HR = 0.42, p = 0.048) and a lower ACM in the T_1–2 (HR = 0.55, p = 0.031) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤20ng/ml (HR = 0.48, p = 0.022) subgroups. Besides, the results showed that the mortality risk was similar between the two groups in the T_3–4, Gleason score (GS) >7, PSA >20 ng/ml, and all metastatic subgroups (all p > 0.100).

Conclusions

RP could confer better survival outcomes than could RT in mPCa patients with favorable primary tumor features, but not in those with advanced primary tumor features. Moreover, the metastatic substage has limited impact on the comparative effectiveness between RP and RT. Further clinical trials are necessary to confirm the present results.

Initial Management of Noncastrate Advanced, Recurrent, or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

Update all preceding ASCO guidelines on initial hormonal management of noncastrate advanced, recurrent, or metastatic prostate cancer.

METHODS

The Expert Panel based recommendations on a systematic literature review. Recommendations were approved by the Expert Panel and the ASCO Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee.

RESULTS

Four clinical practice guidelines, one clinical practice guidelines endorsement, 19 systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, 47 phase III randomized controlled trials, nine cohort studies, and two review papers informed the guideline update.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, or apalutamide, each when administered with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), represent four separate standards of care for noncastrate metastatic prostate cancer. Currently, the use of any of these agents in any particular combination or series cannot be recommended. ADT plus docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, or apalutamide should be offered to men with metastatic noncastrate prostate cancer, including those who received prior therapies, but have not yet progressed. The combination of ADT plus abiraterone and prednisolone should be considered for men with noncastrate locally advanced nonmetastatic prostate cancer who have undergone radiotherapy, rather than castration monotherapy. Immediate ADT may be offered to men who initially present with noncastrate locally advanced nonmetastatic disease who have not undergone previous local treatment and are unwilling or unable to undergo radiotherapy. Intermittent ADT may be offered to men with high-risk biochemically recurrent nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Active surveillance may be offered to men with low-risk biochemically recurrent nonmetastatic prostate cancer. The panel does not support use of either micronized abiraterone acetate or the 250 mg dose of abiraterone with a low-fat breakfast in the noncastrate setting at this time.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.

Up-regulation of LIMK1 expression in prostate cancer is correlated with poor pathological features, lymph node metastases and biochemical recurrence

This study aimed to explore the association between LIM domain kinase 1 (LIMK1) expression in prostate cancer (PCa) tissues with advanced pathological features, lymph node metastases and biochemical recurrence. A total of 279 PCa specimens from patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and 50 benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) specimens were collected to construct tissue microarray, which were subjected to immunohistochemical staining for LIMK1 expression subsequently. Logistic and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the relationship between LIMK1 expression and clinicopathological features of patients with PCa. Immunohistochemical staining assay demonstrated that LIMK1 expression was significantly higher in PCa than BPH specimens (77.1% vs 26.0%; P < .001). LIMK1 expression was significantly higher in positive lymph node specimens than corresponding PCa specimens (P = .002; P < .001). Up-regulation of LIMK1 was associated with prostate volume, prostate-specific antigen, prostate-specific antigen density, Gleason score, T stage, lymph node metastases, extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion, and positive surgical margin. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that LIMK1 was an independent risk factor for PCa lymph node metastasis (P < .05). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that the up-regulation of LIMK1 was an independent risk factor for biochemical recurrence. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that up-regulation LIMK1 was associated with shortened biochemical-free survival (BFS) after radical prostatectomy (P < .001). In conclusion, LIMK1 was significantly up-regulated in PCa and positive lymph node specimens and correlated with lymph node metastasis and shortened BFS of PCa. The underlying molecular mechanism of LIMK1 in PCa should be further evaluated.

Prostate cancer with low burden skeletal disease at diagnosis: outcome of concomitant radiotherapy on primary tumor and metastases

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate toxicity and clinical outcome in synchronous bone only oligometastatic (≤2 lesions) prostate cancer patients, simultaneously irradiated to prostate/prostatic bed, lymph nodes and bone metastases.

METHODS

From 2/2009 to 6/2015, 39 bone only prostate cancer patients underwent radiotherapy (RT) at "radical" doses to bone metastases (median 2 Gy equivalent dose, EQD2>40Gy, α/β = 1,5), nodes, and prostate/prostatic bed, within the same RT course, in association with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).Biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, freedom from distant metastases and overall survival were evaluated.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 46.5 (1.2-103.6) months, 5 patients died from disease progression, 10 experienced biochemical relapse, 19, still in ADT, presented undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at the last follow-up. Five patients who discontinued ADT after a median of 34 months (5.8-41) are free from biochemical relapse.The 4 year Kaplan-Meier estimates of biochemical relapse-free survival, clinical relapse-free survival, freedom from distant metastases and overall survival were 53.3%, 65.7%, 73.4% and 82.4% respectively.No Grade > 2 acute events and only two severe late urinary events were recorded, not due to the concomitant treatment of primary and metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that "radical" and synchronous irradiation of primitive tumor and metastatic disease may be a valid approach in synchronous bone only prostate cancer patients, showing mild toxicity profile and promising survival results.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first analysis of clinical outcome in synchronous bone-only metastasis (neither nodal nor visceral) patients at diagnosis, treated with radical RT to all disease, associated to ADT.

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in lymph node staging for prostate cancer

In patients with prostate cancer, the presence of lymph node (LN) metastases is a critical prognostic factor and is essential for treatment planning. Conventional cross-sectional imaging performs poorly for nodal staging as both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are mainly dependent on size and basic morphological criteria. Therefore, extended pelvic LN dissection (ePLND) remains the gold standard for LN staging, however, it is an invasive procedure with its own drawbacks, thus creating a need for accurate preoperative imaging test. Incorporating functional MRI by using diffusion-weighted MRI has proven superior to conventional MRI protocol by means of both qualitative and quantitative assessment. Currently, the increased diagnostic performance remains insufficient to replace ePLND and the future role of DWI may be through combination with MR lymphangiography or with novel positron emission tomography (PET) tracers. In this article, the current state of data supporting DWI in LN staging of patients with prostate cancer is discussed.

Efficacy characteristics of different therapeutic modalities for locally advanced prostate cancer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Though previous studies have investigated the efficacy characteristics of several different therapeutic modalities for locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPCa) patients, the available results remained unestablished. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was conducted to clarify such differences.

Methods

The online PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were comprehensively searched for relevant studies published before September 1st, 2017, and eventually eleven relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. The hazard odds ratios (HRs) with 95% credible interval (CI) were utilized to evaluate the efficacy characteristics of several different therapeutic modalities for LAPCa patients by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.

Results

Five different therapeutic modalities were ultimately enrolled to shed light on the efficacy characteristics for LAPCa patients and seven different clinical outcomes were finally analyzed in this study. The cumulative rank probability of overall survival (OS) or cancer-specific survival (CSS) from best to worst was radiotherapy (RT) + orchiectomy, RT + long-term androgen deprivation therapy (LTADT), RT + short-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT), LTADT and RT; RT + LTADT, RT + orchiectomy, RT + STADT, LTADT and RT, respectively. Meanwhile, in the terms of progression-free survival (PFS), biochemical failure rate (BFR), disease-free survival (DFS), local progression rate (LPR) and metastasis rate (MR), RT + LTADT as well as RT + STADT had a higher, whereas RT alone or LTADT had a relatively lower treatment effect.

Conclusions

All in all, our results indicated that RT + LTADT or RT + orchiectomy was among the best two therapeutic regimens in the prognostic aspects of the patients with LAPCa. Furthermore, in consideration of reducing invasive treatment of eligible patients, RT + LTADT could yield better survival benefit of LAPCa patients, compared with others. In addition, the results of our analysis might provide a reference in the clinical selection. Larger sample sizes of strictly designed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were wanted to validate our findings.

Radiation therapy to the primary in metastatic prostate cancer: palliation only or altering tumor biology?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite improvement in systemic treatment, the prognosis of men with de novo metastatic prostate cancer remains poor. Treating the local disease may not only reduce the occurrence of local urologic symptoms, but also slow the metastatic process, either by reducing the seeding from the primary tumor or by altering the microenvironment and thus minimizing the formation of new metastatic sites.

RECENT FINDINGS

Retrospective and population-based studies have suggested that the addition of local treatment to systemic therapy may improve survival in this patient group. The aim of this review is to discuss the biologic rationale of such an approach, present and discuss the current available evidence, with a focus on radiation-based treatments. It is key to also address the issue of patient selection as not all patients with metastatic prostate cancer will benefit from the treatment of the primary tumor.

SUMMARY

Retrospective and population-based research suggests a survival benefit of prostatectomy or radiotherapy in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Clinical trials evaluating the role of prostate radiotherapy in the metastatic setting are ongoing.

Increased Paxillin expression in prostate cancer is associated with advanced pathological features, lymph node metastases and biochemical recurrence

Purpose Paxillin regulates cell-cell adhesion, and altered Paxillin expression has been associated with human carcinogenesis. This study analyzed the association between Paxillin expression in prostate cancer (PCa) tissues with clinicopathological features, lymph node metastasis and biochemical PCa recurrence.

Methods A total of 386 tissue specimens from PCa patients who received radical prostatectomy and 60 tissue specimens from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) cases were collected to construct tissue microarrays, which were subsequently immunostained for Paxillin expression. Thirty positive lymph node tissue specimens and 10 healthy prostate tissue specimens were randomly selected for Paxillin immunostaining.

Results The association between Paxillin expression, lymph node metastasis and biochemical PCa recurrence was analyzed. Paxillin expression was significantly higher in PCa than both normal and BPH tissues (P<0.001) and was correlated with preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, clinical tumor stage, lymph node metastasis, positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion (P<0.05 for all). Logistic regression analysis showed that Paxillin and Gleason score were independent risk factors for PCa lymph node metastasis (P<0.05). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve indicated that Paxillin expression (AUC=0.723) more accurately predicted PCa lymph node metastasis than Gleason score (AUC=0.692). Kaplan-Meier curve analysis showed that increased Paxillin expression was associated with shortened biochemical-free survival (BFS) after radical prostatectomy (P<0.001).

Conclusion Paxillin was significantly upregulated in PCa compared with BPH and normal tissues and associated with lymph node metastasis and shortened BFS of PCa. Further study will investigate the underlying molecular mechanism and the role of Paxillin in PCa.

[Long-term outcomes of prostate cancer patients with lymph nodes metastasis after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection]

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate biochemical recurrence-free survival (RFS) and to identify useful predictors of such survival in localized prostate cancer patients (cN0) and pelvic lymph node metastasis (pN+) treated with radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter and retrospective study, assessed overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and biochemical recurrence-free survival (RFS), between January 2005 until December 2010 with 5 years of distance. We evaluated factors predicting long-term RFS in node positive prostate cancer patients.

RESULTS

Thus, 30 patients were included. Median follow-up was 89.9±27.4 months. After surgery, patients were treated with surveillance (n=4, 13.5%), adjuvant hormone therapy (n=22, 73%) or combination of radio and hormone therapy, (n=4, 13.5%). During the follow-up, 50% of patients had biochemical recurrence, with a mean time period of 38±30 months. Five and 10-year RFS were 57% and 41% respectively. Extra lymph nodes extension (P=0.00021) and pathological margin status (P=0.0065) were independent predictors of 5-year RFS.

CONCLUSION

Biochemical RFS of patients treated with radical prostatectomy and subclinical lymph node metastatic disease is adequate and multifactorial. However, this study identifies pathological margin status and extra lymph node extension as independent factors of b RFS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Characteristics and national trends of patients receiving treatment of the primary tumor for metastatic prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine temporal trends in the receipt of prostatectomy or locoregional radiation to the prostate for patients with metastatic prostate cancer and to identify predictors of receipt of local treatment.

METHODS

We identified 39,976 patients with metastatic prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004-2012 using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We used logistic multivariable regression to determine trends in the receipt of prostate and/or pelvic radiation or radical prostatectomy after adjusting for demographic and clinical factors.

RESULTS

Patients with metastatic disease were less likely to receive locoregional treatment over time [7.88% in 2004 vs. 5.53% in 2012, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.97 per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.95-0.98; P < 0.001]. Cofactors associated with decreased likelihood for locoregional treatment included older age (AOR = 0.96 per year, 95% CI = 0.96-0.96, P < 0.001) and increased comorbidity level (1 comorbidity: AOR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.73-0.93, P = 0.001; two or more comorbidities: AOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.39-0.61, P < 0.001). Decreasing utilization of both radiation and surgery of the primary site contributed to this trend. More specifically, patients with metastatic disease were less likely to receive radiation to the prostate and/or pelvis over time (5.9% in 2004 vs. 4.2% in 2012, AOR = 0.97 per year, 95% CI = 0.95-0.99, P < 0.001). Similarly, there was a trend toward decreased use of radical prostatectomy (2.17% in 2004 compared to 1.31% in 2012, AOR = 0.96 per year, 95% CI 0.93-0.99, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Despite recent evidence of the possible benefit for locoregional treatment of prostate cancer in the setting of metastatic disease, rates of prostate radiation and radical prostatectomy among this population have actually declined over the 8-year period between 2004 and 2012, suggesting slow adoption of this novel treatment paradigm.

Radical prostatectomy for locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer

The management of advanced prostate cancer remains challenging. Traditionally, radical prostatectomy was discouraged in patients with locally advanced or node positive disease owing to the increased complication rate and treatment related morbidity. However, technical advances and refinements in surgical techniques have enabled the outcomes for patients with high risk prostate cancer to be improved. More recently, the concept of cytoreductive prostatectomy has been described where surgery (often Combined with an extended lymph node dissection) is performed in the setting of metastatic disease. Indirect evidence suggests an advantage using the cytoreductive approach. Hypothetical explanations for this observed benefit include decreased tumour burden, immune modulation, improved response to secondary treatment and avoidance of secondary complications attributable to local tumour growth. Nevertheless, prospective trials are required to investigate this further.

Androgen deprivation therapy in the treatment of locally advanced, nonmetastatic prostate cancer: practical experience and a review of the clinical trial evidence

Following new scientific insights, initial management for patients with high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer has changed considerably and rapidly over the last few years. Several clinical and pathologic variables should be taken into account when deciding the best treatment choice for those patients. These variables are summarized and discussed in detail. High radiation doses to the prostate are essential to achieve good local control in patients with high-risk nonmetastatic disease. Addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to radiation therapy has significantly improved overall survival and cancer-specific survival compared with radiation therapy alone without significantly increasing toxicity. Long-term neo(adjuvant) ADT (2-3 years) to radiation therapy significantly improved cancer-specific survival compared with short-term ADT (4-6 months). Radical prostatectomy with extended pelvic lymph node dissection is considered a reasonable option in experienced hands. ADT alone is an inappropriate treatment option for patients with high-risk nonmetastatic disease. Management decisions for these patients should be discussed by a multidisciplinary team.

[Reappraisal role of locoregional radiation therapy in metastatic cancers]

Recent innovations in oncology area helped to improve the prognosis of certain cancers including metastatic ones with a decrease in mortality. Recommendations describe the treatment of metastatic cancer as systemic therapy or complementary care and the role of locoregional treatment in the treatment plan only occurs in a palliative context. Currently, in the clinical practice, out of "the evidence based medicine", an early locoregional therapy (surgery or radiation therapy) can be proposed in several cases of metastatic cancers. The aim of the present review is to describe the role of the primary tumor radiation therapy in metastatic disease. In metastatic breast, prostate, cervix, rectal or nasopharyngeal cancers, locoregional treatment including radiation therapy can, in some cases, be discussed and decided in MDT. Ongoing clinical trials in these locations should soon precise the benefit of this locoregional treatment. It will also be important to define the specific criteria in order to select patients who could benefit from this treatment.

Management of Node-Positive and Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer

Historically, stage IV prostate cancer was considered incurable. Although node-positive and oligometastatic prostate cancers are both classified as stage IV, these likely represent distinct clinical groups, and some patients may be curable with aggressive multimodality treatments. There is a lack of randomized evidence, but retrospective studies suggest that radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy may improve survival in these patients. This is an area of great current research interest and prospective randomized trials are needed to help define the optimal treatments for these patients.

Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in metastatic prostate cancer: Does it really make sense?

PURPOSE

Surgical removal of the primary tumor in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is becoming a hotly debated issue. The purpose of this review was to summarize the current knowledge on cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (cRP) in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a non-systematic Medline/PubMed literature search of articles published in the field between January 2000 and April 2015.

RESULTS

Cytoreductive surgery has demonstrated its benefit in various malignancies with a solid biological rationale to justify its assessment in mPCa. cRP appears as a safe and feasible procedure in expert hands and well-selected patients. A growing body of evidence suggests a survival benefit for patients undergoing cRP as a part of a multimodal approach compared to those treated with systemic treatment alone. Nevertheless, little is known about the best clinical and tumor characteristics for the selection of patients most likely to benefit from cRP. The current literature is based on retrospective studies with small cohorts and limited follow-up or large uncontrolled population-based studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from various other malignancies together with the biological rationale and preliminary results in PCa suggest that cytoreductive surgery may be an option in some mPCa patients. The lack of randomized controlled trials and the low level of evidence in the current literature preclude any firms conclusion on the benefit of cRP in mPCa. Ongoing phase II and future phase III studies are mandatory to define the exact role of cRP in mPCa and to identify the patients who are most likely to benefit from cRP.

Surgical cytoreduction of the primary tumor reduces metastatic progression in a mouse model of prostate cancer

Metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is one of the most prevalent cancers in men worldwide. The main cause of death in these patients is androgen-resistant metastatic disease. Surgery of the primary tumor has been avoided in these patients as there is no strong evidence that supports a beneficial effect. From the biological point of view, it appears rational to hypothesize that the primary tumor may contribute to the establishment and growth of metastases. Considering this, we propose that cytoreductive surgery (CS) in advanced metastatic stage slows the progression of metastatic disease. To test this, we used a mouse model of resectable orthotopic prostate cancer (PCa) and performed CS. After surgery, metastases were smaller and less numerous in the treated mice; an effect that was observable until the end of the experiment. These results suggest that CS alone delays the progression of metastatic disease and that although this effect may be temporary, it may translate to prolonged survival, especially when used with adjuvant therapy.

Upregulation of Talin-1 expression associates with advanced pathological features and predicts lymph node metastases and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer

Talin-1 functions to regulate cell-cell adhesion, and its altered expression was reported to be associated with human carcinogenesis.A total of 280 tissue specimens from prostate cancer (PCa) patients who underwent radical prostatectomy, 75 cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) tissue, and 6 cases of normal prostate tissue specimens were collected for construction of tissue microarray and subsequently subjected to immunohistochemical staining of Talin-1 expression.Talin-1 expression was significantly higher in PCa than both normal and BPH tissues (P <0.001). Talin-1 expression in PCa tissues was associated with preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, tumor stage, lymph node metastasis, positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion (all P <0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that Talin-1 and Gleason score were independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis of PCa (P <0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve indicated that Talin-1 expression (AUC = 0.766) had a better accuracy to predict PCa lymph node metastasis than Gleason score (AUC = 0.697), whereas their combination could further enhance the prediction accuracy (AUC = 0.803). Kaplan-Meier curve analysis showed that increased Talin-1 expression was associated with shortened biochemical-free survival of PCa patients after radical prostatectomy (P <0.001).These findings suggested that Talin-1 protein was significantly upregulated in PCa tissues compared with that of BPH tissue and Talin-1 expression was an independent predictor for lymph node metastasis and biochemical recurrence of PCa. Further study will investigate the underlying molecular mechanism and the role of Talin-1 in PCa.

Diagnostic yield and complications of extended lymphadenectomy versus limited lymphadenectomy combined with radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer (PC) is the most reliable procedure for detecting lymphatic metastases. The optimal extension of this procedure is still a topic of debate.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the diagnostic performance and complications of extended lymphadenectomy (ELD) and limited lymphadenectomy (LLD) in a series of patients with high-risk PC who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients with high d'Amico risk who underwent RP with lymphadenectomy between 1999 and 2014. A comparative analysis was performed of the diagnostic capacity of lymphatic metastases of ELD and LLD and of postoperative complications at 90 days.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were analysed, 20 (21.5%) and 73 (78.5%) of whom underwent ELD and LLD, respectively. The mean age of the series was 65.26 years (SD, 5.51). The median follow-up was 1.51 (0.61-2.29) years in the ELD group and 5.94 (3.61-9.10) in the LLD group. The median number of nodes obtained was 13 (9-23) in the ELD group compared with 5 (2-8) in the LLD group (p <.001). The percentages of patients with positive nodes in the ELD and LLD groups were 35% and 5.47%, respectively (p <.001). The overall complication rate at 90 days was 35.5% (33 patients). In the ELD group, 12 patients (60%) had complications, compared with 21 patients (28.8%) in the LLD group (p=.016), with no significant differences in severity according to the Clavien scale (p=.73).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, the detection of metastatic nodes was significantly greater with ELD. ELD increases the number of complications, with no differences compared with LLD in severity according to the modified Clavien scale.

[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.

"Hit the primary": A paradigm shift in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer?

Patients with metastatic prostate cancer (PC) represent a heterogeneous group with survival rates varying between 13 and 75 months. The current standard treatment in this setting is hormonal therapy, with or without docetaxel-based chemotherapy. In the era of individualized medicine, however, maximizing treatment options, especially in long-term surviving patients with limited disease burden, is of capital importance. Emerging data, mainly from retrospective surgical series, show survival benefits in men diagnosed with metastatic PC following definitive therapy for the prostate. Whether the irradiation of primary tumor in a metastatic disease might improve the therapeutic ratio in association with systemic treatments remains investigational. In this scenario, modern radiation therapy (RT) can play a significant role owing to its intrinsic capability to act as a more general immune response modifier, as well as to the potentially better toxicity profile compared to surgery. Preclinical data, clinical experience, and challenges in local treatment in de novo metastatic PC are reviewed and discussed.

Reliability of sentinel node procedure for lymph node staging in prostate cancer patients at high risk for lymph node involvement

AIM

To investigate the reliability of a sentinel node (SN) procedure for nodal staging in prostate cancer (PCa) patients at high risk for lymph node (LN) involvement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seventy-four patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma, who were clinically node-negative and had a risk of LN involvement of ≥ 10% (Partin tables), were prospectively enrolled. Upon intraprostatic 99mTc-nanocolloid injection, they underwent planar scintigraphy and SPECT imaging. Surgical removal of the SN, located by means of a gamma probe, was completed with a superextended LN dissection (seLND) as a reference and followed by radical prostatectomy.

RESULTS

In total, 470 SN (median 6, IQR 3-9) were scintigraphically detected of which 371 (median 4, IQR 2-6) were located by gamma probe and selectively removed during surgery (79%). Histopathology confirmed LN metastases in 37 patients (50%) having 106 affected LN in total (median number per patient 2, IQR 1-4). Twenty-eight patients were node positive (N+) based on the analysis of the resected SN. However, the seLND that was performed as a reference revealed nine additional N+ patients resulting in a sensitivity of 76% (28/37). In total, 15 of 37 patients (41%) had metastases in SN only and could have been spared seLND to remove all affected nodes.

CONCLUSION

We found a relatively low sensitivity when addressing the SN procedure for nodal staging in PCa patients at high risk for LN involvement. Importantly, only less than half of the N+ patients could have been spared a seLND to remove all affected lymphoid tissue.

Integrating chemohormonal therapy and surgery in known or suspected lymph node metastatic prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer persisting in the primary site after systemic therapy may contribute to emergence of resistance and progression. We previously demonstrated molecular characteristics of lethal cancer in the prostatectomy specimens of patients presenting with lymph node metastasis after chemohormonal treatment. Here we report the post-treatment outcomes of these patients and assess whether a link exists between surgery and treatment-free/cancer-free survival.

METHODS

Patients with either clinically detected lymph node metastasis or primaries at high risk for nodal dissemination were treated with androgen ablation and docetaxel. Those responding with PSA concentration <1 ng ml(-1) were recommended surgery 1 year from enrollment. ADT was withheld postoperatively. The rate of survival without biochemical progression 1 year after surgery was measured to screen for efficacy.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled and 39 were evaluable. Three patients (7.7%) declined surgery. Of the remaining 36, 4 patients experienced disease progression during treatment and 4 more did not reach PSA <1. Twenty-six patients (67%) completed surgery, and 13 (33%) were also progression-free 1 year postoperatively (8 with undetectable PSA). With a median follow-up of 61 months, time to treatment failure was 27 months in the patients undergoing surgery. The most frequent patterns of first disease recurrence were biochemical (10 patients) and systemic (5).

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the patients undergoing surgery were off treatment and progression-free 1 year following completion of all therapy. These results suggest that integration of surgery is feasible and may be superior to systemic therapy alone for selected prostate cancer patients presenting with nodal metastasis.

Oligometastases in prostate cancer: restaging stage IV cancers and new radiotherapy options

There are various subgroups of patients with metastatic prostate cancer: polymetastatic, oligometastatic, or oligo-recurrent cancers whose progression follows different courses and for whom there are different treatment options. Knowledge of tumor dissemination pathways and different genetic and epigenetic tumor profiles, as well as their evolution during disease progression, along with new diagnostic and therapeutic advances has allowed us to address these situations with local ablative treatments such as stereotactic body radiation therapy or stereotactic radiosurgery. These treatments provide high rates of local control with low toxicity in metastatic spread for primary cancers including those of pulmonary, digestive, and renal origin, while these types of treatments are still emerging for cancers of prostatic origin. There are several retrospective studies showing the effectiveness of such treatments in prostate cancer metastases, which has led to the emergence of prospective studies on the issue and even some phase II studies intended to prevent or delay systemic treatments such as chemotherapy. Here we collect together and review these past experiences and the studies currently underway. These types of radiotherapy treatments redefine how we approach extracranial metastatic disease and open up new possibilities for combination therapy with new systemic treatment agents.

A comprehensive review of contemporary role of local treatment of the primary tumor and/or the metastases in metastatic prostate cancer

To provide an overview of the currently available literature regarding local control of primary tumor and oligometastases in metastatic prostate cancer and salvage lymph node dissection of clinical lymph node relapse after curative treatment of prostate cancer. Evidence Acquisition. A systematic literature search was conducted in 2014 to identify abstracts, original articles, review articles, research articles, and editorials relevant to the local control in metastatic prostate cancer. Evidence Synthesis. Local control of primary tumor in metastatic prostate cancer remains experimental with low level of evidence. The concept is supported by a growing body of genetic and molecular research as well as analogy with other cancers. There is only one retrospective observational population based study showing prolonged survival. To eradicate oligometastases, several options exist with excellent local control rates. Stereotactic body radiotherapy is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious treatment for lymph node and bone lesions. Both biochemical and clinical progression are slowed down with a median time to initiate ADT of 2 years. Salvage lymph node dissection is feasible in patients with clinical lymph node relapse after local curable treatment. Conclusion. Despite encouraging oncologic midterm results, a complete cure remains elusive in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Further advances in imaging are crucial in order to rapidly evolve beyond the proof of concept.

Current status of radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer

Despite the wide application of prostate-specific antigen-based screening leading to a profound stage migration in prostate cancer (PC), a significant percentage of men are still being diagnosed with clinically high-risk disease that requires aggressive treatment. Optimal management in these patients remains challenging, and strong advocates for radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy, androgen deprivation therapy, and, increasingly, a multimodal approach abound. Currently, surgery for high-risk PC is frequently applied. RP offers an attractive opportunity for tumor excision either as a definitive management or as a first step in multimodal therapy. Nevertheless, this approach is still controversial. In this review, we discuss the current evidence for the role of RP in this clinical setting, including surgical considerations and outcomes. The role of robot-assisted RP, which is increasingly utilized in Korea in this clinical scenario, is discussed.

Is intermittent androgen-deprivation therapy beneficial for patients with advanced prostate cancer?

Use of intermittent androgen-deprivation therapy (IADT) in patients with prostate cancer has been evaluated in several studies, in an attempt to delay the development of castration resistance and reduce side-effects associated with ADT. However it is still not clear whether survival is adversely affected in patients treated with IADT. In this review, we explore the available data in an attempt to identify the most suitable candidate patients for IADT, and discuss factors that may inform appropriate patient stratification. ADT is first-line treatment for advanced/metastatic prostate cancer and is also recommended for use with definitive radiotherapy for high-risk localised prostate cancer. The changes in hormone levels induced by ADT can lead to short- and long-term side-effects which, although treatable in most cases, can significantly reduce the tolerability of ADT treatment. IADT has been investigated in several phase II and phase III studies in patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, in an attempt to delay time to tumour progression and reduce the side-effect burden of ADT. In selected patient groups IADT is no less effective than continuous ADT, ameliorating the impact of ADT-related side-effects, and, to a degree, their impact on patient health-related quality of life (HRQL). Further comparative study is required, particularly in relation to HRQL and long-term complications associated with ADT.

Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer

Intermittent androgen deprivation is increasingly employed as an alternative to continuous life long androgen deprivation therapy for men with advanced or recurrent prostate cancer. Two recent phase III trials have clarified the benefits of intermittent therapy. In men with non-metastatic disease with PSA recurrence after definitive local therapy, intermittent therapy showed equivalent survival to continuous therapy, with significant improvements in quality of life. Patients on intermittent therapy experience improved bone health, less metabolic and hematologic disturbances, fewer hot flashes, as well as improved sexual function. In men with metastatic disease, the data is less clear. The long-awaited results of SWOG 9324 comparing intermittent to continuous therapy in metastatic disease showed a trend to worse outcome in the patients with 'minimal' metastatic disease, and no difference in those with widespread bone mets. The significance of this observation is in dispute. This review also addresses practical issues in the use intermittent therapy, including patient selection, follow-up and cycling of therapy. The recent results of randomized clinical trials now establish that intermittent androgen deprivation therapy is an approach that should be considered the standard of care for most patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer requiring hormonal therapy.

Results of surgery for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Surgery for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is applied frequently nowadays. Nevertheless, this approach is still surrounded by many controversies. The present review discusses the most recent literature regarding surgery for high-risk PCa.

RECENT FINDINGS

As there is no standard definition of high-risk PCa, outcome comparison between series and treatment approaches is hampered. Nevertheless, recent radical prostatectomy series have shown excellent cancer-specific survival in patients with high-risk PCa. Even for very-high-risk PCa (cT3b-T4 or any cT, N1), surgery may be applied to highly selected patients as a first step of a multimodality approach. Recent experience with robot-assisted surgery opens new possibilities for a minimally invasive approach in this field.Patient selection for surgery was also addressed in recent studies. Excellent cancer-specific survival is seen when specimen-confined PCa is found at final histopathology; a recently published nomogram enables the prediction of specimen-confined disease. Another issue in high-risk PCa is the impact of age and comorbidities on cancer-specific and overall mortality. In a recent study, it was shown that patients with low comorbidity scores, even when at least 70 years old, had a significant risk of dying from their cancer and may benefit most from a surgical approach. A modified extended pelvic lymphadenectomy template was presented, providing optimal removal of positive lymph nodes.

SUMMARY

Radical prostatectomy with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy delivers very good cancer-related outcomes in high-risk and very-high-risk PCa, often within a multimodal approach. Minimally invasive surgery and improved patient selection will be key to further improve oncological and functional outcomes.

The role of radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature

CONTEXT

Because pelvic lymph node (LN)-positive prostate cancer (PCa) is generally considered a regionally metastatic disease, surgery needs to be better defined.

OBJECTIVE

To review the impact of radical prostatectomy (RP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND), possibly in conjunction with a multimodal approach using local radiotherapy and/or androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), in LN-positive PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic Medline search for studies reporting on treatment regimens and outcomes in patients with LN-positive PCa undergoing RP between 1993 and 2012 was performed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

RP can improve progression-free and overall survival in LN-positive PCa, although there is a lack of high-level evidence. Therefore, the former practice of aborting surgery in the presence of positive nodes might no longer be supported by current evidence, especially in those patients with a limited LN tumor burden. Current data demonstrate that the lymphatic spread takes an ascending pathway from the pelvis to the retroperitoneum, in which the internal and the common iliac nodes represent critical landmarks in the metastatic distribution. Sophisticated imaging technologies are still under investigation to improve the prediction of LN-positive PCa. Nonetheless, extended PLND including the common iliac arteries should be offered to intermediate- and high-risk patients to improve nodal staging with a possible benefit in prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival by removing significant metastatic load. Adjuvant ADT has the potential to improve overall survival after RP; the therapeutic role of a trimodal approach with adjuvant local radiotherapy awaits further elucidation. Age is a critical parameter for survival because cancer-specific mortality exceeds overall mortality in younger patients (<60 yr) with high-risk PCa and should be an impetus to treat as thoroughly as possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing evidence suggests that RP and extended PLND improve survival in LN-positive PCa. Our understanding of surgery of the primary tumor in LN-positive PCa needs a conceptual change from a palliative option to the first step in a multimodal approach with a significant improvement of long-term survival and cure in selected patients.

Results of hormone therapy as first-line treatment for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the current place for androgen deprivation therapy as single modality in locally advanced nonmetastatic situations.

RECENT FINDINGS

One standard of care for node negative locally advanced disease is a combination of external beam with androgen deprivation treatment. Several recent randomized trials have confirmed the key role of a local treatment combined to a systemic one in terms of specific and overall survival. The specific morbidity of this combined modality appears to be minimal. Retrospective data also suggest that a local treatment should be considered in case of positive nodes. Finally, the real place of immediate single hormonal treatment has also been clarified. The limited survival benefit has to be balanced with the side-effects. Therefore, this single modality should be limited to the most aggressive situations when no local treatment is planned.

SUMMARY

Single hormonal treatment for nonmetastatic advanced prostate cancer appears to be limited to the few patients unfit or unwilling for a local treatment and having a high prostate-specific antigen and a short prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In all other situations, it might represent a clear undertreatment.

Androgen deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer: is intermittent therapy the new standard of care?

PURPOSE

Intermittent androgen deprivation is increasingly used as an alternative to continuous life-long androgen deprivation therapy for men with advanced or recurrent prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two recent phase iii trials have clarified the benefits of intermittent therapy. The Canadian-led pr.7 trial in men with nonmetastatic disease and prostate-specific antigen recurrence after definitive local therapy showed that intermittent therapy resulted in survival equivalent to that with continuous therapy, with significant improvements in quality of life. Patients on intermittent therapy experienced improved bone health, fewer metabolic and hematologic disturbances, fewer hot flashes, and improved sexual function. In men with metastatic disease, the data are less clear. The long-awaited results of the Southwest Oncology Group 9346 trial, comparing intermittent with continuous therapy in metastatic disease, showed no difference in overall survival. Post hoc stratification analysis showed a worse outcome in patients with "minimal" metastatic disease, and no difference in those with widespread bone metastases. The significance of that observation is in dispute. The present review also addresses practical issues in the use of intermittent therapy, including patient selection, follow-up, and therapy cycling.

SUMMARY

The recent results of randomized clinical trials now establish that intermittent androgen deprivation therapy is an approach that should be considered the standard of care in most patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer requiring hormonal therapy and in selected patients with metastatic disease.

KEY POINTS

Level i evidence supports the oncologic equivalence of intermittent compared with continuous androgen blockade in men with biochemical failure.Compared with continuous androgen deprivation, intermittent therapy demonstrates improved quality of life and fewer side effects.Patient selection for intermittent therapy is important to maintain good oncologic results.Monitoring of prostate-specific androgen response and duration of off-treatment intervals allow for stratification of patients by risk of progression.

Endocrine therapy in prostate cancer: time for reappraisal of risks, benefits and cost-effectiveness?

In the 70 years following the first description of the benefits of surgical castration, despite advances in medical therapy e.g. cabazitaxel, enzalutamide, abiraterone, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the cornerstone of treatment for advanced prostate cancer. However, with increasing numbers of men undergoing PSA testing, the disease is being diagnosed earlier and the costs of ADT, with uncertain survival benefits and associated risks, have risen dramatically. Clinical studies of potent novel agents have shown survival benefits in advanced disease, but timing, risks and cost-effectiveness of treatment remain controversial. As new agents enter clinical practice, a comprehensive research strategy is essential to optimise benefits whilst minimising harm.

Androgen deprivation therapy: past, present and future

Since Huggins and Hodges demonstrated the responsiveness of prostate cancer to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), androgen-suppressing strategies have formed the cornerstone of management of advanced prostate cancer. Approaches to ADT have included orchidectomy, oestrogens, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, anti-androgens and more recently the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists. The most extensively studied antagonist, degarelix, avoids the testosterone surge and clinical flare associated with LHRH agonists, offering more rapid PSA and testosterone suppression, improved testosterone control and improved PSA progression-free survival compared with agonists. The clinical profile of degarelix appears to make it a particularly suitable therapeutic option for certain subgroups of patients, including those with metastatic disease, high baseline PSA (>20 ng/mL) and highly symptomatic disease. As well as forming the mainstay of treatment for advanced prostate cancer, ADT is increasingly used in earlier disease stages. While data from clinical trials support the use of ADT neoadjuvant/adjuvant to radiotherapy for locally advanced or high-risk localized prostate cancer, it remains to be established whether specific ADT classes/agents provide particular benefits in this clinical setting.