Neoadjuvant docetaxel and capecitabine in patients with high risk prostate cancer

Neoadjuvant Approaches Prior To Radical Prostatectomy

Patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer benefit from multimodality therapy of curative intent. Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with radiation improves survival in this population. However, prior clinical trials of neoadjuvant ADT and surgery failed to consistently demonstrate a survival advantage. The development of novel, more potent hormonal agents presents an opportunity to revisit the potential for neoadjuvant therapy to improve long-term outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer. We review recent advances in neoadjuvant approaches for prostate cancer and emerging clinical trials data supporting the use of neoadjuvant therapy prior to radical prostatectomy.

Systemic treatments for high-risk localized prostate cancer

The majority of patients with prostate cancer who later develop lethal metastatic disease have high-risk localized disease at presentation, emphasizing the importance of effective treatment strategies at this stage. Multimodal treatment approaches that combine systemic and local therapies offer a promising strategy for improving the clinical outcomes of patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. Combinations of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, or chemohormonal therapy are considered to be the standard of care in most solid tumours and should be investigated in the future for the treatment of prostate cancer to improve patient outcomes. However, although the combination of androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy is a standard of care in high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer, the benefit of chemotherapy or chemohormonal therapy has yet to be demonstrated outside of the metastatic setting. Moreover, the benefit of neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant systemic therapies in combination with radical prostatectomy has not been proved. The development of next-generation hormonal agents, which have been approved for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer, offers further therapeutic possibilities that are being assessed in early-phase clinical trials.

The addition of chemotherapy in the definitive management of high risk prostate cancer

In attempt to improve long-term disease control outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer, numerous clinical trials have tested the addition of chemotherapy (CTX)-either adjuvant or neoadjuvant-to definitive local therapy, either radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT). Neoadjuvant trials generally confirm safety, feasibility, and pre-RP PSA reduction, but rates of pathologic complete response are rare, and no indications for neoadjuvant CTX have been firmly established. Adjuvant regimens have included CTX alone or in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Here we provide a review of the relevant literature, and also quantify utilization of CTX in the definitive management of localized high-risk prostate cancer by querying the National Cancer Data Base. Between 2004 and 2013, 177 patients (of 29,659 total) treated with definitive RT, and 995 (of 367,570 total) treated with RP had CTX incorporated into their treatment regimens. Low numbers of RT + CTX patients precluded further analysis of this population, but we investigated the impact of CTX on overall survival (OS) for patients treated with RP +/- CTX. Disease-free survival or biochemical-recurrence-free survival are not available through the National Cancer Data Base. Propensity-score matching was conducted as patients treated with CTX were a higher-risk group. For nonmatched groups, OS at 5-years was 89.6% for the CTX group vs. 95.6%, for the no-CTX group (P < 0.01). The difference in OS between CTX and no-CTX groups did not persist after propensity-score matching, with 5-year OS 89.6% vs. 90.9%, respectively (Hazard ratio 0.99; P = 0.88). In summary, CTX was not shown to improve OS in this retrospective study. Multimodal regimens-such as RP followed by ADT, RT, and CTX; or RT in conjunction with ADT followed by CTX-have shown promise, but long-term follow-up of randomized data is required.

Role of chemotherapy in prostate cancer

Chemotherapy in prostate cancer (PCa) has undergone dramatic landscape changes. While earlier studies utilized varying chemotherapy regimens which were found to be largely palliative in nature and hardly resulted in durable or meaningful responses, docetaxel resulted in the first chemotherapy agent that showed improvement in overall survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, combination chemotherapy or any agents added to docetaxel have failed to yield incremental benefits. The improvement in overall survival as well as secondary endpoints of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and time to recurrence when using docetaxel in the metastatic hormone-sensitive state has changed the standard of care for treatment of newly diagnosed de novo metastatic PCa. There are also promising results in locally advanced PCa and high-risk PCa in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. This review summarizes the historical as well as the more contemporary use of chemotherapeutic agents in PCa in varying states and phases of disease.

Neoadjuvant therapy for localized prostate cancer: Examining mechanism of action and efficacy within the tumor

OBJECTIVES

Efforts to improve the clinical outcome for patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer have led to the development of neoadjuvant systemic therapies. We review the different modalities of neoadjuvant therapies for localized prostate cancer and highlight emerging treatment approaches including immunotherapy and targeted therapy.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed search of clinical trials evaluating preoperative systemic therapies for treating high-risk prostate cancer published after 2000, and those studies with the highest clinical relevance to current treatment approaches were selected for review. The database at clinicaltrials.gov was queried for neoadjuvant studies in high-risk prostate cancer, and those evaluating novel targeted therapies and immunotherapies are spotlighted here.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has become standard of care for treating some malignancies, including breast and bladder cancers. In prostate cancer, preoperative hormonal therapy or chemotherapy has failed to demonstrate improvements in overall survival. Nevertheless, the emergence of novel treatment modalities such as targeted small molecules and immunotherapy has spawned neoadjuvant clinical trials that provide a unique vantage from which to study mechanism of action and biological potency. Tissue-based biomarkers are being developed to elucidate the biological efficacy of these treatments. With targeted therapy, these can include phospho-proteomic signatures of target pathway activation and deactivation. With immunotherapies, including sipuleucel-T and ipilimumab, recruitment of immune cells to the tumor microenvironment can also be used as robust markers of a biological effect. Such studies can provide insight not only into mechanism of action for these therapies but can also provide paths forward to improving clinical efficacy like with rationally designed combinations and dose selection.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy and chemotherapy either singly or in combination before radical prostatectomy is generally safe and feasible while reducing prostate volume and tumor burden. However, pathologic complete response rates are low and no long-term survival benefit has been observed with the addition of neoadjuvant therapies over surgery alone at present, and therefore preoperative therapy is not the current standard of care in prostate cancer treatment.

Chemotherapy and novel therapeutics before radical prostatectomy for high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer

Although both surgery and radiation are potential curative options for men with clinically localized prostate cancer, a significant proportion of men with high-risk and locally advanced disease will demonstrate biochemical and potentially clinical progression of their disease. Neoadjuvant systemic therapy before radical prostatectomy (RP) is a logical strategy to improve treatment outcomes for men with clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer. Furthermore, delivery of chemotherapy and other systemic agents before RP affords an opportunity to explore the efficacy of these agents with pathologic end points. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, primarily with docetaxel (with or without androgen deprivation therapy), has demonstrated feasibility and safety in men undergoing RP, but no study to date has established the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapies. Other novel agents, such as those targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, clusterin, and immunomodulatory therapeutics, are currently under investigation.

[Neoadjuvant before surgery treatments: state of the art in prostate cancer]

GOAL

To study the impact of systemic treatment in neoadjuvant strategy before surgery in prostate cancer.

MATERIALS

Literature reviews with data analysis from PubMed search using the keywords "neoadjuvant", "chemotherapy", "hormonal therapy", "prostate surgery", "radical prostatectomy", but also reports from ASCO and ESMO conferences. The articles on neoadjuvant treatment before radiotherapy were excluded.

RESULTS

First studies with former therapy are more than 15-years-old and with questionable methodology: lack of power to have a clear idea of the impact on survival criteria such as overall survival or relapse-free survival. However, the impact of neoadjuvant hormone therapy on the classic risk factors for relapse (positive margins, intraprostatic disease, positive lymph nodes) was demonstrated by these studies and a Cochrane meta-analysis. The association with hormone therapy seems mandatory in comparison to treatment based solely on chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy. Promising data on the use of new drugs and their combinations arise: abiraterone acetate combined with LHRH analogue showed a fast PSA decrease and higher rates of pathologic complete response. Other results are promising with hormonal blockages at various key points.

CONCLUSION

Studies with 2nd generation anti-androgene agents or enzyme inhibitors seem to show very promising results. To provide answers about the effectiveness of current neoadjuvant strategy in terms of survival, other studies are needed: randomized phase III or phase II exploring predictive biomarkers. The design of such trials requires a multidisciplinary approach with urologists, oncologists, radiologists and methodologists.

Rationale for and review of neoadjuvant therapy prior to radical prostatectomy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer

Despite state of the art local therapy, a significant portion of men with high-risk prostate cancer develop progressive disease. Neoadjuvant systemic therapy prior to radical prostatectomy (RP) is an approach that can potentially maximize survival outcomes in patients with localized disease. This approach is under investigation with a wide array of agents and provides an opportunity to assess pathologic and biologic activity of novel treatments. The aim of this review is to explore the past and present role of neoadjuvant therapy prior to definitive therapy with RP in patients with high-risk localized or locally advanced disease. The results of neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), including use of newer agents such as abiraterone, are promising. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, primarily with docetaxel, with or without ADT has also demonstrated efficacy in men with high-risk disease. Other novel agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), clusterin, and the immune system are currently under investigation and have led to variable results in early clinical trials. Despite optimistic data, approval of neoadjuvant therapy prior to RP in patients with high-risk prostate cancer will depend on positive results from well designed phase III trials.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy prior to Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

High-risk prostate cancer represents a pretentious clinical problem since a significant number of its patients will relapse and progress after radical prostatectomy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be valuable since its efficacy in hormone-resistant prostate cancer has been established. In this paper, we report studies of neoadjuvant chemotherapies that have been used in high-risk patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Even though the results regarding the prognostic surrogates are not significant, the effects on clinical and pathological outcomes are promising, while toxicity in most of the studies is in the expected field.

Preoperative therapy for localized prostate cancer: a comprehensive overview

At the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, two studies of preoperative systemic therapy for localized prostate cancer garnered significant attention. In the first, investigators evaluated various permutations of conventional hormonal therapies prior to prostatectomy, with detailed biomarker studies focused on tissue androgens. In the second, investigators assessed the novel CYP17 lyase inhibitor abiraterone prior to prostatectomy. Both studies provide a wealth of biological information, but the question remains - will preoperative systemic therapy ultimately be incorporated into clinical algorithms for prostate cancer? Herein, the existing literature for both preoperative hormonal and chemotherapeutic approaches is reviewed. We performed a MEDLINE search of published prospective and retrospective clinical studies assessing preoperative systemic therapy for prostate cancer from 1982 onwards, revealing a total of 75 publications meeting these criteria. Of these, 55 possessed a number of patients (i.e., greater than 10) deemed worth of the current analysis. Beyond outlining these datasets, we discuss the relevance of clinical and pathologic endpoints in assessing preoperative therapy.

Safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist plus low-dose estramustine phosphate in high-risk prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm study

BACKGROUND

Radical prostatectomy (RP) has limited cancer control potential for the patient with high-risk prostate cancer (Pca). We prospectively examined the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist + low-dose estramustine phosphate (EMP) (LHRH+EMP) followed by RP.

METHODS

High-risk Pca was defined by the D'Amico stratification system. A total of 142 patients with high-risk Pca were enrolled in this trial from September 2005 to March 2011. The LHRH+EMP therapy included administration of LHRH agonist and 280 mg day(-1) EMP for 6 months before RP. Pathological cancer-free (pT0) rate on the surgical specimen was the primary end point. Secondary end points were PSA-free survival and toxicity.

RESULTS

The average patient age was 67.4 years (interquartile range (IQR) 72, 65) and the median initial PSA level was 14.80 ng ml(-1) (IQR 26.22, 7.13). The median Gleason score was 9 (IQR 9, 7) and 97 patients (68.3%) had clinical stage T2c or T3. All patients completed 6 months of LHRH+EMP neoadjuvant therapy with no delays in RP. Seven patients (4.9%) achieved pT0. Surgical margins were negative in 125 patients (87.0%). At a median follow-up period of 34.9 months, PSA-free survival was 84.3%. No serious adverse events were reported during the study and there were no toxicity-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Six months of LHRH+EMP neoadjuvant therapy followed by RP is safe and oncological outcomes are acceptable. Although this study was a single-arm trial with a relatively short follow-up, this treatment may have a potential to improve PSA-free survival in high-risk Pca patients. Further clinical trials are warranted.

A systematic review of the role of adjuvant and neoadjuvant pharmacotherapy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION

Between 25 and 30% of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer are classified as high risk for an adverse prognosis. A significant number of these will progress to biochemical or clinical relapse. As there is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment of these cases, a multimodal therapeutic approach, including radical prostatectomy, remains an option.

AREAS COVERED

The Pubmed/Medline database was searched to identify trials that have evaluated adjuvant and neoadjuvant pharmaceutical protocols combined with radical prostatectomy and provided information regarding efficacy and safety.

EXPERT OPINION

Improvements in adverse pathological findings, following operations in patients who received neoadjuvant treatment, have been reported in the majority of the reviewed studies. Furthermore, the addition of pharmacotherapy to radical prostatectomy has produced beneficial results in survival surrogates. However, no benefits in overall survival were observed with adjuvant or neoadjuvant protocols and toxicity was a concern, especially in combination regimens. New studies on the effects of current pharmacotherapy and of new agents on overall survival and quality of life, after defining well-established criteria for patient stratification and inclusion, are required urgently.

Is there a role for chemotherapy in nonmetastatic prostate cancer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prognostic clinical, pathological, and molecular parameters identify patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer that are at risk for the development of future metastatic disease and shorter survival. In metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, docetaxel-based chemotherapy prolongs survival and improves quality of life, and is the standard of care. It may be rational to hypothesize that early utilization of chemotherapy may delay the onset of distant metastasis and prolong survival in the earlier nonmetastatic disease. A discussion on ongoing clinical trials and natural history aspects applicable to clinical trials design in this setting are presented herein.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preliminary data suggest that chemotherapy is well tolerated, feasible, and potentially active in nonmetastatic prostate cancer. However, results from prospective randomized trials were not published yet.

SUMMARY

In nonmetastatic prostate cancer, application of chemotherapy remains an open question awaiting prospective validation and should be routinely applied outside of clinical trials. In view of the long natural history, evaluation of conventional endpoints as time to distant metastasis and survival are challenging even in the high-risk patients. Appropriate patient selection based on predictive biomarkers and surrogate endpoints may provide critical information for patient selection and study design.

Neoadjuvant therapy preceding prostatectomy for prostate cancer: rationale and current trials

Neoadjuvant therapy improves outcomes for a number of malignancies and provides intermediate pathologic outcomes, which correlate with long-term outcomes. Neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy, alone or with docetaxel chemotherapy, preceding prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer is feasible and demonstrates pathologic activity, but evidence for improved long-term outcomes is lacking. Data in support of the further exploration of neoadjuvant therapy for localized prostate cancer preceding prostatectomy are reviewed. Ongoing randomized trials are elucidating the impact of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation combined with docetaxel chemotherapy on pathologic and long-term outcomes. The correlation of pathologic and biologic outcomes with long-term outcomes in this setting is unknown. The neoadjuvant therapy approach followed by prostatectomy is feasible with a wide array of agents and provides a paradigm for evaluating the activity, and mechanism of action and resistance to new treatments. This promising modality may aid the rapid development of novel therapeutic agents. A multidisciplinary approach involving oncologists, urologists and pathologists is critical to the success of this model.

Interleukin-6 trans-signalling differentially regulates proliferation, migration, adhesion and maspin expression in human prostate cancer cells

Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is suggested to have a pathogenic role in the progression of prostate cancer (PC), therefore representing an attractive target for new therapies. However, due to the pleiotropy of this cytokine, targeting IL-6 results in different and unpredictable responses. In order to better understand the mechanisms underlying the different responses to the cytokine, we focused our attention on IL-6 receptors (IL-6Rs) that represent the first element in the cascade of cytokine-activated signalling pathways. IL-6 signal transduction may indeed occur through the membrane IL-6R (classical signalling) and/or through the less studied soluble IL-6R (sIL-6R; IL-6 trans-signalling (IL-6TS)). We provide the first evidence how responses to IL-6 may depend on the different content of IL-6Rs in PC. In particular, the studies of (3)H-thymidine incorporation and exploitation of different approaches (i.e. activation or inhibition of IL-6TS in sIL-6R-negative and -positive cell lines and transfection of IL-6R siRNA) allowed us to demonstrate that IL-6TS specifically accounts for an anti-proliferative effect of the cytokine in three PC cell lines that are known to respond differently to IL-6. Additionally, by applying migration-, scratch- and adhesion assays, we show that IL-6TS increases motility and migration and decreases adhesion of prostate cells facilitating thereby processes that determine metastasis initiation and spread. Finally, by western analyses, we uncovered an IL-6- and sIL-6R-dependent downregulation of the tumour suppressor maspin. Collectively, these data suggest that selective targeting of IL-6TS might allow to refine the currently available experimental anti-IL-6 therapies against PC.

Innovations in the systemic therapy of prostate cancer

Systemic therapy has become an increasingly important component of treatment of advanced prostate cancer. In the past decade, important innovations have been achieved in the development of novel systemic hormonal therapies for the salvage treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant disease. These improvements have been accompanied by the broadening of potential indications for chemotherapy in castrate-resistant metastatic disease and the use of chemotherapy as an adjunct to the treatment of locally extensive tumors. These changes have begun to lead to improved outcomes, but at the expense of novel patterns of late toxic effects. We review the key steps in the recent evolution of systemic therapy of prostate cancer.

Benefit of whole pelvic radiotherapy combined with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for the high-risk prostate cancer

AIM

To study whether use of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (N-ADT) combined with whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) for high-risk prostate cancer patients was associated with survival benefit over prostate radiotherapy (PORT) only.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 1999 and 2004, 162 high-risk prostate cancer patients were treated with radiotherapy combined with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (L-ADT). Patients were prospectively assigned into two groups: A (N-ADT + WPRT + L-ADT) n = 70 pts, B (PORT + L-ADT) n = 92 pts.

RESULTS

The 5-year actuarial overall survival (OS) rates were 89% for A and 78% for B (P = .13). The 5-year actuarial cause specific survival (CSS) rates were A = 90% and B = 79% (P = .01). Biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) rates were 52% versus 40% (P = .07), for groups A and B, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The WPRT combined with N-ADT compared to PORT for high-risk patients resulted in improvement in CSS and bPFS; however no OS benefit was observed.

Adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells expressing prodrug-converting enzyme inhibit human prostate tumor growth

The ability of human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AT-MSCs), engineered to express the suicide gene cytosine deaminase::uracil phosphoribosyltransferase (CD::UPRT), to convert the relatively nontoxic 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC) into the highly toxic antitumor 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) together with their ability to track and engraft into tumors and micrometastases makes these cells an attractive tool to activate prodrugs directly within the tumor mass. In this study, we tested the feasibility and efficacy of these therapeutic cells to function as cellular vehicles of prodrug-activating enzymes in prostate cancer (PC) therapy. In in vitro migration experiments we have shown that therapeutic AT-MSCs migrated to all the prostate cell lines tested. In a pilot preclinical study, we observed that coinjections of human bone metastatic PC cells along with the transduced AT-MSCs into nude mice treated with 5-FC induced a complete tumor regression in a dose dependent manner or did not even allow the establishment of the tumor. More importantly, we also demonstrated that the therapeutic cells were effective in significantly inhibiting PC tumor growth after intravenous administration that is a key requisite for any clinical application of gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapies.

Phase II trial of short-term neoadjuvant docetaxel and complete androgen blockade in high-risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The low probability of curing high-risk prostate cancer (PC) with local therapy suggests the need to study modality of therapeutic approaches. To this end, a prospective phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel (D) and complete androgen blockade (CAB) was carried out in high-risk PC patients. The primary end point was to detect at least 10% of pCRs after chemohormonal treatment.

METHODS

Patients with T1c-T2 clinical stage with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20 ng ml(-1) and/or Gleason score >or=7 (4+3) and T3 were included. Treatment consisted of three cycles of D 36 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days concomitant with CAB, followed by radical prostatectomy (RP).

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients were included. Clinical stage was T1c, 11 patients (19.3%); T2, 30 (52.6%) and T3, 16 (28%) patients. Gleason score was >or=7 (4+3) in 44 (77%) patients and PSA >20 ng ml(-1) in 15 (26%) patients. Treatment was well tolerated with 51 (89.9%) patients completing neoadjuvant therapy together with RP. The rate of pCR was 6% (three patients). Three (6%) additional patients had microscopic residual tumour (near pCR) in prostate specimen. With a median follow-up of 35 months, 18 (31.6%) patients presented PSA relapse.

CONCLUSION

Short-term neoadjuvant D and CAB induced a 6% pCR rate, which is close to what would be expected with ADT alone. The combination was generally well tolerated.

Phase III trial of androgen ablation with or without three cycles of systemic chemotherapy for advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We conducted a phase III trial in patients with previously untreated metastatic prostate cancer to test the hypothesis that three 8-week cycles of ketoconazole and doxorubicin alternating with vinblastine and estramustine, given in addition to standard androgen deprivation, would delay the appearance of castrate-resistant disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had metastatic prostate cancer threatening enough to justify sustained androgen ablation and were fit enough for chemotherapy. The primary end point was time to castrate-resistant progression as shown by increasing prostate-specific antigen, new radiographic lesions, worsening cancer-related symptoms, or receipt of any other systemic therapy.

RESULTS

Three hundred six patients were registered; 286 are reported. Median time to progression was 24 months (95% CI, 18 to 39 months) in the standard therapy arm, and 35 months (95% CI, 26 to 44 months) in the chemohormonal group (P = .39). At median follow-up of 6.4 years, overall survival was 5.4 years (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.8 years) in the standard therapy arm versus 6.1 years (95% CI, 5.1 to 10.1 years; P = .41). Prostate-specific antigen kinetics at the time of androgen ablation and the nadir after hormone treatment were strongly correlated with survival. Chemotherapy significantly increased the burden of therapy, with 51% of patients experiencing an adverse event of grade 3 or worse, especially thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSION

There is no role for ketoconazole and doxorubicin alternating with vinblastine and estramustine before emergence of a castrate-resistant phenotype.

[Histological modifications observed in prostate after preserving treatments for prostate cancer and their impact on Gleason score interpretation]

Total prostatectomy remains the main treatment for intermediate risk prostate cancer with a life expectancy greater than 10 years. In other cases non-surgical treatments can be proposed: external radiotherapy (exclusive or combined anti-androgen therapy), brachytherapy with permanent implants, high frequency ultrasounds (HIFU, Ablatherm), cryotherapy or exclusive hormonal treatment. For such patients in case of biological recurrence, prostate biopsies are usually performed in order to affirm the local recurrence. The histological confirmation of persistent tumor is usually required before any treatment: salvage surgery, cryotherapy, and brachytherapy or high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Pathologists must be aware of the histological modifications induced by these different treatments in order to ensure an optimal interpretation of the biopsies. In this review, we describe the modifications observed in the normal prostate and in cancers after these various therapeutic methods, and also after alpha reductase inhibitors proposed as treatment of benign prostate hypertrophy and prostate cancer chemoprevention.