Treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for 3 published active surveillance protocols

What is cancer? A focus on Grade Group 1 prostate cancer

Since the widespread adoption of prostate-specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer, the prevalence of Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer has risen. Historically, these patients were subjected to overtreatment of this otherwise indolent disease process, leading to significant quality-of-life detriments. Active surveillance as a primary management strategy has allowed for a focus on early detection while minimising morbidity from unnecessary intervention. Here we provide a comprehensive overview of the characteristics of GG1 prostatic adenocarcinoma, including its histological features, genomic differentiators, clinical progression, and implications for treatment guidelines, all supporting the movement to reclassify GG1 disease as a non-cancerous entity.

Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low-risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered "cancer" and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer-specific mortality was 0%-6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%-66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%-2.1%) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (0%-0.1%) over follow-up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%-9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at <30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by >79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54-72 years) reported prevalences of 12%-43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well-conducted study found high reproducibility for low-risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985-1995).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low-risk prostate lesions.

Adverse Pathology after Radical Prostatectomy of Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance-A Summary 7 Years after Introducing mpMRI-Guided Biopsy in a Real-World Setting

OBJECTIVE

Over the last decade, active surveillance (AS) of low-risk prostate cancer has been increasing. The mpMRI fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate (FBx) is considered to be the gold standard in preoperative risk stratification. However, the role of FBx remains unclear in terms of risk stratification of low-risk prostate cancer outside high-volume centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy (RP) in a real-world setting, focusing on patients diagnosed with Gleason score (GS) 6 prostate cancer (PCa) and eligible for AS by FBx.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Between March 2015 and March 2022, 1297 patients underwent FBx at the Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Germany. MpMRI for FBx was performed by 111 different radiology centers. FBx was performed by 14 urologists from our department with different levels of experience. In total, 997/1297 (77%) patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer; 492/997 (49%) of these patients decided to undergo RP in our clinic and were retrospectively included. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate clinical and histopathological parameters associated with adverse pathology comparing FBx and RP specimens. To compare FBx and systematic randomized biopsies performed in our clinic before introducing FBx (SBx, n = 2309), we performed a propensity score matching on a 1:1 ratio, adjusting for age, number of positive biopsy cores, and initial PSA (iPSA).

RESULTS

A total of 492 patients undergoing FBx or SBx was matched. In total, 55% of patients diagnosed with GS 6 by FBx were upgraded to clinically significant PCa (defined as GS ≥ 7a) after RP, compared to 52% of patients diagnosed by SBx (p = 0.76). A time delay between FBx and RP was identified as the only correlate associated with upgrading. A total of 5.9% of all FBx patients and 6.1% of all SBx patients would have been eligible for AS (p > 0.99) but decided to undergo RP. The positive predictive value of AS eligibility (diagnosis of low-risk PCa after biopsy and after RP) was 17% for FBx and 6.7% for SBx (p = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we show, in a real-world setting, that introducing FBx did not lead to significant change in ratio of adverse pathology for low-risk PCa patients after RP compared to SBx.

Activin B and Activin C Have Opposing Effects on Prostate Cancer Progression and Cell Growth

Current prognostic and diagnostic tests for prostate cancer are not able to accurately distinguish between aggressive and latent cancer. Members of the transforming growth factor-β (TGFB) family are known to be important in regulating prostate cell growth and some have been shown to be dysregulated in prostate cancer. Therefore, the aims of this study were to examine expression of TGFB family members in primary prostate tumour tissue and the phenotypic effect of activins on prostate cell growth. Tissue cores of prostate adenocarcinoma and normal prostate were immuno-stained and protein expression was compared between samples with different Gleason grades. The effect of exogenous treatment with, or overexpression of, activins on prostate cell line growth and migration was examined. Activin B expression was increased in cores containing higher Gleason patterns and overexpression of activin B inhibited growth of PNT1A cells but increased growth and migration of the metastatic PC3 cells compared to empty vector controls. In contrast, activin C expression decreased in higher Gleason grades and overexpression increased growth of PNT1A cells and decreased growth of PC3 cells. In conclusion, increased activin B and decreased activin C expression is associated with increasing prostate tumor grade and therefore have potential as prognostic markers of aggressive prostate cancer.

Grade group 1 prostate cancer on biopsy: are we still missing aggressive disease in the era of image-directed therapy?

PURPOSE

Recently, Eggener et al. reignited a debate consisting to redefine Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 1 prostate cancer (PCa) as a precancerous lesion to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment. However, historical cohorts showed that some GGG1-labeled disease at biopsy may be underestimated by the standard PCa diagnostic workup. The aim was to assess whether the risk of adverse features at radical prostatectomy (RP) in selected GGG1 patients still exists in the era of pre-biopsy mpMRI and image-guided biopsies.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our data from a European RP dataset to assess in contemporary patients with GGG1 at mpMRI-targeted biopsy the rate of adverse features at final pathology, defined as ≥ pT3a and/or pN+ and/or GGG ≥ 3.

RESULTS

A total of 419 patients with cT1-T2 cN0 GGG1-PCa were included. At final pathology, 143 (34.1%) patients had adverse features. In multivariate analysis, only unfavorable intermediate-risk/high-risk disease (defined on PSA or stage) was predictive of adverse features (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.11-5.39, p = 0.02). A significant difference was observed in the 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival between patients with and without adverse features (93.4 vs 87.8%, p = 0.026). In sensitivity analysis restricted low- and favorable intermediate-risk PCa, 122/383 patients (31.8%) had adverse features and no preoperative factors were statistically associated with this risk.

CONCLUSION

In this European study, we showed that there is still a risk of underestimating GGG1 disease at biopsy despite the routine use of image-guided biopsies. Future studies are warranted to improve the detection of aggressive disease in GGG1-labeled patients by incorporating the latest tools such as genomic testing or radiomics.

[Active surveillance in prostate cancer]

Prostate cancer remains among the most commonly diagnosed malignancies worldwide in men. In patients with low-risk prostate cancer, the risk of metastasis and mortality is very low; therefore, a tumor surveillance strategy can be used. In patients undergoing active surveillance, curative active therapy is postponed without compromising opportunities for cure until there is evidence of progression or the patient desires active therapy. The aim of active surveillance in prostate cancer patients is to minimize treatment-related toxicity without impairing patient survival. To maintain patients under active surveillance, the following criteria should be met: prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤10 ng/ml, Gleason score ≤6, cT1 or cT2a, ≤2 biopsy cores with <50% cancer involvement of every positive core. Follow-up in active surveillance patients is based on repeat biopsy, serial PSA measurements, and digital rectal examination.

MRI findings guiding selection of active surveillance for prostate cancer: a review of emerging evidence

Active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) is generally considered to be a safe strategy for men with low-risk, localized disease. However, as many as 1 in 4 patients may be incorrectly classified as AS-eligible using traditional inclusion criteria. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) may offer improved risk stratification in both the initial diagnostic and disease monitoring setting. We performed a review of recently published studies to evaluate the utility of this imaging modality for this clinical setting. An English literature search was conducted on PubMed for original investigations on localized PCa, AS, and magnetic resonance imaging. Our Boolean criteria included the following terms: PCa, AS, imaging, MRI, mpMRI, prospective, retrospective, and comparative. Our search excluded publication types such as comments, editorials, guidelines, reviews, or interviews. Our literature review identified 71 original investigations. Among these, 52 met our inclusion criteria. Evidence suggests mpMRI improves characterization of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) foci, and the enhanced detection and risk-stratification afforded by this modality may keep men from being inappropriately placed on AS. Use of serial mpMRI may also permit longer intervals between confirmatory biopsies. Multiple studies demonstrate the benefit of MRI-targeted biopsies. The use of mpMRI of the prostate offers improved confidence in risk-stratification for men with clinically low-risk PCa considering AS. While on AS, serial mpMRI and MRI-targeted biopsy aid in the detection of aggressive disease transformation or foci of clinically-significant cancer undetected on prior biopsy sessions.

Prostate Cancer Imaging and Biomarkers Guiding Safe Selection of Active Surveillance

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is a widely adopted strategy to monitor men with low-risk, localized prostate cancer (PCa). Current AS inclusion criteria may misclassify as many as one in four patients. The advent of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and novel PCa biomarkers may offer improved risk stratification. We performed a review of recently published literature to characterize emerging evidence in support of these novel modalities.

Methods

An English literature search was conducted on PubMed for available original investigations on localized PCa, AS, imaging, and biomarkers published within the past 3 years. Our Boolean criteria included the following terms: PCa, AS, imaging, biomarker, genetic, genomic, prospective, retrospective, and comparative. The bibliographies and diagnostic modalities of the identified studies were used to expand our search.

Results

Our review identified 222 original studies. Our expanded search yielded 244 studies. Among these, 70 met our inclusion criteria. Evidence suggests mpMRI offers improved detection of clinically significant PCa, and MRI-fusion technology enhances the sensitivity of surveillance biopsies. Multiple studies demonstrate the promise of commercially available screening assays for prediction of AS failure, and several novel biomarkers show promise in this setting.

Conclusion

In the era of AS for men with low-risk PCa, improved strategies for proper stratification are needed. mpMRI has dramatically enhanced the detection of clinically significant PCa. The advent of novel biomarkers for prediction of aggressive disease and AS failure has shown some initial promise, but further validation is warranted.

Epigenetic Signature: A New Player as Predictor of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (PCa) in Patients on Active Surveillance (AS)

Widespread prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing notably increased the number of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnoses. However, about 30% of these patients have low-risk tumors that are not lethal and remain asymptomatic during their lifetime. Overtreatment of such patients may reduce quality of life and increase healthcare costs. Active surveillance (AS) has become an accepted alternative to immediate treatment in selected men with low-risk PCa. Despite much progress in recent years toward identifying the best candidates for AS in recent years, the greatest risk remains the possibility of misclassification of the cancer or missing a high-risk cancer. This is particularly worrisome in men with a life expectancy of greater than 10–15 years. The Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study showed that, in addition to age and PSA at diagnosis, both PSA density (PSA-D) and the number of positive cores at diagnosis (two compared with one) are the strongest predictors for reclassification biopsy or switching to deferred treatment. However, there is still no consensus upon guidelines for placing patients on AS. Each institution has its own protocol for AS that is based on PRIAS criteria. Many different variables have been proposed as tools to enrol patients in AS: PSA-D, the percentage of freePSA, and the extent of cancer on biopsy (number of positive cores or percentage of core involvement). More recently, the Prostate Health Index (PHI), the 4 Kallikrein (4K) score, and other patient factors, such as age, race, and family history, have been investigated as tools able to predict clinically significant PCa. Recently, some reports suggested that epigenetic mapping differs significantly between cancer patients and healthy subjects. These findings indicated as future prospect the use of epigenetic markers to identify PCa patients with low-grade disease, who are likely candidates for AS. This review explores literature data about the potential of epigenetic markers as predictors of clinically significant disease.

Validation of Selection Criteria for Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Considerable Proportion of Prostate Cancer (PCa) patients suitable for Active Surveillance (AS) harbour aggressive disease at surgical histopathology. Identification of truly indolent prostate cancer at diagnosis is difficult.

AIM

Of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of current AS protocols in identifying low risk PCa by comparing the histopathology at biopsy and surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on all patients who underwent Radical Prostatectomy (RP) between 2008 and 2012. We identified patients who fulfilled inclusion criteria of five different established AS protocols. Histopathology at biopsy was compared with final surgical histopathology to identify upgrading or upstaging of disease. The biochemical recurrence rate in the cohort was also determined.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients (24%) met criteria of at least one protocol. Sixteen patients (28%) were eligible for AS based on all studied criteria. Overall 24 patients (40.6%) were upgraded in their final histopathology while 12 patients (20%) upstaged from their original TRUS biopsy. Two patients (3%) had PSA failure, both had salvage radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable discrepency in current AS selection criteria which makes it necessary to introduce novel markers to identify indolent disease as a part of AS protocol for PCa.

Use of mpMRI in active surveillance for localized prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

In an effort to limit prostate cancer (PCa) overdiagnosis and overtreatment, which have occurred in response to widespread prostate specific antigen testing, numerous strategies aimed at improved risk stratification of patients with PCa have evolved. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is being used in concert with prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsies to improve sensitivity and specificity of these tests. There are limited data on how multiparametric MRI can be incorporated into active surveillance (AS) protocols.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A PubMed literature search of available English language publications on PCa, AS, and MRI was conducted. Appropriate articles were selected and included for review. Bibliographies were also used to expand our search.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Data from 41 studies were reviewed. AS inclusion criteria and protocols varied among studies, as did indications for use of MRI. Technological improvements are briefly highlighted. Studies are broadly categorized and discussed according to the role of MRI in patient selection, disease staging, and monitoring in AS protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Although improvements in MRI technology have been useful for biopsy guidance and in the diagnosis and staging of PCa, this literature search demonstrates that more prospective research is needed, specifically regarding how this promising technology can be incorporated into AS protocols.

Heterogeneity in D'Amico classification-based low-risk prostate cancer: Differences in upgrading and upstaging according to active surveillance eligibility

BACKGROUND

To date, no study has examined clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics of D׳Amico low-risk patients according to active surveillance (AS) eligibility.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We relied on patients with low-risk prostate cancer, who were classified based on the D׳Amico classification, treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2008 and 2013 at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center. We assessed differences in clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics in D׳Amico low-risk patients according to AS eligibility (prostate-specific antigen [PSA]≤ 10 ng/ml, Gleason score ≤ 3 + 3, ≤ 2 positive cores,≤5 0% tumor content per core, and ≤ cT1-2a). Multivariable logistic regression analyses targeted 2 end points: (1) presence of either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 3+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) or (2) exclusive presence of high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 4+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) at RP.

RESULTS

Of 1,331 patients low-risk prostate cancer classified based on the D׳Amico classification, 825 (62%) men were eligible for AS. AS candidates were less frequently either upgraded (55% vs. 78%, P<0.001) or upstaged (8% vs. 15%, P<0.001). Similarly, at final pathology, AS candidates less frequently harbored either intermediate- or high-risk (56% vs. 78%, P<0.001), or exclusive high-risk characteristics (9% vs. 16%, P<0.001). Tumor involvement per core (>50%) (most powerful), number of positive cores, PSA values, and age were independent predictors for either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics at RP. Tumor involvement per core and PSA values were independent predictors for exclusive high-risk characteristics at RP.

CONCLUSIONS

D׳Amico low-risk patients did not have a homogeneous histology at RP. Especially, non-AS candidates were at a higher risk of either upgrading or upstaging at final pathology. Tumor involvement greater than 50% per core was the most powerful indicator of adverse pathology. Therefore, D'Amico low-risk criteria are not safe enough to identify AS candidates.

Does cumulative prostate cancer length (CCL) in prostate biopsies improve prediction of clinically insignificant cancer at radical prostatectomy in patients eligible for active surveillance?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate if cumulative prostate cancer length (CCL) on prostate needle biopsy divided by the number of biopsy cores (CCL/core) could improve prediction of insignificant cancer on radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance (AS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with prostate cancer on extended (≥10 cores) biopsy with an initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) level of <15 ng/mL, clinical stage (cT) ≤ 2a, and highest biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6 or 3 + 4 = 7 with <3 positive cores who underwent RP were included in the study. The CCL/core and presence of insignificant cancer (organ-confined, volume <0.5 mL, Gleason score at RP ≤6) were recorded. pT2 prostate cancer with RP Gleason score ≤3 + 4 = 7 and volume <0.5 mL were categorised as low-tumour-volume organ-confined disease (LV-OCD).

RESULTS

In all, 221 patients met the inclusion criteria: the mean age was 59 years and the median iPSA level was 4.5 ng/mL. The clinical stage was cT1 in 86% of patients; biopsy Gleason score was 3 + 3 = 6 in 67% (group 1) and 3 + 4 = 7 in 33% of patients (group 2). The maximum percentage of biopsy core involvement was <50 in 85%; the median CCL/core was 0.15 mm. Insignificant cancer was found in 27% and LV-OCD in 44% of patients. Group 2 was associated with higher number of positive cores, maximum percentage core involvement, total prostate cancer length, and CCL/core. Group 1 was more likely to have insignificant cancer (39%) or LV-OCD (54%) than group 2 (3% and 23%, respectively). Group 2 had significantly higher RP Gleason score and pathological stage. Univariate analysis of group 1 showed that the iPSA level, maximum percentage core involvement, prostate cancer length, and CCL/core were all significantly associated with insignificant cancer and LV-OCD. For group 2, the number of positive cores (1 vs 2) was also significantly associated with LV-OCD. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, maximum percentage core involvement of <50, and number of positive cores (1 vs 2) were independent predictors of insignificant cancer in group 1; biopsy Gleason score, maximum percentage core involvement of <50 and prostate cancer length of <3 mm or CCL/core of <0.2 mm were all independent predictors of LV-OCD in the whole population. The maximum percentage of core involvement of <50 and prostate cancer length of <3 mm or CCL/core of <0.2 mm were also independent predictors of LV-OCD in group 1 patients.

CONCLUSION

In patients eligible for AS, a CCL/core of <0.20 mm was significantly associated with insignificant cancer and LV-OCD. However, when parameters of cancer burden were considered, CCL/core did not independently add any additional value for predicting insignificant cancer in patients with biopsy Gleason score 6. The CCL/core was an independent predictor of LV-OCD in the whole population and in group 1 patients, although the model including prostate cancer length showed slightly higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

Cryotherapy in prostate cancer

Review objectives:

Cryotherapy use has increased due to technological advances. A review of the literature was performed to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of whole gland, salvage and targeted focal cryotherapy in the management of prostate cancer.

Review findings:

Cryotherapy use has increased significantly over the last 10 years with a trend towards focal ablation. Whole gland cryotherapy, salvage cryotherapy and focal cryotherapy biochemical recurrence rates appear to be comparable to other treatment modalities for low risk disease, however biochemical failure remains difficult to compare across studies due to a lack of consensus regarding appropriate end points for evaluation of cryotherapy. Short-term focal cryotherapy outcomes are encouraging. Side effect profiles for cryotherapy have significantly improved with fourth generation systems while salvage cryotherapy continues to carry a slightly higher risk of incontinence than primary whole gland cryotherapy. The incidence of erectile dysfunction after focal cryotherapy is dramatically lower than that for whole gland ablation.

Conclusions:

Cryotherapy continues to have an active role in the primary and salvage treatment of prostate cancer. Targeted focal cryotherapy is a promising treatment with minimal morbidity. Further long-term data is needed to support targeted therapy in addition to direct comparison with other treatment modalities.

The use of exome genotyping to predict pathological Gleason score upgrade after radical prostatectomy in low-risk prostate cancer patients

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is a promising option for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), however current criteria could not select the patients correctly, many patients who fulfilled recent AS criteria experienced pathological Gleason score upgrade (PGU) after radical prostatectomy (RP). In this study, we aimed to develop an accurate model for predicting PGU among low-risk PCa patients by using exome genotyping.

Methods

We genotyped 242,221 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP)s on a custom HumanExome BeadChip v1.0 (Illuminam Inc.) in blood DNA from 257 low risk PCa patients (PSA <10 ng/ml, biopsy Gleason score (GS) ≤6 and clinical stage ≤T2a) who underwent radical prostatectomy. Genetic data were analyzed using an unconditional logistic regression to calculate an odds ratio as an estimate of relative risk of PGU, which defined pathologic GS above 7. Among them, we selected persistent SNPs after multiple testing using FDR method, and we compared accuracies from the multivariate logistic model incorporating clinical factors between included and excluded selected SNP information.

Results

After analysis of exome genotyping, 15 SNPs were significant to predict PGU in low risk PCa patients. Among them, one SNP – rs33999879 remained significant after multiple testing. When a multivariate model incorporating factors in Epstein definition – PSA density, biopsy GS, positive core number, tumor per core ratio and age was devised for the prediction of PGU, the predictive accuracy of the multivariate model was 78.4% (95%CI: 0.726–0.834). By addition the factor of rs33999879 in aforementioned multivariate model, the predictive accuracy was 82.9%, which was significantly increased (p = 0.0196).

Conclusion

The rs33999879 SNP is a predictor for PGU. The addition of genetic information from the exome sequencing effectively enhanced the predictive accuracy of the multivariate model to establish suitable active surveillance criteria.

Predictive factors of unfavorable prostate cancer in patients who underwent prostatectomy but eligible for active surveillance

PURPOSE

To investigate the predictive factors of unfavorable prostate cancer in Korean men who underwent radical prostatectomy but eligible for active surveillance according to Epstein criteria.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 2,036 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer between 1994 and 2011. Among these, 233 patients were eligible for active surveillance based on Epstein criteria. Unfavorable prostate cancer was defined as pathologic Gleason sum ≥7 or non-organ-confined disease. We investigated pathologic outcomes and predictive factors for unfavorable prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Of 233 cases, 91 patients (39.1%) were pathologic Gleason sum ≥7, 11 (4.7%) had extracapsular extension, and three (1.3%) had seminal vesicle invasion. Ninety-eight patients (42.1%) had unfavorable prostate cancer. When comparing clinically insignificant and significant prostate cancer, there were significant differences in mean age (P=0.007), prostate volume (P=0.021), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (P=0.03), maximum tumor volume in biopsy core (P<0.001), and rate of two positive cores (P=0.001). On multivariate analysis, age (P=0.015), PSA density (P=0.017) and two positive cores (P=0.001) were independent predictive factors for unfavorable prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of patients who were candidates for active surveillance had unfavorable prostate cancer. Age, PSA density, and two positive cores were independent significant predictive factors for unfavorable prostate cancer. These factors should be considered when performing active surveillance.

Is active surveillance a safe alternative in the management of localized prostate cancer? Pathological features of radical prostatectomy specimens in potential candidates for active surveillance

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Active surveillance (AS) has become an accepted alternative for patients with low risk prostate cancer. The purpose of AS is to defer definitive therapy in these patients to avoid treatment-related complications. Our aim was to determine the pathological features of the surgical specimen from potential AS candidates that underwent radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a group of patients submitted to RP who met criteria for AS: Gleason score (GS) ≤ 3+3 = 6, PSA ≤ 10ng/mL, T1c - T2a,< 1/3 of positive cores, < 50% of involvement in any core and PSA density < 0.15. We determined the concordance between GS in biopsy and RP specimen (RPS). Other pathological features of the RPS were also analyzed, including surgical margins, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicles and lymph node involvement.

RESULTS

We identified 167 patients subjected to RP that met the criteria for AS. Fifty two patients (31.1%) had a GS > 6 in the RPS (GS 7 n = 49; GS 8 n = 3). Extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle and lymph node involvement was found in 6.1%, 3.1% and 1.2% of the specimens, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this study a significant proportion of potential candidates for AS showed features of aggressive and/or high-risk tumors in the RPS. Therefore, before considering a patient for an AS protocol, a proper and strict selection must be performed, and informed consent is crucial for these patients.

Targeted focal therapy for the management of organ confined prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Patients currently diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer are often overtreated and experience complications, resulting in detriment to quality of life. Targeted focal therapy is a minimally invasive procedure designed to ablate tumor foci while minimizing collateral damage to maintain quality of life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This institutional review board approved, prospective study was done to assess the safety and efficacy of targeted focal therapy using cryotherapy in men 40 to 85 years old diagnosed with low risk, organ confined prostate cancer at our institution between 2006 and 2009. Low risk, organ confined prostate cancer was defined as Gleason score 7 or less (3 + 4) on transrectal ultrasound biopsy, tumor burden 50% or less and prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/dl. Patients were evaluated for eligibility after undergoing 3-dimensional mapping biopsy. Median followup was 28 months (IQR 26-31).

RESULTS

A total of 62 men with low risk disease met study inclusion criteria. At 1 year biopsy was negative in 50 of 62 patients (81%). All 12 men who tested positive on repeat biopsy had a Gleason score of 3 + 3 = 6 with 1 or 2 positive cores. The median prostate specific antigen change was a 3.0 ng/dl decrease (p <0.01). The median American Urological Association symptom score change was a 1.5-point decrease (p <0.01). No significant change was observed in Sexual Health Inventory for Men score (p = 0.6). No urinary incontinence episodes and no severe side effects were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted focal therapy in carefully selected patients provides a feasible, practical option for treating low risk prostate cancer with minimal impact on quality of life.

Interdisciplinary decision making in prostate cancer therapy - 5-years' time trends at the Interdisciplinary Prostate Cancer Center (IPC) of the Charité Berlin

Background

Patients with prostate cancer face the difficult decision between a wide range of therapeutic options. These men require elaborate information about their individual risk profile and the therapeutic strategies´ risks and benefits to choose the best possible option. In order to detect time trends and quality improvements between an early patient population (2003/2004) and a later reference group (2007/2008) data was analysed with regards to epidemiologic parameters, differences in diagnostics and the type and ranking of the recommended therapies taking into account changes to Gleason Grading System and implementation of new therapeutic strategies, particularly Active surveillance, in 2005.

Methods

Data from all 496 consecutive patients who received consultation in 2003/2004 (n = 280) and 2007/2008 (n = 216) was retrospectively evaluated. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-square test. Dependent variables were analysed using the unpaired Students´ t-test and the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Results

The cohorts were comparable concerning clinical stage, initial PSA, prostate volume, comorbidities and organ confined disease. Patients in Cohort I were younger (66.44 vs. 69.31y; p < .001) and had a longer life expectancy (17.22 vs. 14.75y; p < .001). 50.9%, 28.2% and 20.9% in Cohort I and 37.2%, 39.6% and 23.2% in Cohort II showed low-, intermediate- and high-risk disease (D´Amico) with a trend towards an increased risk profile in Cohort II (p = .066). The risk-adapted therapy recommended as first option was radical prostatectomy for 91.5% in Cohort I and 69.7% in Cohort II, radiation therapy for 83.7% in Cohort I and 50.7% in Cohort II, and other therapies (brachytherapy, Active surveillance, Watchful waiting, high-intensity focused ultrasound) for 6.5% in Cohort I and 6.9% in Cohort II (p < .001). Radiation therapy was predominant in both cohorts as second treatment option (p < .001). Time trends showing quality improvement involved an increase in biopsy cores (9.95 ± 2.38 vs. 8.43 ± 2.29; p < .001) and an increased recommendation for bilateral nerve sparing (p < .001).

Conclusion

In the earlier years, younger patients with a more favourable risk profile presented for interdisciplinary consultation. A unilateral recommendation for radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy was predominant. In the later years, the patient population was considerably older. However, this group may have benefitted from optimised diagnostic possibilities and a wider range of treatment options.

Pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk prostate cancer meeting the Prostate Cancer International: Active Surveillance criteria

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: Active surveillance has been widely accepted as a treatment tool for low-risk prostate cancer, and use of the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria can select smaller and less aggressive tumours in low-risk disease. The study shows the pathological outcomes of radical prostatectomy for patients with low-risk disease who met the PRIAS criteria. It found that ~20% had unfavourable pathological features and only 30% satisfied insignificant cancer criteria with pT2 stage, a Gleason score ≤6 and tumour volume <2.5 mL. It concludes that close follow-up including repeat biopsy or MRI is necessary to minimize unexpected progression of disease.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria in identifying indolent cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 1268 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy without neoadjuvant therapy were retrospectively reviewed. Within this cohort, patients with low-risk disease (n = 211) were classified according to whether they met (Group A, n = 87) or did not meet (Group B, n = 124) the PRIAS criteria. Pathological upstaging, upgrading, tumour volume and 5-year prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence-free survival were compared between the two groups, and factors that predicted upstaging, upgrading and PSA recurrence were analysed by univariate and multivariate methods.

RESULTS

Pathological T3 stage was present in 10.3% of patients in Group A and in 18.5% of patients in Group B (P = 0.08). Gleason score upgrading to 4+3 or greater was seen in 19.5% of Group A and in 29.9% of Group B (P = 0.01). The mean (range) tumour volume was 0.81 (0.03-5.09) mL in Group A and 1.40 (0.04-8.21) mL in Group B (P < 0.01). The rates of insignificant cancer with total tumour volume <2.5 mL, Gleason score ≤6 and stage pT2 were 30.6% in Group A and 15.4% in Group B (P = 0.07). With a median follow-up of 44 months, the 5-year PSA recurrence-free survival rates were 91.2% in Group A and 86.4% in Group B (P = 0.47). In multivariate analysis, PSA density and the PRIAS criteria were independent factors that predicted upstaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Although use of the PRIAS criteria could select more favourable tumours even in low-risk prostate cancer, about one in five men had unfavourable pathological outcomes and only three in ten had insignificant cancer. Close and careful follow-up is necessary to avoid misclassification or progression of disease, especially during the first few years of active surveillance.

Pathological findings at radical prostatectomy in patients initially managed by active surveillance: a comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our analysis was to determine if delays in treatment caused by active surveillance result in significant pathological changes when patients no longer meet the criteria on repeat biopsy and to study whether or not these changes may affect treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Out of 207 men who were on active surveillance, 47 (23%) no longer met the criteria after one of the repeat biopsies. Twenty-two underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution and formed the main group (Group 1) of this study. One hundred sixty-four patients met the criteria for active surveillance but underwent immediate surgery. Of these patients, we selected 38 (23%) with the lowest predicted biochemical recurrence-free survival. These patients formed the comparison group (Group 2). Pathological features as well as postoperative biochemical outcomes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Seven patients (32%) in Group 1 and four (11%) in Group 2 have predominantly high-grade cancer (i.e., ≥4/5 + 3) at pathology. The visually estimated percent of carcinoma was also higher in patients initially managed by active surveillance (median 12.5 vs. 5.0 in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P = 0.009). Other pathological characteristics were similar in both groups. With limited duration of follow-up, postoperative biochemical recurrence-free survival did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study has demonstrated that both tumor grade and volume may increase during active surveillance. However, the clinical significance of these changes with respect to the outcomes of delayed treatment remains to be established.

Active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancer: background, patient selection, triggers for intervention, and outcomes

With the advent of increasingly sensitive and widely used diagnostic testing, cancer overdiagnosis in particular has emerged as a problem in multiple organ sites. This has the greatest ramifications in the case of prostate cancer because of the very high incidence of latent prostate cancer in aging men, the availability of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, and the long-term effects of definitive therapy. The condition of most men with favorable-risk prostate cancer is far removed from the consequences of a rampaging, aggressive disease. Most of these men are not destined to die of their disease, even in the absence of treatment. Unfortunately, most of these patients are treated radically and are exposed to the risk of significant side effects. Therefore, a selective approach to treatment is appealing. The concept is to identify the subset that harbor more aggressive disease early enough that curative therapy is still a possibility, thereby allowing the others to enjoy improved quality of life, free from the side effects of treatment. This review article summarizes the evidence supporting active surveillance, and the current approach to this management strategy, including the roles of serial biopsy, PSA kinetics, and MR imaging.

Single application of high-intensity focused ultrasound as a first-line therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes

Study Type--Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy has been proposed for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa) for all risk levels of tumour recurrence. The study adds data on the efficacy of a single HIFU application in the treatment of PCa with different risks of recurrence. Durable cancer control was achieved in 81.7% of patients with low-risk disease, with rates of efficacy declining in intermediate- and high-risk tumours. The data suggest that the principal domain for minimal invasive HIFU should be low-risk disease.

OBJECTIVE

• To report cancer control results after a single application of high-intensity focused ultrasonography (HIFU) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa), stratified by tumour recurrence risk according to D'Amico risk classification.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• In a retrospective single-centre study, we analysed the outcomes of patients with localized PCa who were treated with curative intent between December 2002 and October 2006 using an Ablatherm HIFU device (EDAP-TMS, France). • Transurethral resection of the prostate or adenomectomy were performed before HIFU to downsize large prostate glands. • Oncological failure was determined by the occurrence of biochemical relapse, positive biopsy and/or metastasis. Biochemical relapse was defined as a PSA nadir +1.2 ng/mL (Stuttgart definition), or as a rise in PSA level to ≥ 0.5 ng/mL if PSA doubling time was ≤ 6 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for survival estimates.

RESULTS

• A total of 191 consecutive patients were included in the study. The median (range) patient age was 69.7 (51-82) years, and 38, 34 and 28% of these patients were in the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively. • The median (range) follow-up was 52.8 (0.2-79.8) months. • At 5 years, overall and cancer-specific survival rates were 86.3% and 98.4%, respectively. • Stratified by risk group, negative biopsy rates were 84.2%, 63.6%, and 67.5% (P = 0.032), 5-year biochemical-free survival rates were 84.8%, 64.9% and 54.9% (P< 0.01), and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.7%, 53.2% and 51.2% (P < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSION

• Single-session HIFU is recommended as a curative approach in elderly patients with low-risk PCa. Patients at higher risk of tumour progression should be counselled regarding the likely need for salvage therapy, including repeat HIFU.

Molecular profiling of indolent human prostate cancer: tackling technical challenges to achieve high-fidelity genome-wide data

The contemporary problem of prostate cancer overtreatment can be partially attributed to the diagnosis of potentially indolent prostate cancers that pose low risk to aged men, and lack of sufficiently accurate risk stratification methods to reliably seek out men with indolent diseases. Since progressive acquisition and accumulation of genomic alterations, both genetic and epigenetic, is a defining feature of all human cancers at different stages of disease progression, it is hypothesized that RNA and DNA alterations characteristic of indolent prostate tumors may be different from those previously characterized in the setting of clinically significant prostate cancer. Approaches capable of detecting such alterations on a genome-wide level are the most promising. Such analysis may uncover molecular events defining early initiating stages along the natural history of prostate cancer progression, and ultimately lead to rational development of risk stratification methods for identification of men who can safely forego treatment. However, defining and characterizing indolent prostate cancer in a clinically relevant context remains a challenge, particularly when genome-wide approaches are employed to profile formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens. Here, we provide the conceptual basis underlying the importance of understanding indolent prostate cancer from molecular profiling studies, identify the key hurdles in sample acquisition and variables that affect molecular data derived from FFPE tissues, and highlight recent progresses in efforts to address these technical challenges.

Association of prostate cancer risk alleles with unfavourable pathological characteristics in potential candidates for active surveillance

OBJECTIVE

• To assess whether the carrier status of 35 risk alleles for prostate cancer (CaP) is associated with having unfavourable pathological features in the radical prostatectomy specimen in men with clinically low risk CaP who fulfil commonly accepted criteria as candidates for active surveillance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• We studied men of European ancestry with CaP who fulfilled the commonly accepted clinical criteria for active surveillance (T1c, prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/mL, biopsy Gleason ≤6, three or fewer positive cores, ≤50% tumour involvement/core) but instead underwent early radical prostatectomy. • We genotyped these men for 35 CaP risk alleles. We defined 'unfavourable' pathological characteristics to be Gleason ≥7 and/or ≥ pT2b in their radical prostatectomy specimen.

RESULTS

• In all, 263 men (median age 60 [46-72] years) fulfilled our selection criteria for active surveillance, and 58 of 263 (22.1%) were found to have 'unfavourable' pathological characteristics. • The frequencies of three CaP risk alleles (rs1447295 [8q24], P= 0.004; rs1571801 [9q33.2], P= 0.03; rs11228565 [11q13], P= 0.02) were significantly higher in men with 'unfavourable' pathological characteristics. • Two other risk alleles were proportionately more frequent (rs10934853 [3q21], P= 0.06; rs1859962 [17q24], P= 0.07) but did not achieve nominal statistical significance. • Carriers of any one of the significantly over-represented risk alleles had twice the likelihood of unfavourable tumour features (P= 0.03), and carriers of any two had a sevenfold increased likelihood (P= 0.001). • Receiver-operator curve analysis demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.66, suggesting that the number of single nucleotide polymorphisms carried provided discrimination between men with 'favourable' and 'unfavourable' tumour features in their prostatectomy specimen.

CONCLUSION

• In potential candidates for active surveillance, certain CaP risk alleles are more prevalent in patients with 'unfavourable' pathological characteristics in their radical prostatectomy specimen.

Pathological findings following radical prostatectomy in patients who are candidates for active surveillance: impact of varying PSA levels

Active surveillance is an acceptable treatment option in men with a low-risk prostate cancer. In the present study, we have retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 509 men who fit the criteria for active surveillance but selected radical prostatectomy. Then, the impact of varying prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels on the risk of upstaging and upgrading in these patients was assessed. Pathological characteristics of patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria under three active surveillance criteria--those of the University of California-San Francisco, the National Cancer Institute and the European Association of Urology--were examined. The proportion of men who were deemed candidates for active surveillance but were subsequently upstaged or upgraded was determined. Of 509 patients, 186 (36.5%), 132 (25.9%) and 88 (17.3%) men fulfilled the active surveillance criteria, respectively. Upgrading (Gleason scores 7-10) ranged from 32.8% to 38.6%, while upstaging (≥pT3) ranged from 10.2% to 12.5%, depending on the three active surveillance criteria. After a median follow-up of 24 months, three patients developed a biochemical recurrence. When the impact of varying PSA levels was examined using a test for trend analysis in the context of PSA for each protocol, rates of upstaging were lower in men with PSA <4 ng ml(-1). However, there was no impact of varying PSA levels on upgrading. In conclusion, commonly used active surveillance protocols carry the risks of upgrading and upstaging. More reliable and accurate markers are needed to better stratify the risks of men who are appropriate candidates for active surveillance.

Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update

Active surveillance is now an accepted management strategy for men with low-risk localized prostate cancer, in recognition of the knowledge that the majority of men with such cancers are likely to die from other causes. The most obvious benefit of active surveillance is the reduction of morbidity associated with surgery by delaying or avoiding radical gland therapy. Other advantages include lower overall costs to the health-care system and potentially a better quality of life. These advantages should be balanced against the risks of delayed therapy, the most considerable of which being development of more-aggressive disease. Appropriate selection criteria and the definition of triggers for intervention with radical therapy are critical components of an active surveillance protocol. The ability to accurately identify and cure the men whose cancers will progress using clinical, biopsy and imaging data is yet to be resolved, as is the psychological burden of living with an untreated cancer. The benefit of 5α-reductase inhibitors as secondary chemoprevention in men on active surveillance is a new avenue of research. Focal therapy, which has the similar aim of reducing morbidity while maintaining oncological control, is an emerging competitor for active surveillance. Nevertheless, active surveillance is an appealing management option for selected men with prostate cancer.

Acceptance and durability of surveillance as a management choice in men with screen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer: improved outcomes with stringent enrollment criteria

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the acceptance rate and durability of surveillance among contemporary men with low-risk prostate cancer managed at a large, US academic institution.

METHODS

Patients with low-risk parameters on initial and repeat biopsy were offered surveillance regardless of age. Regular clinical evaluation and repeat prostate biopsy were recommended every 1-2 years, and intervention was recommended based on adverse clinical and pathologic parameters on follow-up. Acceptance rate of active surveillance, freedom from intervention, and freedom from recommended intervention were measured.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 202 low-risk patients, 86 (43%) chose immediate treatment and 116 (57%) underwent repeat biopsy for consideration of surveillance. Intervention was recommended after initial repeat biopsy in 27 (23%) men because of higher-risk features, leaving a total of 89 men on surveillance. Over a median follow-up of 33 months, 16 men were ultimately treated and 8 were recommended to undergo treatment because of adverse clinical features on subsequent evaluations. Of the men on surveillance, the 3-year freedom from intervention and freedom from recommended intervention was 87% (95% CI, 78-93) and 93% (95% CI, 85-97), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptance of surveillance (57%) in low-risk patients in this series is substantially higher than previous reports, and approximately one-third of these patients are ultimately managed by surveillance using stringent criteria. The risk of reclassification to a more aggressive cancer over short-term follow-up in appropriately selected patients is low.