Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy

Prostate cancer patients with lymphatic node involvement detected by immunohistochemistry. Is the effort worthwhile?

INTRODUCTION

Lymph node (LN) status is one of the main prognostic factors in localized prostate cancer (CaP) patients after surgery. Examining palpable lymph nodes with hematoxylin and eosin (HE) is the most common approach in clinical practice; however, immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been reported to increase the LN detection rate. We reviewed the oncological results of patients with LN metastasis detected by IHC.

METHODS

Retrospective study of CaP patients who underwent lymphadenectomy at the time of the prostatectomy. Extended lymphadenectomy was performed with complementary indocyanine green (ICG) guidance. Three groups were considered according to LN status. Definition of the pN+ group was made if LNs were detected by HE, occulted lymph node-positive (OLN+) was considered when ≥ 1 LN was identified with IHC and occulted lymph node-negative (OLN-) if no metastatic nodes were found. Oncological outcomes were reported regarding PSA kinetics, biochemical recurrence (BCR), need for secondary treatments and metastasis-free survival (MFS).

RESULTS

A total of 283 patients with a median follow-up of 69 months were included in the study. Immunohistochemical assessment revealed metastatic LNs in 8.9% of patients. The rate of locally advanced disease and positive surgical margins was higher in the OLN + and pN + groups vs the OLN - group (P < 0.05). At the end of follow-up, 19%, 44% and 52% of patients from the OLN -, OLN + and pN + groups experienced BCR (P < 0.001), respectively. Additionally, 2.6%, 17% and 22% of patients developed metastatic progression from the OLN -, OLN + and pN+ group (P < 0.001), respectively. In the multivariate analysis, the OLN + group had a higher risk HR: 12 (95% CI, 2.4-56; P = 0.002) of metastatic progression in comparison with OLN - patients. This difference was not observed in the risk of biochemical recurrence HR 1.8 (95% CI, 0.9-3.8; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

Conventional HE histological analysis underdiagnosed nearly 10% of patients. IHC-detected patients were at higher risk of metastasis development than OLN - patients. This report highlights the importance of optimizing the anatomopathological analysis properly.

PRIORITI: Phase 4 study of triptorelin or active surveillance in high-risk prostate cancer

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of triptorelin after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with negative lymph nodes.

METHODS

PRIORITI (NCT01753297) was a prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, phase 4 study conducted in China and Russia. Patients with high-risk (Gleason score ≥ 8 and/or pre-RP prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥ 20 ng/mL and/or primary tumor stage 3a) prostate adenocarcinoma without evidence of lymph node or distant metastases were randomized to receive triptorelin 11.25 mg at baseline (≤ 8 weeks after RP) and at 3 and 6 months, or active surveillance. The primary endpoint was biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS), defined as the time from randomization to biochemical relapse (BR; increased PSA > 0.2 ng/mL). Patients were monitored every 3 months for at least 36 months; the study ended when 61 BRs were observed.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat population comprised 226 patients (mean [standard deviation] age, 65.3 [6.4] years), of whom 109 and 117 were randomized to triptorelin or surveillance, respectively. The median BRFS was not reached. The 25th percentile time to BRFS (95% confidence interval) was 39.1 (29.9-not estimated) months with triptorelin and 30.0 (18.6-42.1) months with surveillance (p = 0.16). There was evidence of a lower risk of BR with triptorelin versus surveillance but this was not statistically significant at the 5% level (p = 0.10). Chemical castration was maintained at month 9 in 93.9% of patients who had received triptorelin. Overall, triptorelin was well tolerated and had an acceptable safety profile.

CONCLUSION

BRFS was observed to be longer with triptorelin than surveillance, but the difference was not statistically significant.

Variation in management of lymph node positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy within a statewide quality improvement consortium

BACKGROUND

Patients with lymph node positive (pN+) disease found at the time of radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer (CaP) are at high risk of disease persistence and progression. Contemporary management trends of pN+ CaP are not well described.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients in the Michigan Urologic Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2012 and 2023 with cN0/pN+ disease were identified. The primary outcome was to evaluate patient and practice-level factors associated with time to secondary post-RP treatment. Secondary outcomes included practice-level variation in management of pN+ CaP and rates of secondary treatment modality. To assess factors associated with secondary treatment, a Cox proportional hazards model of a 60-day landmark analysis was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 666 patients with pN+ disease. Overall, 66% underwent secondary treatment within 12 months post-RP. About 19% of patients with detectable post-RP PSA did not receive treatment. Of patients receiving secondary treatment after 60-days post-RP, 34% received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone, 27% received radiation (RT) alone, 36% received combination, and 4% received other systemic therapies. In the multivariable model, pathologic grade group (GG)3 (HR 1.5; 95%CI: 1.05-2.14), GG4-5 (HR 1.65; 95%CI: 1.16-2.34), positive margins (HR 1.46; 95%CI: 1.13-1.88), and detectable postoperative PSA ≥0.1 ng/ml (HR 3.46; 95%CI: 2.61-4.59) were significantly associated with secondary post-RP treatment. There was wide variation in adjusted practice-level 12-month secondary treatment utilization (28%-79%).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority pN+ patients receive treatment within 12 months post-RP which was associated with high-risk pathological features and post-RP PSA. Variation in management of pN+ disease highlights the uncertainty regarding the optimal management. Understanding which patients will benefit from secondary treatment, and which type, will be critical to minimize variation in care.

Hormonal Agents in Localized and Advanced Prostate Cancer: Current Use and Future Perspectives

Prostate cancer (PC) is generally a hormone-dependent tumor. Androgen deprivation therapy ( has been the standard of care in metastatic disease for more than 80 years. Subsequent studies have highlighted the efficacy of ADT even in earlier disease settings such as in localized disease or in the case of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Improved knowledge of PC biology and ADT resistance mechanisms have led to the development of novel generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI). Initially used only in patients who became resistant to ADT, ARPI have subsequently shown to be effective when used in patients with metastatic hormone-naive disease and in recent years their effectiveness has also been evaluated in localized disease and in case of BCR. The objective of this review is to describe the current role of agents interfering with the androgen receptor in different stages of PC and to point out future perspectives.

Concurrent prognostic utility of lymph node count and lymph node density for men with pathological node-positive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

While both the number (+LN) and density (LND) of metastatic lymph nodes on radical prostatectomy lymphadenectomy predict mortality in prostate cancer, the independent impact of each on overall mortality (OM) is unknown.

METHODS

We sampled men who underwent radical prostatectomy and lymphadenectomy between 2004 and 2013 from the National Cancer Database. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis with restricted cubic spline was used to assess the non-linear association of +LN count and LND with OM.

RESULTS

Of 229,547 men in our sample, 3% (n = 7507) had +LNs, of which 89% had 1-3 +LN and 11% had ≥4 +LN. In multivariable Cox analysis across all patients, OM increased with each additional +LN up to four (HR 1.14, 95%CI 1.06-1.23 per node), with no increase beyond 4 +LN. LND was an independent predictor of OM (HR 1.09, 95%CI 1.06-1.12 per 10% increase). However, after excluding patients with inadequate nodal sampling (<5 LN examined), the variation in OM explained by LND was negligible for patients with ≤3 +LN. In men with 1, 2, and 3 +LN, there was a 0.28%, 0.02%, and 0.50% increase in OM for each 10% increase in LND, compared with 1.9% and 1.6% for men with 4 or 5+ LNs.

CONCLUSIONS

While +LN count and LND independently predict OM, the impact of LND is negligible in men with ≤3 +LN, who comprise the vast majority of men with +LN. Pathological nodal staging should primarily rely on LN count rather than LND.

Identifying low cancer-specific mortality risk lymph node-positive radical prostatectomy patients

OBJECTIVES

To identify low cancer-specific mortality (CSM) risk lymph node-positive (pN1) radical prostatectomy (RP) patients.

METHODS

Within Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database (2010-2015) pN1 RP patients were identified. Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox-regression (MCR) models were used. Pathological characteristics were used to identify patients at lowest CSM risk.

RESULTS

Overall, 2197 pN1 RP patients were identified. Overall, 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) rate was 93.3%. In MCR models ISUP GG1-2 (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.12, p < 0.001), GG3 (HR: 0.14, p < 0.001), GG4 (HR: 0.35, p = 0.002), pT2 (HR: 0.27, p = 0.012), pT3a (HR: 0.28, p = 0.003), pT3b (HR: 0.39, p = 0.009), and 1-2 positive lymph nodes (HR: 0.64, p = 0.04) independently predicted lower CSM. Pathological characteristics subgroups with the most protective hazard ratios were used to identify low-risk (ISUP GG1-3 and pT2-3a and 1-2 positive lymph nodes) patients versus others (ISUP GG4-5 or pT3b-4 or ≥3 positive lymph nodes). In Kaplan-Meier analyses, 5-year CSS rates were 99.3% for low-risk (n = 480, 21.8%) versus 91.8% (p < 0.001) for others (n = 1717, 78.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lymph node-positive RP patients exhibit variable CSS rates. Within this heterogeneous group, those at very low risk of CSM may be identified based on pathological characteristics, namely ISUP GG1-3, pT2-3a, and 1-2 positive lymph nodes. Such stratification scheme might be of value for individual patients counseling, as well as in design of clinical trials.

Validation study on the 2 mm diameter cutoff in lymph node-positive cases following radical prostatectomy in accordance with the AJCC/UICC TNM 8th edition: Real-world data analysis from a Japanese cohort

OBJECTIVES

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) 8th edition has proposed micrometastasis as a lymph node metastasis (LN+) of diameter ≤2 mm in prostate cancer. However, supporting evidence has not described. We evaluated LN+ patients' survival after radical prostatectomy (RP) based on the LN maximum tumor diameter (MTD).

METHODS

Data from 561 LN+ patients after RP and pelvic LN dissection (PLND) treated between 2006 and 2019 at 33 institutions were retrospectively investigated. Patients were stratified by a LN+ MTD cutoff of 2 mm. Outcomes included castration resistance-free survival (CRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In total, 282 patients were divided into two groups (LN+ MTD >2 mm [n = 206] and ≤2 mm [n = 76]). Patients of LN+ status >2 mm exhibited significantly decreased CRFS and MFS, and poorer CSS and OS. No patients developed CRPC in the LN+ status ≤2 mm group when the PLND number was ≥14. Multivariate analysis showed the number of LN removed, RP Gleason pattern 5, and MTD in LN+ significantly predicted CRFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients of LN+ status ≤2 mm showed better prognoses after RP. In all the patients in the ≤2-mm group, the progression to CRPC could be prevented with appropriate interventions, particularly when PLND is performed accurately. Our findings support the utility of the pN substaging proposed by the AJCC/UICC 8th edition; this will facilitate precision medicine for patients with advanced prostate cancer.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2024 Update. Part I: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines provide recommendations for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). This paper aims to present a summary of the 2024 version of the EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised PCa.

METHODS

The panel performed a literature review of all new data published in English, covering the time frame between May 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated, and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is considered, a combination of targeted and regional biopsies should be performed. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography imaging is the most sensitive technique for identifying metastatic spread. Active surveillance is the appropriate management for men with low-risk PCa, as well as for selected favourable intermediate-risk patients with International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A recommendation to consider hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term intensified hormonal treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This article is the summary of the guidelines for "curable" prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is "found" through a multistep risk-based screening process. The objective is to find as many men as possible with a curable cancer. Prostate cancer is curable if it resides in the prostate; it is then classified into low-, intermediary-, and high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. These risk classes are the basis of the treatments. Low-risk prostate cancer is treated with "active surveillance", a treatment with excellent prognosis. For low-intermediary-risk active surveillance should also be discussed as an option. In other cases, active treatments, surgery, or radiation treatment should be discussed along with the potential side effects to allow shared decision-making.

Ultrasensitive PSA: rethinking post-surgical management for node positive prostate cancer

Introduction

Clinicians may offer patients with positive lymph nodes (pN1) and undetectable PSA following surgery for prostate cancer either observation or adjuvant therapy based on AUA, EAU, and NCCN guidelines considering standard PSA detection thresholds of <0.1ng/ml. Here we sought to investigate the outcomes of pN1 patients in the era of ultrasensitive PSA testing.

Methods

We queried the Northwestern Electronic Data Warehouse for patients with prostate cancer who were pN1 at radical prostatectomy and followed with ultrasensitive PSA. Patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. We compared clinical characteristics including age, race, pre-operative PSA, Gleason grade, tumor stage, surgical margins, and nodal specimens to identify factors associated with achievement and maintenance of an undetectable PSA (defined as <0.01 ng/mL). Statistics were performed using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-squared analysis, and logistic regression with significance defined as p<0.05.

Results

From 2018-2023, 188 patients were included. Subsequently, 39 (20.7%) had a PSA decline to undetectable levels (<0.01 ng/mL) post-operatively at a median time of 63 days. Seven percent of these men (3/39) were treated with adjuvant RT + ADT with undetectable PSA levels. 13/39 (33.3%) had eventual rises in PSA to ≥0.01 ng/mL for which they underwent salvage RT with ADT. Overall, 23/39 (59%) patients achieved and maintained undetectable PSA levels without subsequent therapy at median follow-up of 24.2 mo. Compared to patients with PSA persistence after surgery or elevations to detectable levels (≥0.01 ng/mL), patients who achieved and maintained undetectable levels had lower Gleason grades (p=0.03), lower tumor stage (p<0.001), fewer positive margins (p=0.02), and fewer involved lymph nodes (p=0.02). On multivariable analysis, only primary tumor (pT) stage was associated with achieving and maintaining an undetectable PSA; pT3b disease was associated with a 6.6-fold increased chance of developing a detectable PSA (p=0.03).

Conclusion

Ultrasensitive PSA can aid initiation of early salvage therapy for lymph node positive patients after radical prostatectomy while avoiding overtreatment in a significant subset. 20% of patients achieved an undetectable PSA and over half of this subset remained undetectable after 2 years.

The Prognostic Role of Preoperative PSMA PET/CT in cN0M0 pN+ Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Study

CONTEXT

Despite negative preoperative conventional imaging, up to 10% of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) harbor lymph-node involvement (LNI) at radical prostatectomy (RP). The advent of more accurate imaging modalities such as PET/CT improved the detection of LNI. However, their clinical impact and prognostic value are still unclear. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of preoperative PET/CT in patients node positive (pN+) at RP.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We retrospectively identified cN0M0 patients at conventional imaging (CT and/or MRI, and bone scan) who had pN+ PCa at RP at 17 referral centers. Patients with cN+ at PSMA/Choline PET/CT but cN0M0 at conventional imaging were also included. Systemic progression/recurrence was the primary outcome; Cox proportional hazards models were used for multivariate analysis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We included 1163 pN+ men out of whom 95 and 100 had preoperative PSMA and/or Choline PET/CT, respectively. ISUP grade ≥4 was detected in 66.6%. Overall, 42% of patients had postoperative PSA persistence (≥0.1 ng/mL). Postoperative management included initial observation (34%), ADT (22.7%) and adjuvant RT+/-ADT (42.8%). Median follow-up was 42 months. Patients with cN+ on PSMA PET/CT had an increased risk of systemic progression (52.9% vs. 13.6% cN0 PSMA PET/CT vs. 21.5% cN0 at conventional imaging; P < .01). This held true at multivariable analysis: (HR 6.184, 95% CI: 3.386-11-295; P < .001) whilst no significant results were highlighted for Choline PET/CT. No significant associations for both PET types were found for local progression, BCR, and overall mortality (all P > .05). Observation as an initial management strategy instead of adjuvant treatments was related with an increased risk of metastases (HR 1.808; 95% CI: 1.069-3.058; P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

PSMA PET/CT cN+ patients with negative conventional imaging have an increased risk of systemic progression after RP compared to their counterparts with cN0M0 disease both at conventional and/or molecular imaging.

Optimizing anti-androgen treatment use among men with pathologic lymph-node positive prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: the importance of postoperative PSA kinetics

BACKGROUND

Optimal postsurgical management of prostate cancer (PCa) patients with nodal metastasis at the time of radical prostatectomy remains unclear. We sought to examine the role of postoperative PSA kinetics and pathologic tumor characteristics in guiding additional hormonal therapy use in pN1 men.

METHODS

In total, 297 pN1 PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy and ePLND between 2002 and 2018 were identified within our prospectively maintained institutional cancer data-registry. Following surgery, these patients were managed with either immediate androgen deprivation therapy (iADT) or observation with deferred ADT (dADT). The former was defined as ADT given within ≤6 months of surgery and the latter as >6 months. The primary outcome was metastasis. Regression-tree analysis was used to stratify patients into novel risk-groups based on post-prostatectomy tumor characteristics and PSA kinetics and the corresponding metastasis risk. Multivariable Cox regression analyses tested the impact of iADT versus observation ± dADT on metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality within each risk-group separately.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 6.1 years (IQR 3.2-9.0). Regression-tree analysis stratified patients into 3 novel risk-groups (Harrell's C-index 0.79) based on PSA-nadir and time to biochemical failure: group 1 (low-risk) included patients with time to biochemical recurrence >6 months (n = 115), while groups 2 and 3 included patients with biochemical failure within ≤6 months with a postoperative PSA-nadir <1.05 ng/mL (group 2 [intermediate-risk], n = 125) or ≥1.05 ng/mL (group 3 [high-risk], n = 57), respectively. No other patient or tumor characteristics were significant for risk stratification. Within each risk-group, the 10-year metastasis-free survival rates with iADT versus observation ± dADT use were: group 1, 100% versus 95.4% (Log-rank p = 0.738), group 2, 80.6% versus 53.5% (Log-rank p = 0.016), and group 3, 41.5% versus 0% (Log-rank p = 0.015), respectively. Adjusted Cox regression analyses confirmed the benefit of iADT utilization in reducing metastasis in group 2 (p = 0.029) and group 3 (p = 0.008) patients, with no benefit for group 1 patients (p = 0.918). Similar results were noted for cancer-specific and overall mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Following radical prostatectomy, early postoperative PSA kinetics may provide valuable information for guiding the timing of ADT initiation-this may reduce over- and undertreatment of pN1 PCa men.

Immediate radiotherapy versus observation in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of node-positive (pN1) prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy (RP) remains uncertain. Despite randomized evidence, utilization of immediate, life-long androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains poor, and recent trials of early salvage radiotherapy included only a minority of pN1 patients. We therefore emulated a hypothetical pragmatic trial of adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation in men with pN1 prostate cancer.

METHODS

Using the RADICALS-RT trial to inform the design of a hypothetical trial, we identified men aged 50-69 years with pT2-3 Rany pN1 M0, pre-treatment PSA < 50 ng/mL prostate cancer in the NCDB from 2006 to 2015 treated with 60-72 Gy of adjuvant RT (aRT) ± ADT within 26 weeks of RP or observation. After estimating a propensity score for receipt of aRT, we estimated absolute and relative treatment effects using stabilized inverse probability of treatment (sIPW) re-weighting.

RESULTS

In total, 3510 patients were included in the study, of whom 587 (17%) received aRT (73% with concurrent ADT). Median follow-up was 40.0 -months, during which 333 deaths occurred. After sIPW re-weighting, baseline characteristics were well-balanced. Adjusted overall survival (OS) was 93% versus 89% at 5-years and 82% versus 79% at 7-years for aRT versus observation (p = 0.11). In IPW-reweighted Cox regression, aRT was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) than observation, but this did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.70 p = 0.06). In analyses examining heterogeneity of treatment effects, aRT was associated with improved ACM only for men with Gleason 8-10 disease (HR 0.59, p = 0.01), ≥2 positive LNs (HR 0.49, p = 0.04 for 2 positive LNs; HR 0.42, p = 0.01 for ≥3 positive LNs), or negative surgical margins (HR 0.50, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In observational analyses designed to emulate a hypothetical target trial of aRT versus observation in pN1 prostate cancer, aRT was associated with improved OS only for men with Gleason 8-10 disease, ≥2 positive LNs, or negative surgical margins.

Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) in men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a widely used procedure. However, little is known about anatomical site-specific yields and subsequent metastatic patterns in these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data on a consecutive series of 1107 patients undergoing RARP at our centre between 2004 and 2018 were analysed. In men undergoing LN dissection, the internal, external and obturator nodes were removed and sent in separately. We performed an analysis of LN yields in total and for each anatomical zone, patterns of LN metastases and complications. Oncological outcome in pN+ disease was assessed including postoperative PSA persistence and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 823 ePLNDs were performed in the investigated cohort resulting in 98 men being diagnosed as pN+ (8.9%). The median (IQR) LN yield was 19 (14-25), 10 (7-13) on the right and 9 (6-12) on the left side (P < 0.001). A median of six (4-8) LNs were retrieved from the external, three (1-6) from the internal iliac artery, and eight (6-12) from the obturator fossa. More men had metastatic LNs on the right side compared to the left (41 vs. 19). Symptomatic lymphoceles occurred exclusively in the ePLND group (2.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.04). Postoperatively, 47 (47.9%) of men with pN+ reached a PSA of < 0.1μg/ml. There was no association between a certain pN+ region and postoperative PSA persistence or BCRFS. The estimated cancer specific survival rate at 5 years was 98.5% for pN+ disease.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic ePLND with a high LN yield and low complication rate is feasible. However, we observed an imbalance in more removed and positive LNs on the right side compared to the left. A high rate of postoperative PSA persistence and early recurrence in pN+ patients might indicate a possibly limited therapeutical value of the procedure in already spread disease. Yet, these men demonstrated an excellent survival.

Radiation Therapy Summary of the AUA/ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to develop a summary of recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer based on the American Urologic Association/ ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

METHODS

The American Urologic Association and ASTRO convened a multidisciplinary, expert panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic literature review using an a priori defined consensus-building methodology. The topics covered were risk assessment, staging, risk-based management, principles of management including active surveillance, surgery, radiation, and follow-up after treatment. Presented are recommendations from the guideline most pertinent to radiation oncologists with an additional statement on health equity, diversity, and inclusion related to guideline panel composition and the topic of clinically localized prostate cancer.

SUMMARY

Staging, risk assessment, and management options in prostate cancer have advanced over the last decade and significantly affect shared decision-making for treatment management. Current advancements and controversies discussed to guide staging, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations include the use of advanced imaging and tumor genomic profiling. An essential active surveillance strategy includes prostate-specific antigen monitoring and periodic digital rectal examination with changes triggering magnetic resonance imaging and possible biopsy thereafter and histologic progression or greater tumor volume prompting consideration of definitive local treatment. The panel recommends against routine use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for patients with prostate cancer after prostatectomy with negative nodes and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen, while acknowledging that patients at highest risk of recurrence were relatively poorly represented in the 3 largest randomized trials comparing adjuvant RT to early salvage and that a role may exist for adjuvant RT in selected patients at highest risk. RT for clinically localized prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, with new trial results, therapeutic combinations, and technological advances. The recommendation of moderately hypofractionated RT has not changed, and the updated guideline incorporates a conditional recommendation for the use of ultrahypofractionated treatment. Health disparities and inequities exist in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer across the continuum of care that can influence guideline concordance.

Novel Approaches in the Systemic Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Locally advanced prostate cancer comprises approximately 20% of new prostate cancer diagnoses. For these patients, international guidelines recommend treatment with radiotherapy (RT) to the prostate in combination with long-term (2-3 years) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), or radical prostatectomy in combination with extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) as another treatment option for selected patients as part of multimodal therapy. Improvements in overall survival with docetaxel or an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor have been achieved in patients with metastatic castration sensitive or castration resistant prostate cancer. However, the role of systemic therapy combinations for high risk and/or unfavorable prostate cancer is unclear. In this context, the aim of this review is to assess the current evidence for systemic treatment combinations as part of primary definitive therapy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.

The diagnosis and treatment of castrate-sensitive oligometastatic prostate cancer: A review

BACKGROUND

Oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPCa) is emerging as a transitional disease state between localized and polymetastatic disease. This review will assess the current knowledge of castrate-sensitive OMPCa.

METHODS

A review of the current literature was performed to summarize the definition and classification of OMPCa, assess the diagnostic methods and imaging modalities utilized, and to review the treatment options and outcomes. We further identify gaps in knowledge and areas for future research.

RESULTS

Currently there is no unified definition of OMPCa. National guidelines mostly recommend systemic therapies without distinguishing oligometastatic and polymetastatic disease. Next generation imaging is more sensitive than conventional imaging and has led to early detection of metastases at initial diagnosis or recurrence. While mostly retrospective in nature, recent studies suggest that treatment (surgical or radiation) of the primary tumor and/or metastatic sites might delay initiation of androgen deprivation therapy while increasing survival in selected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective data are required to better assess the incremental improvement in survival and quality of life achieved with various treatment strategies in patients with OMPCa.

Role of lymphatic invasion in predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy

Objective

Lymphatic invasion in prostate cancer is associated with poor prognosis. However, there is no consensus regarding the clinical and prognostic value of lymphatic invasion. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of lymphatic invasion in biochemical recurrence (BCR) and compare the recurrence rates between patients with lymphatic invasion and lymph node metastasis.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 2,207 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) without pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) and 742 patients who underwent RP with PLND for clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer, between 1993 and 2020, at Seoul National University Hospital. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to estimate BCR-free survival (BCRFS) using the log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the significant factors for BCR. Propensity score matching was performed with a 1:2 ratio to match age, initial PSA level, pathological T stage, and Gleason score to exclude confounding effects.

Results

Of the 2,207 patients who underwent RP without PLND, lymphatic invasion (L1Nx) was observed in 79 (3.5%) individuals. Among the 742 patients who underwent RP with PLND, lymph node metastases were found in 105 patients (14.2%). In patients with lymph node metastasis, lymphatic invasion was observed in 50 patients (47.6%), whereas lymphatic invasion was observed in 53 patients (8.3%) among those without lymph node metastasis. In patients who underwent RP without PLND, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly poorer BCR-free survival in the L1Nx group than in the L0Nx group (p < 0.001). In patients who underwent RP with PLND, the L1N0, L0N1, and L1N1 groups showed significantly worse prognoses than the L0N0 group (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in BCRFS between the L1N0 and lymph node metastasis groups, including the L0N1 and L1N1 groups. After propensity score matching at a 1:2 ratio, the L1Nx group showed significantly poorer outcomes in terms of BCRFS than the L0Nx group (p = 0.05). In addition, the L1N0 group showed a significantly worse prognosis than the L0N0 group after propensity score matching.

Conclusion

Lymphatic invasion in radical prostatectomy specimens is an independent prognostic factor, which can complement lymph node status for predicting biochemical recurrence. Considering lymphatic invasion as an adverse pathological finding, similar to lymph node metastasis, adjuvant therapy could be considered in patients with lymphatic invasion.

Androgen deprivation therapy in localized prostate cancer. Current status and future trends

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer (PCa) has been recognized as an androgen-sensitive disease since the investigations from Huggins and Hodges in 1941. Thanks to these findings, they received the Nobel Prize in 1966. This was the beginning of the development of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as treatment for patients with PCa.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current indications of ADT in localized PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a comprehensive English and Spanish language literature research, focused on the main indications for ADT in localized PCa.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Nowadays, the indications for ADT as monotherapy in localized PCa have been limited to specific situations, to patients unwilling or unable to receive any form of local treatment if they have a PSA-DT < 12 months, and either a PSA > 50 ng/mL, a poorly differentiated tumor, or troublesome local disease-related symptoms. ADT can be used in combination with local treatment in different scenarios. Although neoadjuvant treatment with ADT prior to surgery with curative intent has no clear oncological impact, as a future sight, PCa is a heterogeneous disease, and there could be a group of patients with high-risk localized disease that could benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

We need to optimize the treatment with ADT in localized PCa, selecting the patients accordingly to their disease characteristics. Given that the therapeutic armamentarium evolves day by day, there is a need for the development of new clinical trials, as well as a molecular studies of patients to identify those who might benefit from an early multimodal treatment.

Management of Pathologic Node-Positive Prostate Cancer following Radical Prostatectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Approximately 15% of prostate cancer patients have lymph node metastases at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP). However, there is no universally accepted standard of care for these men. The options for treatment in this subset of patients range from observation to a combination of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (aADT) and radiation therapy (RT).

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent systematic review showed that there was no clear choice out of the options above to treat these patients. Studies have shown that patients treated with adjuvant radiation therapy have lower all-cause mortality when compared to patients treated with salvage radiation therapy. In this review, we summarize treatment options for pathologic node-positive (pN1) patients and discuss the urgent need for robust clinical trials that includes observation as the control group to help establish a standard of care for treating patients with node-positive prostate cancer after RP.

Treating Primary Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: A Scoping Review of Available Treatment Options

There is currently no consensus on the optimal treatment for patients with a primary diagnosis of clinically and pathologically node-positive (cN1M0 and pN1M0) hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa). The treatment paradigm has shifted as research has shown that these patients could benefit from intensified treatment and are potentially curable. This scoping review provides an overview of available treatments for men with primary-diagnosed cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. A search was conducted on Medline for studies published between 2002 and 2022 that reported on treatment and outcomes among patients with cN1M0 and pN1M0 PCa. In total, twenty-seven eligible articles were included in this analysis: six randomised controlled trials, one systematic review, and twenty retrospective/observational studies. For cN1M0 PCa patients, the best-established treatment option is a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) applied to both the prostate and lymph nodes. Based on most recent studies, treatment intensification can be beneficial, but more randomised studies are needed. For pN1M0 PCa patients, adjuvant or early salvage treatments based on risk stratification determined by factors such as Gleason score, tumour stage, number of positive lymph nodes, and surgical margins appear to be the best-established treatment options. These treatments include close monitoring and adjuvant treatment with ADT and/or EBRT.

The Use of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer Lead to Similar Rate of Following Open Angle Glaucoma: A Population-Based Cohort Study

This study aimed to survey the effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on the development of open angle glaucoma (OAG) in prostate cancer using the data from national health insurance research database (NHIRD) of Taiwan. A retrospective cohort study was conducted and patients were regarded as prostate cancer with ADT according to related diagnostic, procedure and medication codes. Each prostate subject with ADT was matched to one patient with prostate cancer, but without ADT, and two participants without both prostate cancer and ADT; 1791, 1791 and 3582 patients were recruited in each group. The primary outcome was set as the OAG development according to related diagnostic codes. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of ADT for the incidence of OAG. There were 145, 65 and 42 newly developed OAG cases in the control group, prostate cancer without ADT group and prostate cancer with ADT group. The prostate cancer with ADT group showed a significantly lower risk of OAG development compared to the control group (aHR: 0.689, 95% CI: 0.489-0.972, p = 0.0341), and the risk of OAG development in the prostate cancer without ADT group was similar compared to that in the control group (aHR: 0.825, 95% CI: 0.613-1.111, p = 0.2052). In addition, ages older than 50 years old would lead to higher incidence of OAG development, respectively. In conclusion, the use of ADT will lead to a similar or lower rate of OAG development.

Radical prostatectomy findings in patients with locally aggressive Grade group 5 prostatic adenocarcinoma and negative limited or extended pelvic lymph node dissection

Current management options for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients include radical prostatectomy with lymph node dissection and other local or systemic therapeutic approaches. However, there is paucity of data in the pathology literature on the radical prostatectomy findings in patients with locally aggressive Grade group 5 PCa with negative limited or extended lymph node dissection. A search was made through our Urologic Pathology files and consults of the senior author for patients who had radical prostatectomy specimens with locally aggressive Grade group 5 PCa and limited or extended lymph node dissection from 2010 to 2022. Patients with lymph node metastasis were excluded. Clinicopathologic and follow up data were obtained. Forty-two patients were included in the study. Mean age was 64 years (range: 49-79 years). Forty-one (98 %) patients had PCa Gleason score 4 + 5 = 9 and 1 (2 %) patient had Gleason score 5 + 4 = 9. Extraprostatic extension and/or bladder neck invasion was present in 30 (71 %) patients and seminal vesicle invasion was present in 20 (48 %) patients, of which 10 (50 %) were bilateral. Extended lymph node dissection was performed in 18 patients with mean of 22 lymph nodes (range: 6-51 lymph nodes). Limited lymph node dissection was performed in 24 patients with mean of 7 lymph nodes (range: 2-25 lymph nodes). This study demonstrates that a subset of patients with very advanced/high grade PCa still benefit from radical prostatectomy/tumor debulking even in the setting of positive margins, and may not have lymph node metastasis.

ESTRO-ACROP recommendations for evidence-based use of androgen deprivation therapy in combination with external-beam radiotherapy in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is no consensus concerning the appropriate use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) during primary and postoperative external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Thus, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) guidelines seeks to present current recommendations for the clinical use of ADT in the various indications of EBRT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE PubMed that evaluated EBRT and ADT in prostate cancer. The search focused on randomized, Phase II and III trials published in English from January 2000 to May 2022. In case topics were addressed in the absence of Phase II or III trials, recommendations were labelled accordingly based on the limited body of evidence. Localized PCa was classified according to D'Amico et al. classification in low-, intermediate and high risk PCa. The ACROP clinical committee identified 13 European experts who discussed and analyzed the body of evidence concerning the use of ADT with EBRT for prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Key issues were identified and are discussed: It was concluded that no additional ADT is recommended for low-risk prostate cancer patients, whereas for intermediate- and high-risk patients four to six months and two to three years of ADT are recommended. Likewise, patients with locally advanced prostate cancer are recommended to receive ADT for two to three years and when ≥ 2 high-risk factors (cT3-4, ISUP grade ≥ 4 or PSA ≥ 40 ng/ml) or cN1 is present ADT for three years plus additional Abiraterone for two years is recommended. For postoperative patients no ADT is recommended for adjuvant EBRT in pN0 patients whereas for pN1 patients adjuvant EBRT with long-term ADT is performed for at least 24 to 36 months. In the setting of salvage EBRT ADT is performed in biochemically persistent PCa patients with no evidence of metastatic disease. Long-term ADT (24 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with high risk of further progression (PSA ≥ 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group ≥ 4) and a life expectancy of over ten years, whereas short-term ADT (6 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with lower risk profile (PSA < 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group 4). Patients considered for ultra-hypofractionated EBRT as well as patients with image based local recurrence within the prostatic fossa or lymph node recurrence should participate in appropriate clinical trials evaluating the role of additional ADT.

CONCLUSION

These ESTRO-ACROP recommendations are evidence-based and relevant to the use of ADT in combination with EBRT in PCa for the most common clinical settings.

Incremental prognostic value of ADC histogram analysis in patients with high-risk prostate cancer receiving adjuvant hormonal therapy after radical prostatectomy

Purpose

To investigate the incremental prognostic value of preoperative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histogram analysis in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) who received adjuvant hormonal therapy (AHT) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

Methods

Sixty-two PCa patients in line with the criteria were enrolled in this study. The 10^th, 50^th, and 90^th percentiles of ADC (ADC₁₀, ADC₅₀, ADC₉₀), the mean value of ADC (ADC_mean), kurtosis, and skewness were obtained from the whole-lesion ADC histogram. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to analyze the relationship between biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCR-fs) and ADC parameters and other clinicopathological factors. Prognostic models were constructed with and without ADC parameters.

Results

The median follow-up time was 53.4 months (range, 41.1-79.3 months). BCR was found in 19 (30.6%) patients. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that lower ADC_mean, ADC₁₀, ADC₅₀, and ADC₉₀ and higher kurtosis could predict poorer BCR-fs (all p<0.05). After adjusting for clinical parameters, ADC₅₀ and kurtosis remained independent prognostic factors for BCR-fs (HR: 0.172, 95% CI: 0.055-0.541, p=0.003; HR: 7.058, 95% CI: 2.288-21.773, p=0.001, respectively). By adding ADC parameters to the clinical model, the C index and diagnostic accuracy for the 24- and 36-month BCR-fs were improved.

Conclusion

ADC histogram analysis has incremental prognostic value in patients with high-risk PCa who received AHT after RP. Combining ADC₅₀, kurtosis and clinical parameters can improve the accuracy of BCR-fs prediction.

Coadministration of Apalutamide and Relugolix in Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer at High Risk for Metastases

BACKGROUND

The single-arm, open-label, multicenter, phase II Apa-RP study evaluates the biochemical recurrence (confirmed prostate-specific antigen [PSA] > 0.2 ng/mL)-free rate in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (HR-LPC) after radical prostatectomy following adjuvant apalutamide and androgen-deprivation therapy. In this substudy, relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, was evaluated in combination with apalutamide.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the approved standard maintenance dose of relugolix in combination with apalutamide sustains castrate testosterone levels (< 50 ng/dL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twelve patients with HR-LPC who met all the main study criteria were included in the substudy. Patients received relugolix monotherapy for 2 weeks (loading dose [360 mg] at Day - 14 then 120 mg/day daily until Day - 1), then daily relugolix (120 mg) with apalutamide (240 mg) from Day 1 to Day 28. Endpoints were rate of maintained castration (testosterone < 50 ng/dL) through Day 28 (primary) and safety (secondary).

RESULTS

All 12 patients received relugolix and apalutamide and achieved castrate testosterone levels after 2-week relugolix monotherapy (median testosterone 348.5 ng/dL and 8.7 ng/dL at Days - 14 and - 1). All 11 patients who had testosterone measured at Day 28 maintained castrate testosterone (median 10.0 ng/dL) without relugolix dose adjustment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in nine patients during relugolix monotherapy and in eight patients during relugolix + apalutamide coadministration. Hot flush was the most common TEAE reported, in six and four patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Relugolix administered at approved standard doses concurrently with apalutamide was effective in maintaining castrate testosterone levels in HR-LPC without new safety signals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE

NCT04523207, 21 August 2020.

The Changing Face of cN0M0 Prostate Cancer Being Found With pN+ After Surgery in the Contemporary Era: Results of an International European Survey on Disease Management

INTRODUCTION

The urological community's opinion over the management of men being found with pathologically positive nodes (pN+) following radical prostatectomy (RP) performed with curative intent after preoperative negative conventional staging (cN0M0) has never been assessed. This remains crucial, especially considering the advent of novel imaging modalities. Our aim was to investigate the current opinion on management of pN+ cN0M0 prostate cancer (PCa) in the European urological community.

METHODS

Following validation, a 31-item survey, complying with the Cherries checklist, was distributed using a web link from December 2021 to April 2022 to 10 urological societies mailing list. Social media (Twitter, Facebook) were also used.

RESULTS

We received 253 replies. The majority were Urologists (96.8%), younger than 60 (90.5%); 5.2% did not have access to PET-scans; 78.9% believed pN+ is a multifaceted category; 10-years CSS was marked as 71 to 95% by 17.5%. Gold standard management was stated not being ADT by 80.8% and being RT±ADT by 52.3%. Early sRT±ADT was considered an option vs. aRT±ADT by 72.4%. In case of BCR 71% would perform and decide management based on PSMA-PET whilst 3.7% would not perform PSMA-PET. pN+ management is still unclear for 77.1%. On multivariate analysis PSMA-PET availability related to a lower and higher likelihood of considering aRT±ADT as standard and of considering early salvage versus aRT respectively (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The Urological community has an acceptable awareness of pN+ disease and management, although it may overestimate disease aggressiveness. The majority consider pN+ PCa as a multifaceted category and rely on a risk-adapted approach. Expectant compared to immediate upfront management and new imaging modalities are increasingly considered.

Selecting lymph node-positive patients for adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy: An outcome analysis of 100 node-positive patients managed without adjuvant therapy

Objective

The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of deferred androgen deprivation therapy on biochemical recurrence (BCR) and other survival parameters in node-positive prostate cancer patients after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with bilateral extended pelvic lymph node dissection (RARP + EPLND).

Materials and methods

Of the 453 consecutive RARP procedures performed from 2011 to 2018, 100 patients with no prior use of androgen deprivation therapy were found to be lymph node (LN) positive and were observed, with initiation of salvage treatment at the time of BCR only. Patients were divided into 1 or 2 LNs (67)-and more than 2 LNs (33)-positive groups to assess survival outcomes.

Results

At a median follow-up of 21 months (1-70 months), the LN group (p < 0.000), preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA, p = 0.013), tumor volume (TV, p = 0.031), and LND (p = 0.004) were significantly associated with BCR. In multivariate analysis, only the LN group (p = 0.035) and PSA level (p = 0.026) were statistically significant. The estimated BCR-free survival rates in the 1/2 LN group were 37.6% (27%-52.2%), 26.5% (16.8%-41.7%), and 19.9% (9.6%-41.0%) at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively, with a hazard of developing BCR of 0.462 (0.225-0.948) compared with the more than 2 LN-positive group. Estimated 5-year overall survival, cancer-specific, metastasis-free, and local recurrence-free survival rates were 88.4% (73.1%-100%), 89.5% (74%-100%), 65.1% (46.0%-92.1%), and 94.8% (87.2%-100.0%), respectively, for which none of the factors were significant. Based on cutoff values for PSA, TV, and LND of 30 ng/mL, 30%, and 10%, respectively, the 1/2 LN group was substratified, wherein the median BCR-free survival for the low- and intermediate-risk groups was 40 and 12 months, respectively.

Conclusions

Nearly one fourth and one fifth of 1/2 node-positive patients were BCR-free at 3 and 5 years after RARP + EPLND. Further substratification using PSA, TV, and LN density may help in providing individualized care regarding the initiation of adjuvant therapy.

Evaluating the Impact of Prostate Only Versus Pelvic Radiotherapy for Pathological Node-positive Prostate Cancer: First Results from the Multicenter Phase 3 PROPER Trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for patients with pathological node-positive (pN1) prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) improves clinical relapse-free survival (cRFS) in comparison to prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in pN1 PCa.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

PROPER was a phase 3 trial randomizing patients to WPRT or PORT. All patients had pN1cM0 PCa with fewer than five lymph nodes involved.

INTERVENTION

All patients underwent pelvic lymph node dissection followed by radical prostatectomy/primary radiotherapy + 2 yr of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Patients were randomized to PORT (arm A) or WPRT (arm B).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was cRFS. The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), and toxicity. The study was stopped because of poor accrual in June 2021 after the inclusion of 69 patients. We report on OS, bRFS, cRFS, and acute and late toxicity.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The median follow-up was 30 mo in arm A (n = 33) and 36 mo in arm B (n = 31). The 3-yr OS rate was 92% ± 5% in arm A and 93% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.61). None of the patients died of PCa. The 3-yr bRFS was 79% ± 9% in arm A and 92% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.08). The 3-yr cRFS rate was 88% ± 6% in arm A and 92% ± 5% in arm B (p = 0.31). No pelvic recurrence was observed in arm B. Acute grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was higher with WPRT (15% in arm A vs 45% in arm B; p = 0.03). Limitations are the early closure because of poor accrual and the limited follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our trial are hypothesis-generating but add evidence supporting the recommendation to offer WPRT to patients with pN1 PCa. However, WPRT is associated with more acute gastrointestinal toxicity.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at the impact of radiotherapy to the whole pelvis (WPRT) for patients with prostate cancer that had spread to the lymph nodes. Although the trial was closed early because of poor enrolment, we found that WPRT improves survival free from relapse, and no recurrences were observed in the pelvis. WPRT is associated with more acute side effects on the gastrointestinal system in comparison to radiotherapy to just the prostate.

Emerging hormonal agents for the treatment of prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the most common solid organ malignancy in men in the United States. Until recently, treatment options for men with metastatic disease were limited and patients faced poor outcomes with minimal alternatives. The landscape of prostate cancer treatment has transformed and taken shape over the last 20 years with novel hormonal and non-hormonal therapeutics that have demonstrated significant improvement in survival. However, patients with advanced disease still face imminent progression on hormone blockade therapy.

AREAS COVERED

There is a significant market opportunity to devise novel, more potent agents for patients with hormone-resistant disease. Here we review the existing treatment options in men with advanced prostate cancer, the market opportunity within this field, goals of current research, and the novel agents under investigation, including androgen receptor degraders, testosterone synthesis pathway inhibitors, DNA-binding domain and N-terminal domain antagonists, and the combination of hormonal and non-hormonal agents.

EXPERT OPINION

Combination therapy regimens and novel agents targeting alternative binding domains of the androgen receptor are of great interest, as they may overcome resistance mechanisms and hold promise as the future of advanced prostate cancer treatment.

Bilateral Seminal Vesicle Invasion Is Not Associated with Worse Outcomes in Locally Advanced Prostate Carcinoma

Background and Objectives: Patients with seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) are a highly heterogeneous group. Prognosis can be affected by many clinical and pathological characteristics. Our aim was to study whether bilateral SVI (bi-SVI) is associated with worse oncological outcomes. Materials and Methods: This is an observational retrospective study that included 146 pT3b patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We compared the results between unilateral SVI (uni-SVI) and bi-SVI. The log-rank test and Kaplan–Meier curves were used to compare biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCR), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and additional treatment-free survival. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify predictors of BCR-free survival, MFS, and additional treatment-free survival. Results: 34.93% of patients had bi-SVI. The median follow-up was 46.84 months. No significant differences were seen between the uni-SVI and bi-SVI groups. BCR-free survival at 5 years was 33.31% and 25.65% (p = 0.44) for uni-SVI and bi-SVI. MFS at 5 years was 86.03% vs. 75.63% (p = 0.1), and additional treatment-free survival was 36.85% vs. 21.93% (p = 0.09), respectively. In the multivariate analysis, PSA was related to the development of BCR [HR 1.34 (95%CI: 1.01–1.77); p = 0.03] and metastasis [HR 1.83 (95%CI: 1.13–2.98); p = 0.02]. BCR was also influenced by lymph node infiltration [HR 2.74 (95%CI: 1.41–5.32); p = 0.003]. Additional treatment was performed more frequently in patients with positive margins [HR: 3.50 (95%CI: 1.65–7.44); p = 0.001]. Conclusions: SVI invasion is an adverse pathology feature, with a widely variable prognosis. In our study, bilateral seminal vesicle invasion did not predict worse outcomes in pT3b patients despite being associated with more undifferentiated tumors.

Current Status and Future Perspective on the Management of Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy

Pathological lymph node involvement (pN1) after a pelvic lymph node dissection represents one of the most unfavorable prognostic factors for disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality in prostate cancer. However, optimal management for pN1 patients remains unclear. Thus, the guideline from the European Association of Urology recommends discussing three following management options with pN1 patients after an extended pelvic lymph node dissection, based on nodal involvement characteristics: (i) offer adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy, (ii) offer adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy with additional radiotherapy and (iii) offer observation (expectant management) to a patient with ≤2 nodes and a prostate-specific antigen <0.1 ng/mL. Treatment intensification may reduce risks of recurrence and cancer-specific mortality, but it may increase adverse events and impair quality of life. Few randomized control trials for pN1 are under investigation. In addition, there are limited reports on the quality of life and patient-reported outcomes in patients with pN1. Therefore, more research is needed to establish an optimal therapeutic strategy for patients with pN1. This review summarizes current evidence on the treatments available for men with pN1, summarizes randomized control trials that included pN1 prostate cancer, and discusses future perspectives.

Patients with Positive Lymph Nodes after Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy—Do We Know the Proper Way of Management?

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most frequent malignancy in the male population worldwide. Men with a nodal invasion established after radical prostatectomy with lymph node dissection are a heterogeneous group of patients who require more thorough stratification and therapy individualization, which remain uncovered by current guidelines. Considering a multitude of prognostic factors and novel diagnostic techniques, classifying patients into narrower and more specified risk groups should be a vital part of lymph node positive PCa management in the future.

Abstract

Lymph node invasion in prostate cancer is a significant prognostic factor indicating worse prognosis. While it significantly affects both survival rates and recurrence, proper management remains a controversial and unsolved issue. The thorough evaluation of risk factors associated with nodal involvement, such as lymph node density or extracapsular extension, is crucial to establish the potential expansion of the disease and to substratify patients clinically. There are multiple strategies that may be employed for patients with positive lymph nodes. Nowadays, therapeutic methods are generally based on observation, radiotherapy, and androgen deprivation therapy. However, the current guidelines are incoherent in terms of the most effective management approach. Future management strategies are expected to make use of novel diagnostic tools and therapies, such as photodynamic therapy or diagnostic imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen. Nevertheless, this heterogeneous group of men remains a great therapeutic concern, and both the clarification of the guidelines and the optimal substratification of patients are required.

Radiotherapy plus androgen-deprivation therapy for PSA persistence in lymph node-positive prostate cancer

The treatment for lymph node involvement (LNI) after radical prostatectomy (RP) has not been established. This study aimed to reveal the outcomes of various management strategies among patients with LNI after RP. Retrospectively, 561 patients with LNI after pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) with RP treated between 2006 and 2019 at 33 institutions participating in the Japanese Urological Oncology Group were investigated. Metastasis-free survival (MFS) was the primary outcome. Patients were stratified by PSA persistence after RP. Cox regression models were used to analyze the relationships between clinicopathological characteristics and survival. Survival analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test with or without propensity score matching. Prognoses, including MFS and overall survival, were prominently inferior among patients with persistent PSA than among those without persistent PSA. In multivariate analysis, androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus radiotherapy (RT) was associated with better MFS than ADT alone among patients with persistent PSA (hazard ratio = 0.37; 95% confidence interval = 0.15-0.93; P = 0.034). Similarly, MFS and overall survival were significantly better for ADT plus RT than for ADT alone among patients with persistent PSA after propensity score matching. This study indicated that PSA persistence in LNI prostate cancer increased the risk of poor prognoses, and intensive treatment featuring the addition of RT to ADT might improve survival.

Acceptance and efficacy of recommended adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy: a preference-based study

PURPOSE

To investigate acceptance and efficacy of recommended adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

Among 495 patients with positive lymph nodes who consecutively underwent radical prostatectomy between 2007 and 2017, we investigated 347 patients who were recommended to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy by a multidisciplinary post-therapeutic tumor board and in whom information whether such treatment was eventually given was available. The median follow-up for censored patients was 5.4 years. Univariate analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Mantel-Haenszel hazard ratios and log rank tests. Proportional hazard models for competing risks were used for multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

Adjuvant radiotherapy was independently associated with lower overall mortality and in high-risk patients (Gleason score 8-10 or three or more involved lymph nodes) also with lower prostate cancer-specific mortality. In patients with a Gleason score of 8-10 or three or more involved lymph nodes, the hazard ratio for adjuvant radiotherapy was 0.455 (95% confidence interval 0.257-0.806, p = 0.0069) for overall and 0.426 (95% confidence interval 0.201-0.902, p = 0.0259) for prostate cancer-specific mortality. Among patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy, there was a trend to lower mortality when such treatment was combined with adjuvant androgen deprivation.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant radiotherapy decreased mortality in patients with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy with further disease factors but not in patients with low-risk disease. Simultaneous androgen deprivation might increase efficacy. Multidisciplinary recommendations may possibly increase the use of adjuvant radiotherapy in this setting.

Einfluss von lokalen Therapiemaßnahmen auf die Biologie des fortschreitenden Prostatakarzinoms

Hintergrund

In den letzten 15 Jahren zeigt sich ein Trend hin zu einem längeren Überleben beim metastasierten Prostatakarzinom. Neben dem durch neue Medikamente bedingten Fortschritt deuten retrospektive Daten auch auf einen möglichen positiven Effekt einer früheren Primärtumorbehandlung hin.

Fragestellung

Kann eine Primärtumorbehandlung im Falle einer späteren Metastasierung die Prognose der betroffenen Patienten verbessern und wenn ja, über welche Mechanismen?

Material und Methode

Wir werteten die klinischen Langzeitergebnisse von 115 Patienten aus, die bei T4-Prostatakarzinomen nach induktiver Hormontherapie an unserer Klinik prostatektomiert worden waren. Weiterhin erfolgte eine kritische Durchsicht und Diskussion der zur oben genannten Fragestellung vorhandenen Literatur.

Ergebnisse

Von den 115 Patienten hatten 84 im weiteren Verlauf ein biochemisches Rezidiv erlitten, waren also definitiv durch die radikale Prostatektomie nicht geheilt. Das tumorspezifische und das Gesamtüberleben dieser 84 Patienten lag nach 150 Monaten bei 61 % bzw. 44 %. Bemerkenswert war die Beobachtung, dass diese Patienten ein überraschend gutes und langes Ansprechen auf eine Hormontherapie zeigten. Von den 84 Patienten waren nach durchschnittlich 95 Monaten Nachbeobachtungszeit noch 47 am Leben. 31 von ihnen, also ungefähr zwei Drittel, standen immer noch unter einer Standardhormontherapie. Nur 13 hatten eine Resistenz gegen die primäre Hormontherapie entwickelt und entsprechend eine tertiäre Hormontherapie erhalten, auf die sie teilweise aber auch wieder langfristig sensibel blieben.

Schlussfolgerungen

Die Primärtumorentfernung, zumindest unter den beschriebenen Begleitumständen, scheint die Entwicklung einer Hormonresistenz beim metastasierten Prostatakarzinom hinauszögern und in Einzelfällen sogar ganz verhindern zu können.

Evolution of Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) and Its New Emerging Modalities in Prostate Cancer: An Update for Practicing Urologists, Clinicians and Medical Providers

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the main management strategy for prostate cancer for more than eight decades, nowadays achieved commonly by administration of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists. ADT markedly suppresses androgen hormones with the long-term risks of adverse events such as muscle weakness, impairment of glucose and lipid metabolism, impotence, osteoporosis, and secondary fractures. Extensive research has provided significantly better insight into the dynamics of ADT including identification of the benefits of sequential and combination therapies. This has led to the development of new pharmaceutical ADT modalities. This review provides a general overview of the evolution of ADT in the context of the new emerging pharmaceutical ADT modalities so that clinicians and medical providers have a better understanding of personalizing the available ADT options with their different risk-benefit profiles.

Comparison of short-term and long-term neoadjuvant hormone therapy prior to radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of long-term neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) before radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

We conducted meta-analyses and network meta-analyses, which included randomized controlled trials that assessed patients with prostate cancer (PC) who received either short-term (<6 months) or long-term (≥6 months) neoadjuvant ADT before RP.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles with 2778 patients were eligible for analysis. Short-term neoadjuvant ADT was neither associated with biochemical recurrence (OR 1.19, 95% CI, 0.93-1.51, p = 0.17), metastasis (OR 0.73, 95% CI, 0.45-1.19, p = 0.21), nor overall mortality (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.43-1.21, p = 0.22); no study investigated survival outcomes in patients on long-term neoadjuvant ADT. In terms of pathologic outcomes, long-term neoadjuvant ADT was significantly associated with a reduced risk of positive surgical margin (SM) and an increased rate of organ-confined disease (OCD) compared to short-term neoadjuvant ADT (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39-0.80, p = 0.001, and OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10-1.99, p = 0.009, respectively). These findings were confirmed in the network meta-analyses. Meanwhile, only a non-significant trend favoring long-term neoadjuvant ADT was observed for pathologic complete response (OR 1.98, 95% Crl 1.00-3.93).

CONCLUSION

Long-term neoadjuvant ADT was associated with more favorable pathologic outcomes, but whether these findings translate into favorable survival outcomes still remains unproven due to very limited evidence. Since there are no reliable survival data, long-term neoadjuvant ADT before RP should not be used in clinical practice until more robust evidence arises from ongoing trials.

NEAR trial: A single-arm phase II trial of neoadjuvant apalutamide monotherapy and radical prostatectomy in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Treatment efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy with radical prostatectomy for intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer is less well-studied. The NEAR trial is a single-arm, phase II investigation of neoadjuvant apalutamide monotherapy and radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of D'Amico intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (NCT03124433).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with histologically-proven, D'Amico intermediate- to high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma received apalutamide 240 mg once-daily for 12 weeks followed by RP + /-lymphadenectomy. Primary outcome was pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary outcomes included rate of biochemical response (defined by PSA < 0.03 ng/mL at week 24 from starting apalutamide without subsequent PSA relapse), treatment-related adverse events, and RP complication rates. Correlative biomarker analyses were performed to examine for molecular predictors of treatment responses.

RESULTS

From 2017 to 2019, 30 patients were recruited, of which 20 and 10 were high and intermediate risk, respectively; 25 completed treatment as per-protocol. We did not observe any pCR on trial; median reduction of cancer burden was 41.7% (IQR: 33.3%-60.0%). 18 out of 25 patients were classified as having a biochemical response (4 did not achieve PSA of <0.03 ng/mL at week 24 and 3 developed PSA relapse subsequently). Dry skin (N = 16; 53.3%), fatigue (N = 10; 33.3%) and skin rash (N = 9; 30.0%) were the most common adverse events, and there was no major peri-operative complication. We observed an association between tumours of low androgen receptor activity and PAM50 basal status with biochemical non-responders, albeit these molecular phenotypes were not associated with pathological response.

CONCLUSIONS

A 12-week course of neoadjuvant apalutamide prior to RP did not meet the primary endpoint of pCR in this trial. Tumours with low androgen receptor activity or of the PAM50 basal subtype may have a reduced response to apalutamide.

Prostate cancer dormancy and recurrence

Prostate cancer can progress rapidly after diagnosis, but can also become undetectable after curative intent radiation or surgery, only to recur years or decades later. This capacity to lie dormant and recur long after a patient was thought to be cured, is relatively unique to prostate cancer, with estrogen receptor positive breast cancer being the other common and well-studied example. Most investigators agree that the bone marrow is an important site for dormant tumor cells, given the frequency of bone metastases and that multiple studies have reported disseminated tumor cells in patients with localized disease. However, while more difficult to study, lymph nodes and the prostate bed are likely to be important reservoirs as well. Dormant tumor cells may be truly quiescent and in the G0 phase of the cell cycle, which is commonly called cellular dormancy. However, tumor growth may also be held in check through a balance of proliferation and cell death (tumor mass dormancy). For induction of cellular dormancy, prostate cancer cells respond to signals from their microenvironment, including TGF-β2, BMP-7, GAS6, and Wnt-5a, which result in signals transduced in part through p38 MAPK and pluripotency associated transcription factors including SOX2 and NANOG, which likely affect the epi-genome through histone modification. Clinical use of adjuvant radiation or androgen deprivation has been modestly successful to prevent recurrence. With the rapid pace of discovery in this field, systemic adjuvant therapy is likely to continue to improve in the future.

Lack of consensus identifies important areas for future clinical research: Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 findings

BACKGROUND

Innovations in treatments, imaging and molecular characterisation have improved outcomes for people with advanced prostate cancer; however, many aspects of clinical management are devoid of high-level evidence. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019, many of these topics were addressed, and consensus was not always reached. The results from clinical trials will most reliably plus the gaps.

METHODS

An invited panel of 57 experts voted on 123 multiple-choice questions on clinical management at APCCC 2019. No consensus was reached on 88 (71.5%) questions defined as <75% of panellists voting for the same answer option. We reviewed clinicaltrials.gov to identify relevant ongoing phase III trials in these areas of non-consensus.

RESULTS

A number of ongoing phase III trials were identified that are relevant to these non-consensus issues. However, many non-consensus issues appear not to be addressed by current clinical trials. Of note, no phase III but only phase II trials were identified, investigating side effects of hormonal treatments and their management.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of consensus almost invariably indicates gaps in existing evidence. The high percentage of questions lacking consensus at APCCC 2019 highlights the complexity of advanced prostate cancer care and the need for robust, clinically relevant trials that can fill current gaps with high-level evidence. Our review of these areas of non-consensus and ongoing trials provides a useful summary, indicating areas in which future consensus may soon be reached. This review may facilitate academic investigators to identify and prioritise topics for future research.

An Expert Review on the Combination of Relugolix with Definitive Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is an integral component in the management of prostate cancer across multiple disease states. Traditionally, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists constituted the backbone of ADT. However, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor hormone (GnRH) antagonists are also available, which offer faster testosterone suppression and reduced likelihood of ADT-related adverse effects compared to LHRH agonists, including the potential for fewer ADT-associated major cardiac events. Until recently, all forms of LHRH agonists and GnRH antagonist formulations are of parenteral administration. However, recently relugolix gained FDA approval as the first oral GnRH antagonist. Relugolix achieves faster and more complete testosterone suppression compared to an LHRH agonist. This translates to more rapid prostate-specific antigen response compared to LHRH agonists. After discontinuation of relugolix, testosterone recovers faster than after GnRH agonists or injectable GnRH antagonist therapy. Overall, these factors provide opportunities for more precisely defined ADT duration when combined with radiation therapy. The rapid onset and offset testosterone suppression with relugolix, however, may require physicians to rethink the mechanism and goals of ADT when prescribing. As an oral formulation, relugolix enables patients to avoid pain and injection site reactions, limit extra office visits for injections, and achieve a shorter duration of experiencing the side effects of castrate testosterone levels. This convenience and tolerability may enhance physicians' willingness to prescribe ADT and patients' feeling of control over their ADT course, but the potential advantages are accompanied by the risks of patients choosing to discontinue therapy to escape side effects of ADT. This article focuses on different aspects of what is known and unknown regarding the optimal use of ADT and radiation therapy, and how relugolix, due to its properties, fit into our current treatment paradigms for localized prostate cancer.

Clinical and Preclinical Outcomes of Combining Targeted Therapy With Radiotherapy

In the era of precision medicine, radiation medicine is currently focused on the precise delivery of highly conformal radiation treatments. However, the tremendous developments in targeted therapy are yet to fulfill their full promise and arguably have the potential to dramatically enhance the radiation therapeutic ratio. The increased ability to molecularly profile tumors both at diagnosis and at relapse and the co-incident progress in the field of radiogenomics could potentially pave the way for a more personalized approach to radiation treatment in contrast to the current ‘‘one size fits all’’ paradigm. Few clinical trials to date have shown an improved clinical outcome when combining targeted agents with radiation therapy, however, most have failed to show benefit, which is arguably due to limited preclinical data. Several key molecular pathways could theoretically enhance therapeutic effect of radiation when rationally targeted either by directly enhancing tumor cell kill or indirectly through the abscopal effect of radiation when combined with novel immunotherapies. The timing of combining molecular targeted therapy with radiation is also important to determine and could greatly affect the outcome depending on which pathway is being inhibited.