1
|
Scharl S, Gartner L, Böhmer DHG, Siegmann A, Thamm R, Krafcsik M, Mayer B, Zips D, Ruf C, Wiegel T. Undetectable PSA predicts outcome after salvage radiotherapy for biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. Radiother Oncol 2024; 200:110476. [PMID: 39147035 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110476] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2024] [Revised: 08/03/2024] [Accepted: 08/12/2024] [Indexed: 08/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is a curative treatment option in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). Undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 0.1 ng/mL following SRT predicts biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS). The aim of this large retrospective study was to evaluate whether this effect persists in an extended follow-up of >5 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 678 patients treated with SRT for biochemical recurrence after RP were included. Exclusion criteria were lymph node or distant metastases, pre-SRT PSA > 3 ng/mL, and receipt of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between RP and SRT. All patients received a median dose of 70.2 (range 59.4-72.0) Gy to the prostatic fossa. The log-rank test (Kaplan-Meier) and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the impact of disease- and treatment-related parameters on BPFS, metastasis-free survival (MFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Median follow-up after SRT was 5.6 (range 0.1-14.5) years. The 5-year BPFS was 77.8 % in patients with a PSA nadir < 0.1 ng/mL (undetectable) and 16.3 % in the remaining cohort (p < 0.001). Five-year MFS was 95.3 % with undetectable PSA versus 84.0 % with detectable PSA (p < 0.001), and 5-year OS values were 97.5 % and 92.7 % with undetectable versus detectable PSA, respectively (p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, undetectable PSA was the strongest predictor of BPFS (HR = 0.122; 95 %CI: 0.080-0.187; p < 0.001) and MFS (HR = 0.262; 95 %CI: 0.136-0.594; p < 0.001), but was not significant for OS (HR = 0.615; 95 %CI: 0.298-1.269; p = 0.189). CONCLUSION PSA < 0.1 ng/mL following SRT without ADT is a significant predictor of BPFS and MFS. The results suggest that it might be feasible to withhold ADT in selected patients if they have undetectable PSA after SRT. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia Scharl
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
| | - Luca Gartner
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Dirk Heinz Gerhard Böhmer
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
| | - Alessandra Siegmann
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
| | - Reinhard Thamm
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Manuel Krafcsik
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Benjamin Mayer
- Institute für Epidemiologie und Medizinische Biometrie, Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Daniel Zips
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
| | - Christian Ruf
- Klinik für Urologie, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Turco F, Buttigliero C, Delcuratolo MD, Gillessen S, Vogl UM, Zilli T, Fossati N, Gallina A, Farinea G, Di Stefano RF, Calabrese M, Saporita I, Crespi V, Poletto S, Palesandro E, Di Maio M, Scagliotti GV, Tucci M. Hormonal Agents in Localized and Advanced Prostate Cancer: Current Use and Future Perspectives. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2024; 22:102138. [PMID: 38996529 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2024] [Revised: 06/07/2024] [Accepted: 06/08/2024] [Indexed: 07/14/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio Turco
- Department of Oncology, IOSI (Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Bellinzona, Canton Ticino, Switzerland; Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Consuelo Buttigliero
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Marco Donatello Delcuratolo
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Department of Oncology, IOSI (Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Bellinzona, Canton Ticino, Switzerland; Department of Oncology, Universita della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Ursula Maria Vogl
- Department of Oncology, IOSI (Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Bellinzona, Canton Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Oncology, Universita della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland; Department of Oncology, Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Canton Ticino, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nicola Fossati
- Department of Urology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Civico USI - Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Andrea Gallina
- Department of Urology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Civico USI - Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
| | - Giovanni Farinea
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Rosario Francesco Di Stefano
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Mariangela Calabrese
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Isabella Saporita
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Veronica Crespi
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Stefano Poletto
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Erica Palesandro
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cardinal Massaia Hospital, Asti, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Massimo Di Maio
- Department of Oncology, Division of Medical Oncology, Ordine Mauriziano Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Giorgio Vittorio Scagliotti
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, at Division of Medical Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Turin, Piedmont, Italy
| | - Marcello Tucci
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cardinal Massaia Hospital, Asti, Piedmont, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
González-San Segundo C, López Campos F, Gómez Iturriaga A, Rodríguez A, Olivera J, Duque-Santana V, Sancho G, Henríquez I, Conde AJ, Valero J, Maldonado X, Glaria L, Caballero B, Sanmamed N, Mases J, Boladeras-Inglada AM, Montijano M, Santos M, Álvarez A, Martínez JI, Couñago F. A randomised trial of short- vs long-term androgen deprivation with salvage radiotherapy for biochemical failure following radical prostatectomy: URONCOR 06-24. BJU Int 2024; 134:568-577. [PMID: 39041411 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/24/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) are widely used in routine clinical practice to treat patients with prostate cancer who develop biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). However, there is no standard-of-care consensus on optimal duration ADT. Investigators propose three distinct risk groups in patients with prostate cancer treated with SRT in order to better define the indications and duration of ADT combined with SRT. STUDY DESIGN The URONCOR 06-24 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05781217) is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase III, clinical trial. The aim of the trial is to determine the impact of short-term (6 months) vs long-term (24 months) ADT in combination with SRT on distant metastasis-free survival (MFS) in patients with prostate cancer with BCR after RP (intermediate and high risk). ENDPOINTS The primary endpoint is 5-year MFS rates in patients with prostate cancer treated with long- vs short-term ADT in combination with SRT. Secondary objectives are biochemical-relapse free interval, pelvic progression-free survival, time to start of systemic treatment, time to castration resistance, cancer-specific survival, overall survival, acute and late toxicity, and quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Total of 534 patients will be randomised 1:1 to ADT 6 months or ADT 24 months with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue in combination with SRT, stratified by risk group and pathological lymph node status. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study is conducted under the guiding principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be disseminated at research conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER EudraCT number 2021-006975-41.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Fernando López Campos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Genesis Care Hospital Vithas La Milagrosa, Madrid, Spain
| | - Alfonso Gómez Iturriaga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Cruces, Biobizkaia Health Research Institute Basque Country University UPV/EHU, Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Aurora Rodríguez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Ruber Internacional, Madrid, Spain
| | - Jesús Olivera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Gemma Sancho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Iván Henríquez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Sant Joan, Reus, Tarragona, Spain
| | - Antonio José Conde
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Jeannette Valero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario HM San Chinarro, Madrid, Spain
| | - Xavier Maldonado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Luis Glaria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain
| | - Begoña Caballero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Madrid, Spain
| | - Noelia Sanmamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Joel Mases
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Miguel Montijano
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Madrid, Spain
| | - Marina Santos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ana Álvarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Juan I Martínez
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Madrid, Spain
| | - Felipe Couñago
- Department of Radiation Oncology, GenesisCare Hospital San Francisco de Asís, Hospital Vithas La Milagrosa, Madrid, Spain
- Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tombal BF, Gomez-Veiga F, Gomez-Ferrer A, López-Campos F, Ost P, Roumeguere TA, Herrera-Imbroda B, D'Hondt LA, Quivrin M, Gontero P, Villà S, Khaled H, Fournier B, Musoro J, Krzystyniak J, Pretzenbacher Y, Loriot Y. A Phase 2 Randomized Open-label Study of Oral Darolutamide Monotherapy Versus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Men with Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer (EORTC-GUCG 1532). Eur Urol Oncol 2024; 7:1051-1060. [PMID: 38272747 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2023] [Revised: 12/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/10/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Darolutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor that increases overall survival in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa). This phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety of darolutamide as monotherapy without ADT in patients with eugonadal testosterone levels. METHODS This was a 24-wk, open-label, randomized study of patients with hormone-sensitive, histologically confirmed PCa requiring gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH); an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0/1; and life expectancy >1 yr. All patients received darolutamide 600 mg bid or a commercially available GnRH analog. The primary endpoint is a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, defined as a ≥80% decline at week 24 relative to baseline in the darolutamide study arm. The GnRH arm is used as an internal control. The secondary endpoints included changes in T levels, safety/tolerability, and quality of life. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Among 61 men enrolled, the median (range) age was 72 yr (53-86 yr); 42.6% of them had metastases. In the darolutamide arm, the evaluable population with available PSA values at baseline and week 24 consisted of 23 patients. Twenty-three (100%) evaluable darolutamide patients achieved a PSA decline of >80% at week 24 (primary endpoint), with a median (range) decrease of -99.1% (-91.9%, -100%). Serum T levels increased by a median (range) of 44.3 (5.7-144.0) at week 24, compared with baseline. In the darolutamide arm, 48.4% of men reported drug-related adverse events (AEs; mostly grade 1 or 2). The most frequent treatment-emergent AEs included gynecomastia (35.5%), fatigue (12.9%), hot flush (12.9%), and hypertension (12.9%). Health-related quality of life measures are descriptive, and GnRH arm results will be presented as an internal reference. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Darolutamide monotherapy was associated with a significant PSA response in nearly all men with hormone-naïve PCa. Testosterone-level changes and most common AEs (gynecomastia, fatigue, hypertension, and hot flush) were consistent with potent androgen receptor inhibition. PATIENT SUMMARY In this study, we report the first use of darolutamide, a novel antiandrogen, as monotherapy without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The study shows that darolutamide induce a profound suppression of prostate-specific antigen in all patients, with a safety profile different from that of ADT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bertrand F Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium.
| | | | | | | | - Piet Ost
- Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Thierry Andre Roumeguere
- Department of Urology, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles Erasme Hospital, ULB, Anderlecht, Belgium
| | | | | | - Magali Quivrin
- Radiation Oncology Department, Anticancer Center, Centre Georges Francois Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Dipartimento di Discipline Medico Chirurgiche, Clinica Urologica, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Salvador Villà
- Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Badalona, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Yohann Loriot
- Département de Médecine Oncologique, Institut Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pommier P, Xie W, Ravi P, Carrie C, Dignam JJ, Feng F, Sargos P, Sommer SG, Spratt DE, Tombal B, Van Poppel H, Sweeney C. Prognostic factors in post-prostatectomy salvage radiotherapy setting with and without hormonotherapy: An individual patient data analysis of randomized trials from ICECaP database. Radiother Oncol 2024:110532. [PMID: 39278317 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2024] [Revised: 09/03/2024] [Accepted: 09/05/2024] [Indexed: 09/18/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is the standard of care for biochemical recurrence post-prostatectomy but outcomes are heterogeneous. OBJECTIVE To develop a risk scoring system based on relevant standard-of-care clinico-pathological prognostic factors for patients treated with SRT with and without hormonal therapy (HT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP) database included three randomized trials (Individual patients' data from 1647 subjects) assessing SRT (GETUG-AFU-16; NRG/RTOG-9601, and a subset of EORTC-22911). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Outcomes were clinical progression (CP). metastasis free-survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS). Clinico-pathological factors, including pathological Gleason Score (GS), PSA at SRT start, margin status, persistent PSA post-RP and time from RP to SRT were evaluated by multivariable models stratified by type of treatment. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS On multivariable analysis PSA ≥ 0.5 ng/mL at SRT start, GS ≥ 8 and negative margin status were the three strongest prognostic factors. Three prognostic groups defined by number of these risk features (high risk: 2 or 3; intermediate risk: 1 and low risk: 0) were strongly associated with OS, MFS and CP outcomes with SRT alone or with HT. This prognostic group definition was also relevant for patients with persistent PSA post RP and for patients treated < 1 year from RP to SRT and with and without HT. CONCLUSION A risk score for patients receiving SRT with or without HT, using three standard-of-care clinico-pathological risk factors provides refined prognostic information for individual patient counselling. PATIENT SUMMARY By using a composite score of pathology grading (Gleason Score), PSA at start of salvage radiation and margin status data, physicians can provide patients with more refined information on the risk of a second relapse after receiving radiation to the prostate bed after a prostatectomy for a rising or persistent PSA, both with and without hormonal therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Curie Institute, Paris, France.
| | - Wanling Xie
- Department of Data Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Praful Ravi
- Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Christian Carrie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | | | - Felix Feng
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - Silke Gillessen Sommer
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | | | - Christopher Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Matsukawa A, Yanagisawa T, Fazekas T, Miszczyk M, Tsuboi I, Kardoust Parizi M, Laukhtina E, Klemm J, Mancon S, Mori K, Kimura S, Miki J, Gomez Rivas J, Soeterik TFW, Zilli T, Tilki D, Joniau S, Kimura T, Shariat SF, Rajwa P. Salvage therapies for biochemical recurrence after definitive local treatment: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00890-4. [PMID: 39266730 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00890-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2024] [Revised: 08/19/2024] [Accepted: 08/28/2024] [Indexed: 09/14/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Recent advancements in the management of biochemical recurrence (BCR) following local treatment for prostate cancer (PCa), including the use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), have broadened the spectrum of therapeutic options. We aimed to compare salvage therapies in patients with BCR after definitive local treatment for clinically non-metastatic PCa with curative intent. METHODS In October 2023, we queried PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies reporting data on the efficacy of salvage therapies in PCa patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT). The primary endpoint was metastatic-free survival (MFS), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS We included 19 studies (n = 9117); six trials analyzed RT-based strategies following RP, ten trials analyzed hormone-based strategies following RP ± RT or RT alone, and three trials analyzed other agents. In a pairwise meta-analysis, adding hormone therapy to salvage RT significantly improved MFS (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.57-0.84, p < 0.001) compared to RT alone. Based on treatment ranking analysis, among RT-based strategies, the addition of elective nodal RT and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was found to be the most effective in terms of MFS. On the other hand, among hormone-based strategies, enzalutamide + ADT showed the greatest benefit for both MFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS The combination of prostate bed RT, elective pelvic irradiation, and ADT is the preferred treatment for eligible patients with post-RP BCR based on our analysis. In remaining patients, or in case of post-RT recurrence, especially for those with high-risk BCR, the combination of ADT and ARSI should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akihiro Matsukawa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takafumi Yanagisawa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tamas Fazekas
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
- Centre for Translational Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Collegium Medicum - Faculty of Medicine, WSB University, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland
| | - Ichiro Tsuboi
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shimane University, Shimane, Japan
| | - Mehdi Kardoust Parizi
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| | - Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Jakob Klemm
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Stefano Mancon
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shoji Kimura
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Jun Miki
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Juan Gomez Rivas
- Department of Urology, Clinico San Carlos Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - Timo F W Soeterik
- Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Derya Tilki
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Development and regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Takahiro Kimura
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
- Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czechia.
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
- Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria.
- Research Center for Evidence Medicine, Urology Department, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
| | - Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Che L, Li D, Wang J, Tuo Z, Yoo KH, Feng D, Ou Y, Wu R, Wei W. Identification of circadian clock-related immunological prognostic index and molecular subtypes in prostate cancer. Discov Oncol 2024; 15:429. [PMID: 39259370 PMCID: PMC11391008 DOI: 10.1007/s12672-024-01276-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/26/2024] [Indexed: 09/13/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence suggests that the circadian clock (CIC) is among the important factors for tumorigenesis. We aimed to provide new insights into CIC-mediated molecular subtypes and gene prognostic indexes for prostate cancer (PCa) patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or radical radiotherapy (RT). METHODS PCa data from TCGA was analyzed to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with significant fold changes and p-values. A prognostic index called CIC-related gene prognostic index (CICGPI) was developed through clustering methods and survival analysis and validated on multiple data sets. The diagnostic accuracy of CICGPI for resistance to chemotherapy and radiotherapy was confirmed. Additionally, the interaction between tumor immune environment and CICGPI score was explored, along with their correlation with prognosis. RESULTS TOP2A, APOE, and ALDH2 were used to classify the PCa patients into two subtypes. Cluster 2 had a higher risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) than cluster 1 for PCa patients undergoing RP or RT. A CIC-related gene prognostic index (CICGPI) was constructed using the above three genes for PCa patents in the TCGA database. The CICGPI score showed good prognostic value in the TCGA database and was externally confirmed by PCa patients in GSE116918, MSKCC2010 and GSE46602. In addition, the CICGPI score had a certain and high diagnostic accuracy for tumor chemoresistance (AUC: 0.781) and radioresistance (AUC: 0.988). For gene set variation analysis, we observed that both beta alanine metabolism and limonene and pinene degradation were upregulated in cluster 1 for PCa patients undergoing RP or RT. For PCa patients undergoing RP, cell cycle, homologous recombination, mismatch repair, and DNA replication were upregulated in cluster 2. A strongly positive relationship between cancer-related fibroblasts and CICGPI score was observed in PCa patients undergoing RP or RT. Moreover, a high density of CAFs was highly closely associated with poorer BCR-free survival of PCa patients. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we established CIC-related immunological prognostic index and molecular subtypes, which might be useful for the clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lu Che
- Operating Room, Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University/West China School of Nursing, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China
| | - Dengxiong Li
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China
| | - Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China
| | - Zhouting Tuo
- Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230601, China
| | - Koo Han Yoo
- Department of Urology, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Dechao Feng
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, W1W 7TS, UK.
| | - Yun Ou
- Department of Pathology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
| | - Ruicheng Wu
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
| | - Wuran Wei
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Tombal B, Giannarini G. Systemic Treatment for Biochemical Recurrence of Localized Prostate Cancer: Do Not EMBARK on When, If the Answer Is How. J Clin Oncol 2024:JCO2401134. [PMID: 39241212 DOI: 10.1200/jco.24.01134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2024] [Revised: 05/31/2024] [Accepted: 06/03/2024] [Indexed: 09/08/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Bertrand Tombal
- Bertrand Tombal, MD, PhD, Service d'Urologie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium; and Gianluca Giannarini, MD, PhD, Urology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy
| | - Gianluca Giannarini
- Bertrand Tombal, MD, PhD, Service d'Urologie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium; and Gianluca Giannarini, MD, PhD, Urology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Spratt DE. Further Randomized Data Confirming Minimal Benefit from the Addition of Hormone Therapy to Postoperative Radiotherapy. Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02562-4. [PMID: 39232980 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2024] [Accepted: 08/13/2024] [Indexed: 09/06/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Niu X, Liu W, Zhang Y, Liu J, Zhang J, Li B, Qiu Y, Zhao P, Wang Z, Wang Z. Cancer plasticity in therapy resistance: Mechanisms and novel strategies. Drug Resist Updat 2024; 76:101114. [PMID: 38924995 DOI: 10.1016/j.drup.2024.101114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2024] [Revised: 06/12/2024] [Accepted: 06/15/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024]
Abstract
Therapy resistance poses a significant obstacle to effective cancer treatment. Recent insights into cell plasticity as a new paradigm for understanding resistance to treatment: as cancer progresses, cancer cells experience phenotypic and molecular alterations, corporately known as cell plasticity. These alterations are caused by microenvironment factors, stochastic genetic and epigenetic changes, and/or selective pressure engendered by treatment, resulting in tumor heterogeneity and therapy resistance. Increasing evidence suggests that cancer cells display remarkable intrinsic plasticity and reversibly adapt to dynamic microenvironment conditions. Dynamic interactions between cell states and with the surrounding microenvironment form a flexible tumor ecosystem, which is able to quickly adapt to external pressure, especially treatment. Here, this review delineates the formation of cancer cell plasticity (CCP) as well as its manipulation of cancer escape from treatment. Furthermore, the intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms driving CCP that promote the development of therapy resistance is summarized. Novel treatment strategies, e.g., inhibiting or reversing CCP is also proposed. Moreover, the review discusses the multiple lines of ongoing clinical trials globally aimed at ameliorating therapy resistance. Such advances provide directions for the development of new treatment modalities and combination therapies against CCP in the context of therapy resistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xing Niu
- China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110122, China; Experimental Center of BIOQGene, YuanDong International Academy Of Life Sciences, 999077, Hong Kong, China
| | - Wenjing Liu
- Medical Oncology Department of Thoracic Cancer (2), Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China
| | - Yinling Zhang
- Department of Oncology Radiotherapy 1, Qingdao Central Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Qingdao, Shandong 266042, China
| | - Jing Liu
- Department of Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, China
| | - Jianjun Zhang
- Department of Gastric Surgery, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China
| | - Bo Li
- Department of Orthopedics, Beijing Luhe Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 101149, China
| | - Yue Qiu
- Department of Digestive Diseases 1, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China
| | - Peng Zhao
- Department of Medical Imaging, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China
| | - Zhongmiao Wang
- Department of Digestive Diseases 1, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China.
| | - Zhe Wang
- Department of Digestive Diseases 1, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Cancer Hospital of Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning 110042, China.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Dover L, Dulaney C. PROshot: Immunotherapy for Cervical Cancer, Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated Stage III Lung Cancer, Perioperative Chemotherapy for Esophageal Cancer, Salvage Postprostatectomy Radiation and Androgen Deprivation Therapy, and Immunotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:363-367. [PMID: 39218526 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2024.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2024] [Revised: 06/14/2024] [Accepted: 06/18/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Dover
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ascension St. Vincent's East, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Caleb Dulaney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Anderson Regional Health System, Meridian, Mississippi.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Shelan M, Achard V, Appiagyei F, Mose L, Zilli T, Fankhauser CD, Zamboglou C, Mohamad O, Aebersold DM, Cathomas R. Role of enzalutamide in primary and recurrent non-metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review of prospective clinical trials. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:422-431. [PMID: 38589645 PMCID: PMC11319196 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00829-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/03/2024] [Indexed: 04/10/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Enzalutamide, a second-generation androgen receptor inhibitor, is indicated for the treatment of metastatic disease, as well as in the treatment of non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (PCa). This systematic review aims to determine outcomes and toxicity in patients with non-metastatic castration sensitive prostate cancer (nmCSPC) treated with enzalutamide in the primary or salvage settings. METHOD We performed a systematic review focusing on the role of Enzalutamide in the treatment of nmCSPC, using the PubMed/Medline database. Articles focusing on androgen receptor inhibitors in nmCSPC were included, while articles discussing exclusively metastatic or castration-resistant PCa were excluded. RESULTS The initial search retrieved 401 articles, of which 15 underwent a thorough assessment for relevance. Ultimately, 12 studies with pertinent outcomes were meticulously examined. Among these, seven studies were dedicated to the investigation of enzalutamide in the primary setting, while the remaining five publications specifically addressed its use in salvage settings. Regardless of the treatment setting, our data revealed two distinct therapeutic strategies. The first advocates for the substitution of enzalutamide for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), based on the premise of achieving equivalent, if not superior, oncological outcomes while minimizing treatment-related toxicity. The second, adopting a more conventional approach, entails augmenting the effectiveness of ADT by incorporating enzalutamide. CONCLUSION Enzalutamide has considerable potential as a therapeutic strategy for nmCSPC, either used alone or in combination with ADT in the primary or in the salvage settings. The use of enzalutamide instead of ADT is an appealing strategy. However, more trials will be required to further understand the efficacy and side-effect profile of enzalutamide monotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Vérane Achard
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HFR Fribourg, Villars-sur-Glâne, Switzerland
| | - Felix Appiagyei
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Lucas Mose
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland
- Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Christian D Fankhauser
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Oncology Center, University Hospital of the European University, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Genito-urinary Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Richard Cathomas
- Department of Oncology/Hematology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hinojosa-Gonzalez DE, Zafar A, Saffati G, Kronstedt S, Zlatev DV, Khera M. Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer and neurocognitive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:507-519. [PMID: 38167924 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00785-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 11/29/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate cancer is a prevalent disease that urgently needs to address its treatment-related complications. By examining existing evidence on the association between Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) and dementia, this study contributes to the understanding of potential risks. We sought to analyze the currently available evidence regarding the risk of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD), vascular dementia, and Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients undergoing ADT. METHODS A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar was performed to identify studies published from the databases' inception to April 2023. Studies were identified through systematic review to facilitate comparisons between studies with and without some degree of controls for biases affecting distinctions between ADT receivers and non-ADT receivers. This review identified 305 studies, with 28 meeting the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity was assessed using Higgins I2%. Variables with an I2 over 50% were considered heterogeneous and analyzed using a Random-Effects model. Otherwise, a Fixed-Effects model was employed. RESULTS A total of 28 studies were included for analysis. Out of these, only 1 study did not report the number of patients. From the remaining 27 studies, there were a total of 2,543,483 patients, including 900,994 with prostate cancer who received ADT, 1,262,905 with prostate cancer who did not receive ADT, and 334,682 patients without prostate cancer who did not receive ADT. This analysis revealed significantly increased Hazard Ratios (HR) of 1.20 [1.11, 1.29], p < 0.00001 for dementia, HR 1.26 [1.10, 1.43], p = 0.0007 for Alzheimer's Disease, HR 1.66 [1.40, 1.97], p < 0.00001 for depression, and HR 1.57 [1.31, 1.88], p < 0.00001 for Parkinson's Disease. The risk of vascular dementia was HR 1.30 [0.97, 1.73], p < 0.00001. CONCLUSION Based on the analysis of the currently available evidence, it suggests that ADT significantly increases the risk of dementia, AD, PD, and depression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David E Hinojosa-Gonzalez
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 1102, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
| | - Affan Zafar
- Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, 7200 Cambridge Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Gal Saffati
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 1102, Boston, MA, 02114, USA
| | - Shane Kronstedt
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 1102, Boston, MA, 02114, USA
| | - Dimitar V Zlatev
- Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, 7200 Cambridge Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Mohit Khera
- Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 1102, Boston, MA, 02114, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Weiner AB, Kakani P, Armstrong AJ, Bossi A, Cornford P, Feng F, Kanabur P, Karnes RJ, Mckay RR, Morgan TM, Schaeffer EM, Shore N, Tree AC, Spratt DE. Risk Stratification of Patients with Recurrence After Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2024; 86:200-210. [PMID: 38782697 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2024] [Revised: 04/04/2024] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic outcomes, risk factors that impact outcomes can vary significantly, necessitating avenues for risk stratification. We sought to identify prognostic risk factors at the time of recurrence after primary radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and prior to salvage treatment(s), associated with adverse oncologic outcomes. METHODS We performed a systematic review of prospective studies in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from January 1, 2000 to October 16, 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (CRD42023466330). We reviewed the factors associated with oncologic outcomes among patients with BCR after primary definitive treatment. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 37 studies were included (total n = 10 632), 25 after prostatectomy (total n = 9010) and 12 after radiotherapy (total n = 1622). Following recurrence after prostatectomy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include higher pathologic T stage and grade group, negative surgical margins, shorter prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT), higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) prior to salvage treatment, shorter time to recurrence, the 22-gene tumor RNA signature, and recurrence location on molecular imaging. After recurrence following radiotherapy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include a shorter time to recurrence, and shorter PSADT or higher PSA velocity. Grade group, T stage, and prior short-term hormone therapy (4-6 mo) were not clearly associated with adverse outcomes, although sample size and follow-up were generally limited compared with postprostatectomy data. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS This work highlights the recommendations and level of evidence for risk stratifying patients with PCa recurrence, and can be used as a benchmark for personalizing salvage treatment based on prognostics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam B Weiner
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Institute for Precision Health, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Preeti Kakani
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Andrew J Armstrong
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancer, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Alberto Bossi
- Amethyst Radiotherapy Group, La Garenne Colombes, France
| | | | - Felix Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Pratik Kanabur
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Rana R Mckay
- Department of Medicine, Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Todd M Morgan
- Department of Urology, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Edward M Schaeffer
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Alison C Tree
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, Petersen PM, Catton CN, Cross WR, Kynaston H, Persad RA, Saad F, Logue J, Payne H, Amos C, Bower L, Raman R, Sayers I, Worlding J, Parulekar WR, Parmar MKB, Sydes MR. Randomised Trial of No, Short-term, or Long-term Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Postoperative Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy: Results from the Three-way Comparison of RADICALS-HD (NCT00541047). Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02515-6. [PMID: 39217077 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.07.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2024] [Revised: 05/31/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE The use and duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with postoperative radiotherapy (RT) have been uncertain. RADICALS-HD compared adding no ("None"), 6-months ("Short"), or 24-mo ("Long") ADT to study efficacy in the long term. METHODS Participants with prostate cancer were indicated for postoperative RT and agreed randomisation between all durations. ADT was allocated for 0, 6, or 24 mo. The primary outcome measure (OM) was metastasis-free survival (MFS). The secondary OMs included freedom from distant metastasis, overall survival, and initiation of nonprotocol ADT. Sample size was determined by two-way comparisons. Analyses followed standard time-to-event approaches and intention-to-treat principles. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Between 2007 and 2015, 492 participants were randomised one of three groups: 166 None, 164 Short, and 162 Long. The median age at randomisation was 66 yr; Gleason scores at surgery were as follows: <7 = 64 (13%), 3+4 = 229 (47%), 4+3 = 127 (26%), and 8+ = 72 (15%); T3b was 112 (23%); and T4 was 5 (1%). The median follow-up was 9.0 yr and, with MFS events reported for 89 participants (32 None, 31 Short, and 26 Long), there was no evidence of difference in MFS overall (logrank p = 0.98), and, for Long versus None, hazard ratio = 0.948 (95% confidence interval 0.54-1.68). After 10 yr, 80% None, 77% Short, and 81% Long patients were alive without metastatic disease. The three-way randomisation was not powered to conventional levels for assessment, yet provides a fair comparison. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Long-term outcomes after radical prostatectomy are usually favourable. In those indicated for postoperative RT and considered suitable for no, short-term, or long-term ADT, there was no evidence of improvement with addition of ADT. Future research should focus on patients at a higher risk of metastases in whom improvements are required more urgently.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chris C Parker
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Noel W Clarke
- Department of Urology, The Christie and Salford Royal Hospitals, Manchester, UK; The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Adrian D Cook
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCL, London, UK
| | - Peter M Petersen
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Charles N Catton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret, Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - William R Cross
- Department of Urology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Howard Kynaston
- Division of Cancer & Genetics, Cardiff University Medical School, Cardiff, UK
| | - Raj A Persad
- Department of Urology, Bristol Urological Institute, Bristol, UK
| | - Fred Saad
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | | | | | - Claire Amos
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCL, London, UK
| | - Lorna Bower
- The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Rakesh Raman
- Kent Oncology Centre, Kent & Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, UK
| | - Ian Sayers
- Deanesly Centre, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK
| | - Jane Worlding
- University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | - Wendy R Parulekar
- Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Mahesh K B Parmar
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCL, London, UK
| | - Matthew R Sydes
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCL, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Vera G, Rojas PA, Black JB, San Francisco IF. Usefulness of Tissue Biomarkers versus Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography for Prostate Cancer Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2879. [PMID: 39199648 PMCID: PMC11352583 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16162879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2024] [Revised: 08/12/2024] [Accepted: 08/16/2024] [Indexed: 09/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Despite curative-intent local therapy, approximately 27% to 53% of prostate cancer (PCa) patients experience prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence, known as biochemical recurrence (BCR). BCR significantly raises the risk of PCa-related morbidity and mortality, yet there is no consensus on optimal management. Prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography (PSMA PET) has emerged as highly sensitive imaging, distinguishing local recurrences from distant metastases, crucially influencing treatment decisions. Genomic biomarkers such as Decipher, Prolaris, and Oncotype DX contribute to refining recurrence risk profiles, guiding decisions on intensifying adjuvant therapies, like radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). This review assesses PSMA PET and biomarker utility in post-radical prostatectomy BCR scenarios, highlighting their impact on clinical decision-making. Despite their promising roles, the routine integration of biomarkers is limited by availability and cost, requiring further evidence. PSMA PET remains indispensable for restaging and treatment evaluation in these patients. Integrating biomarkers and PSMA PET promises to optimize personalized management strategies for BCR, though more comprehensive consensus-building studies are needed to define their standardized utility in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriela Vera
- Servicio de Urología, Complejo Asistencial Dr. Sotero del Rio, Santiago 8207257, Chile; (G.V.); (P.A.R.)
| | - Pablo A. Rojas
- Servicio de Urología, Complejo Asistencial Dr. Sotero del Rio, Santiago 8207257, Chile; (G.V.); (P.A.R.)
| | - Joseph B. Black
- Division of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215-5400, USA;
| | - Ignacio F. San Francisco
- Division of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215-5400, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Achard V, Zilli T. Current status and perspectives on the use of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors in the salvage radiotherapy setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00878-0. [PMID: 39138297 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00878-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2024] [Revised: 07/26/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 08/15/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Vérane Achard
- Radiation Oncology, HFR Fribourg, Villars-sur-Glâne, Switzerland.
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland
- Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Mohamad O, Li YR, Feng F, Hong JC, Wong A, El Kouzi Z, Shelan M, Zilli T, Carroll P, Roach M. Delayed definitive management of localized prostate cancer: what do we know? Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00876-2. [PMID: 39128937 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00876-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2024] [Revised: 06/05/2024] [Accepted: 07/22/2024] [Indexed: 08/13/2024]
Abstract
Delays in the work-up and definitive management of patients with prostate cancer are common, with logistics of additional work-up after initial prostate biopsy, specialist referrals, and psychological reasons being the most common causes of delays. During the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent surges, timing of definitive care delivery with surgery or radiotherapy has become a topic of significant concern for patients with prostate cancer and their providers alike. In response, recommendations for the timing of definitive management of prostate cancer with radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy were published but without a detailed rationale for these recommendations. While the COVID-19 pandemic is behind us, patients are always asking the question: "When should I start radiation or undergo surgery?" In the absence of level I evidence specifically addressing this question, we will hereby present a narrative review to summarize the available data on the effect of treatment delays on oncologic outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer from prospective and retrospective studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Osama Mohamad
- Department of Genito-urinary Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Yun Rose Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Cancer center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Felix Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Julian C Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Anthony Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Zakaria El Kouzi
- Department of Genito-urinary Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland
- Facoltà di Scienze biomediche, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Peter Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Mack Roach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Swensen S, Liao JJ, Chen JJ, Kim K, Ma TM, Weg ES. The expanding role of radiation oncology across the prostate cancer continuum. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024; 49:2693-2705. [PMID: 38900319 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04408-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2024] [Revised: 05/23/2024] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024]
Abstract
Radiotherapy is used in the treatment of prostate cancer in a variety of disease states with significant reliance on imaging to guide clinical decision-making and radiation delivery. In the definitive setting, the choice of radiotherapy treatment modality, dose, and fractionation for localized prostate cancer is determined by the patient's initial risk stratification and other clinical considerations. Radiation is also an option as salvage therapy in patients with locoregionally recurrent disease after prior definitive radiation or surgery. In recent years, the role of radiation has expanded for patients with metastatic disease, including prostate-directed radiotherapy in de novo low volume metastatic disease, metastasis-directed therapy for oligorecurrent disease, and palliative management of symptomatic metastases in the advanced setting. Here we review the expanding role of radiation in the treatment of prostate cancer in the definitive, locoregionally recurrent, and metastatic settings, as well as highlight the role of imaging in clinical reasoning, radiation planning, and treatment delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasha Swensen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Jay J Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Jonathan J Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Katherine Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Ting Martin Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Emily S Weg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Mattes MD. Overview of Radiation Therapy in the Management of Localized and Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2024; 25:181-192. [PMID: 38861238 DOI: 10.1007/s11934-024-01217-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/05/2024] [Indexed: 06/12/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The goal is to describe the evolution of radiation therapy (RT) utilization in the management of localized and metastatic prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS Long term data for a variety of hypofractionated definitive RT dose-fractionation schemes has matured, allowing patients and providers many standard-of-care options to choose from. Post-prostatectomy, adjuvant RT has largely been replaced by an early salvage approach. Multiparametric MRI and PSMA PET have enabled increasingly targeted RT delivery to the prostate and oligometastatic tumors. Areas of active investigation include determining the value of proton beam therapy and perirectal spacers, and optimally incorporate genomic tumor profiling and next generation hormonal therapies with RT in the curative setting. The use of radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer is rapidly evolving. In the coming years, there will be continued improvements in a variety of areas to enhance the value of RT in multidisciplinary prostate cancer management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Malcolm D Mattes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Tilki D, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Brunckhorst O, Darraugh J, Eberli D, De Meerleer G, De Santis M, Farolfi A, Gandaglia G, Gillessen S, Grivas N, Henry AM, Lardas M, J L H van Leenders G, Liew M, Linares Espinos E, Oldenburg J, van Oort IM, Oprea-Lager DE, Ploussard G, Roberts MJ, Rouvière O, Schoots IG, Schouten N, Smith EJ, Stranne J, Wiegel T, Willemse PPM, Cornford P. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II-2024 Update: Treatment of Relapsing and Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2024; 86:164-182. [PMID: 38688773 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2024] [Revised: 03/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/03/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024]
Abstract
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 on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) have been updated. Here we provide a summary of the 2024 guidelines. METHODS The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS Risk stratification for relapsing PCa after primary therapy may guide salvage therapy decisions. New treatment options, such as androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), ARTA + chemotherapy combinations, PARP inhibitors and their combinations, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based therapy have become available for men with metastatic PCa. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Evidence for relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is evolving rapidly. These guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. The full version is available online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/ prostate-cancer/). PATIENT SUMMARY This article summarises the 2024 guidelines for the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence and guide doctors in discussing treatment decisions with their patients. The guidelines are updated every year.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
| | | | | | | | | | - Julie Darraugh
- European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Daniel Eberli
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Maria De Santis
- Department of Urology, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andrea Farolfi
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Soldera Prostate Cancer Laboratory, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Nikolaos Grivas
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, St. James's University Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Michael Lardas
- Department of Urology, Metropolitan General Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | | | - Matthew Liew
- Department of Urology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Jan Oldenburg
- Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Inge M van Oort
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Matthew J Roberts
- Department of Urology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Australia
| | - Olivier Rouvière
- Department of Imaging, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France; Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, UFR Lyon-Est, Lyon, France
| | - Ivo G Schoots
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Emma J Smith
- European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Johan Stranne
- Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Department of Urology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital-Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Peter-Paul M Willemse
- Department of Urology, Cancer Center University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Philip Cornford
- Department of Urology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Reitano G, Ceccato T, Botti S, Bruniera M, Carrozza S, Bovolenta E, Randazzo G, Minardi D, Ruggera L, Gardi M, Novara G, Dal Moro F, Zattoni F. Treatment and Staging Intensification Strategies Associated with Radical Prostatectomy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Efficacy Evaluation and Exploration of Novel Approaches. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2465. [PMID: 39001527 PMCID: PMC11240638 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2024] [Revised: 06/27/2024] [Accepted: 07/04/2024] [Indexed: 07/16/2024] Open
Abstract
The management of high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) presents a significant clinical challenge, often necessitating treatment intensification due to the potential presence of micrometastases. While radical prostatectomy (RP) constitutes one of the primary treatment modalities, the integration of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies suggests a paradigm shift towards more aggressive treatment strategies, also guided by new imaging modalities like positron emission tomography using prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA-PET). Despite the benefits, treatment intensification raises concerns regarding increased side effects. This review synthesizes the latest evidence on perioperative treatment intensification and de-escalation for high-risk localized and locally advanced PCa patients eligible for surgery. Through a non-systematic literature review conducted via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov, we explored various dimensions of perioperative treatments, including neoadjuvant systemic therapies, adjuvant therapies, and the role of novel diagnostic technologies. Emerging evidence provides more support for neoadjuvant systemic therapies. Preliminary results from studies suggest the potential for treatments traditionally reserved for metastatic PCa to show apparent benefit in a non-metastatic setting. The role of adjuvant treatments remains debated, particularly the use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and adjuvant radiotherapy in patients at higher risk of biochemical recurrence. The potential role of radio-guided PSMA lymph node dissection emerges as a cutting-edge approach, offering a targeted method for eradicating disease with greater precision. Innovations such as artificial intelligence and machine learning are potential game-changers, offering new avenues for personalized treatment and improved prognostication. The intensification of surgical treatment in high-risk PCa patients is a dynamic and evolving field, underscored by the integration of traditional and novel therapeutic approaches. As evidence continues to emerge, these strategies will refine patient selection, enhance treatment efficacy, and mitigate the risk of progression, although with an attentive consideration of the associated side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Reitano
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Tommaso Ceccato
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Simone Botti
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Martina Bruniera
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Salvatore Carrozza
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Eleonora Bovolenta
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Gianmarco Randazzo
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Davide Minardi
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Ruggera
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Mario Gardi
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Giacomo Novara
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Dal Moro
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
| | - Fabio Zattoni
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedale-Università Padova, 35122 Padova, Italy
- Department of Medicine (DIMED), University of Padua, 35128 Padova, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Demirlenk YM, Albadawi H, Zhang Z, Atar D, Cevik E, Keum H, Kim J, Rehman S, Gunduz S, Graf E, Mayer JL, Dos Santos PR, Oklu R. Prostate tissue ablation and drug delivery by an image-guided injectable ionic liquid in ex vivo and in vivo models. Sci Transl Med 2024; 16:eadn7982. [PMID: 38959326 DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.adn7982] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2023] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 07/05/2024]
Abstract
Benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer are often associated with lower urinary tract symptoms, which can severely affect patient quality of life. To address this challenge, we developed and optimized an injectable compound, prostate ablation and drug delivery agent (PADA), for percutaneous prostate tissue ablation and concurrently delivered therapeutic agents. PADA is an ionic liquid composed of choline and geranic acid mixed with anticancer therapeutics and a contrast agent. The PADA formulation was optimized for mechanical properties compatible with hand injection, diffusion capability, cytotoxicity against prostate cells, and visibility of an x-ray contrast agent. PADA also exhibited antibacterial properties against highly resistant clinically isolated bacteria in vitro. Ultrasound-guided injection, dispersion of PADA in the tissue, and tissue ablation were tested ex vivo in healthy porcine, canine, and human prostates and in freshly resected human tumors. In vivo testing was conducted in a murine subcutaneous tumor model and in the canine prostate. In all models, PADA decreased the number of viable cells in the region of dispersion and supported the delivery of nivolumab throughout a portion of the tissue. In canine survival experiments, there were no adverse events and no impact on urination. The injection approach was easy to perform under ultrasound guidance and produced a localized effect with a favorable safety profile. These findings suggest that PADA is a promising therapeutic prostate ablation strategy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yusuf M Demirlenk
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Hassan Albadawi
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Zefu Zhang
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Dila Atar
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Enes Cevik
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Hyeongseop Keum
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Jinjoo Kim
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Suliman Rehman
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Seyda Gunduz
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istinye University, Bahcesehir Liv Hospital, Istanbul 34517, Turkey
| | - Erin Graf
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd., Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Joseph L Mayer
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
| | - Pedro R Dos Santos
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd., Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Rahmi Oklu
- Laboratory for Patient-Inspired Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Blvd., Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd., Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Armstrong WR, Kishan AU, Booker KM, Grogan TR, Elashoff D, Lam EC, Clark KJ, Steinberg ML, Fendler WP, Hope TA, Nickols NG, Czernin J, Calais J. Impact of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography on Prostate Cancer Salvage Radiotherapy Management: Results from a Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase 3 Trial (PSMA-SRT NCT03582774). Eur Urol 2024; 86:52-60. [PMID: 38290964 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Revised: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 01/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/01/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Both imaging and several prognostic factors inform the planning of salvage radiotherapy (SRT). Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) can localize disease unseen by other imaging modalities. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of PSMA-PET on biochemical recurrence-free survival rate after SRT. METHODS This prospective randomized, controlled, phase 3 clinical trial randomized 193 patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy to proceed with SRT (control arm, n = 90) or undergo a PSMA-PET/computed tomography (CT) scan prior to SRT planning (investigational arm, n = 103) from June 2018 to August 2020. Any other approved imaging modalities were allowed in both arms (including fluciclovine-PET). This is a secondary endpoint analysis: impact of PSMA-PET on SRT planning. Case-report forms were sent to referring radiation oncologists to collect the management plans before randomization and after completion of SRT. The relative frequency (%) of management changes within each arm were compared using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS The delivered SRT plan was available in 178/193 patients (92.2%;76/90 control [84.4%] and 102/103 PSMA-PET [99%]). Median prostate-specific antigen levels at enrollment was 0.30 ng/ml (interquartile range [IQR] 0.19-0.91) in the control arm and 0.23 ng/ml (IQR 0.15-0.54) in the PSMA-PET arm. Fluciclovine-PET was used in 33/76 (43%) in the control arm. PSMA-PET localized recurrence(s) in 38/102 (37%): nine of 102 (9%) outside of the pelvis (M1), 16/102 (16%) in the pelvic LNs (N1, with or without local recurrence), and 13/102 (13%) in the prostate fossa only. There was a 23% difference (95% confidence interval [CI] 9-35%, p = 0.002) of frequency of major changes between the control arm (22% [17/76]) and the PSMA-PET intervention arm (45%[46/102]). Of the major changes in the intervention group, 33/46 (72%) were deemed related to PSMA-PET. There was a 17.6% difference (95% CI 5.4-28.5%, p = 0.005) of treatment escalation frequency between the control arm (nine of 76 [12%]) and the intervention arm (30/102 [29%]). Treatment de-escalation occurred in the control and intervention arms in eight of 76 (10.5%) and 12/102 (11.8%) patients, and mixed changes in zero of 76 (0%) and four of 102 (3.9%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS In this prospective randomized phase 3 study, PSMA-PET findings provided information that initiated major management changes to SRT planning in 33/102 (33%) patients. The final readout of the primary endpoint planned in 2025 may provide evidence on whether these changes result in improved outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography leads to management changes in one-third of patients receiving salvage radiotherapy for post-radical prostatectomy biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wesley R Armstrong
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; UCLA-Caltech Medical Scientist Training Program, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kiara M Booker
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Tristan R Grogan
- Department of Medicine Statistics Core (DOMStat), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - David Elashoff
- Department of Medicine Statistics Core (DOMStat), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Ethan C Lam
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kevyn J Clark
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Michael L Steinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Wolfgang P Fendler
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) - University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Thomas A Hope
- Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Nicholas G Nickols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Johannes Czernin
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jeremie Calais
- Ahmanson Translational Theranostics Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Spratt DE. Adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy: debates will be reignited. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:585-587. [PMID: 38734076 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- D E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Green A, Temsah P, Goldfarb L, Sanfolippo K, Knoche E, Muzaffar R, Osman MM. Evaluating appropriateness of 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT relative to standard of care imaging guidelines and the impact of ADT on positivity: a prospective study in 62 Veterans Administration patients at a single institution. Nucl Med Commun 2024; 45:526-535. [PMID: 38517329 DOI: 10.1097/mnm.0000000000001836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines, 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT is considered appropriate after negative standard of care (SOC) imaging. OBJECTIVE To prospectively compare 18F-fluciclovine to SOC imaging, investigate whether it should be done when SOC imaging is (+), and evaluate its detection rate in patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy. METHODS We recruited 57 prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence with 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT and SOC imaging within 30 days. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score (GS), history of radical prostatectomy (RP), radiation therapy (RT) or hormone therapy (HT) were reviewed. RESULTS The 57 patients had a median PSA of 2.6 and average GS of 7.4; 27 (47.4%) had RP, 28 (49.1%) had RT, 1 (1.75%) had HT and 1 (1.75%) observation only. 18F-fluciclovine identified disease recurrence in 45/57 patients (78.9%), including oligometastasis in 18/45 (40%). SOC imaging identified recurrent disease in 12/57 patients (21.1%) while 18F-fluciclvoine identified additional sites of disease in 11/12 (91.7%). The (+) 18F-fluciclovine studies had a median PSA 2.6 ng/ml compared to 6.0 ng/ml in the (+) SOC studies. CONCLUSION 18F-fluciclovine was superior to SOC imaging for lesion detection, identification of oligometastasis and identification of additional sites of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aileen Green
- Department of Radiology, Saint Louis VA Medical Center, and
| | - Peter Temsah
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Saint Louis University and
| | | | - Kristen Sanfolippo
- Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis VA Medical Center, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Eric Knoche
- Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis VA Medical Center, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Razi Muzaffar
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Saint Louis University and
| | - Medhat M Osman
- Department of Radiology, Saint Louis VA Medical Center, and
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Saint Louis University and
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Lee K, Kim D, Nam J, Park D, Kim W, Joo J, Jeon H, Ki Y, Kim D. Analysis of risk factors for disease progression after salvage radiation therapy with androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer patients who have prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy. Radiat Oncol J 2024; 42:124-129. [PMID: 38946074 PMCID: PMC11215507 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2023.00962] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2023] [Revised: 01/31/2024] [Accepted: 02/01/2024] [Indexed: 07/02/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess risk factors of disease progression after salvage radiation therapy (SRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in case of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed 57 patients who received SRT with ADT between 2013 and 2019 due to PSA persistence after RP. The endpoint was disease progression defined by biochemical recurrence or clinical recurrence. Age, Pre-RP PSA level, Gleason score, pathologic stage, presence of pelvic lymph node dissection, surgical margins, and PSA at 6-8 weeks after RP were analyzed as predictive factors for disease progression. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models were used for data analysis. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 38 months (interquartile range, 26-61), 17 patients had disease progression. Pathologic T stage (pT3b vs. pT3a or lower; hazard ratio [HR] = 9.20; p = 0.035) and PSA level at 6-8 weeks after RP (≥2.04 vs. <2.04 ng/mL; HR = 5.85; p = 0.002) were predictors of disease progression. The 5-year disease progression-free survival rate was 46.7% in pT3b group as compared to 92.9 % in pT3a or lower group, and 18.4% for PSA ≥2.04 ng/mL after RP as compared to 79.2% for PSA <2.04 ng/mL. CONCLUSION Pathological T stage (pT3b) and post RP PSA ≥2.04 ng/mL are independent risk factors of disease progression after SRT with ADT in patients with PSA persistence after RP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyeonghyo Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
| | - Dongchan Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
| | - Jiho Nam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Dahl Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
| | - Wontaek Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Jihyeon Joo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Hosang Jeon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Yongkan Ki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Donghyun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Shore ND, Moul JW, Pienta KJ, Czernin J, King MT, Freedland SJ. Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after primary definitive therapy: treatment based on risk stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:192-201. [PMID: 37679602 PMCID: PMC11096125 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00712-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nearly one-third of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment. BCR increases the risk of distant metastasis and mortality in patients with prognostically unfavorable features. These patients are best managed with a tailored treatment strategy incorporating risk stratification using clinicopathological factors, next-generation imaging, and genomic testing. OBJECTIVE This narrative review examines the utility of risk stratification for the management of patients with BCR in the context of clinical trial data, referencing the latest recommendations by European and US medical societies. METHODS PubMed was searched for relevant studies published through May 21 2023 on treatment of patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). RESULTS European and US guidelines support the risk-stratified management of BCR. Post-RP, salvage EBRT (with or without androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) is an accepted treatment option for patients with BCR. Post-EBRT, local salvage therapies (RP, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate brachytherapy) have demonstrated comparable relapse-free survival rates but differing adverse event profiles, short and long term. Local salvage therapies should be used for local-only relapses while ADT should be considered for regional or distant relapses. In practice, patients often receive ADT, with varying guidance for intermittent ADT vs. continuous ADT, due to consideration of quality-of-life effects. CONCLUSIONS Despite a lack of consensus for BCR treatment among guideline associations and medical societies, risk stratification of patients is essential for personalized treatment approaches, as it allows for an informed selection of therapeutic strategies and estimation of adverse events. In lower-risk disease, observation is recommended while in higher-risk disease, after failed repeat local therapy, ADT and/or clinical trial enrollment may be appropriate. Results from ongoing clinical studies of patients with BCR should provide consensus for management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neal D Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Judd W Moul
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Johannes Czernin
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Martin T King
- Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Stephen J Freedland
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Parker CC, Kynaston H, Cook AD, Clarke NW, Catton CN, Cross WR, Petersen PM, Persad RA, Pugh CA, Saad F, Logue J, Payne H, Bower LC, Brawley C, Rauchenberger M, Barkati M, Bottomley DM, Brasso K, Chung HT, Chung PWM, Conroy R, Falconer A, Ford V, Goh CL, Heath CM, James ND, Kim-Sing C, Kodavatiganti R, Malone SC, Morris SL, Nabid A, Ong AD, Raman R, Rodda S, Wells P, Worlding J, Parulekar WR, Parmar MKB, Sydes MR. Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial. Lancet 2024; 403:2416-2425. [PMID: 38763153 PMCID: PMC7616389 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(24)00549-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2023] [Revised: 03/13/2024] [Accepted: 03/15/2024] [Indexed: 05/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. METHODS RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chris C Parker
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Howard Kynaston
- Division of Cancer and Genetics, Cardiff University Medical School, Cardiff, UK
| | - Adrian D Cook
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Noel W Clarke
- Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Urology, Salford Royal Hospital, Salford, UK
| | | | - William R Cross
- Department of Urology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Peter M Petersen
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Cheryl A Pugh
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Fred Saad
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - John Logue
- Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Lorna C Bower
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Chris Brawley
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mary Rauchenberger
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Maroie Barkati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - David M Bottomley
- Department of Clinical Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Klaus Brasso
- Department of Urology, Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Hans T Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Peter W M Chung
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ruth Conroy
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Vicky Ford
- Royal Devon and Exeter University NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - Chee L Goh
- Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | - Catherine M Heath
- Department of Clinical Oncology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Nicholas D James
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Charmaine Kim-Sing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer-Vancouver, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ravi Kodavatiganti
- Glan Clwyd Hospital, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Bangor, UK
| | - Shawn C Malone
- The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | | | - Abdenour Nabid
- Service de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
| | - Aldrich D Ong
- Max Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Rakesh Raman
- Kent Oncology Centre, Kent and Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, UK
| | - Sree Rodda
- Bradford Teaching Hospitals, Bradford, UK
| | - Paula Wells
- Barts Cancer Centre, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Jane Worlding
- University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | - Wendy R Parulekar
- Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Mahesh K B Parmar
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Matthew R Sydes
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Pollack A, Pra AD. Androgen deprivation therapy combined with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer management. Lancet 2024; 403:2353-2355. [PMID: 38763152 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(24)00802-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2024] [Accepted: 04/12/2024] [Indexed: 05/21/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Pollack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL 33136, USA.
| | - Alan Dal Pra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL 33136, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Correa RJM, Mendez LC. Helpful tool or blunt instrument?-the European Association of Urology Biochemical Recurrence Risk Classification as a decision-making tool for salvage radiotherapy. Transl Androl Urol 2024; 13:889-892. [PMID: 38855605 PMCID: PMC11157405 DOI: 10.21037/tau-23-665] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 06/11/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rohann J M Correa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada
| | - Lucas C Mendez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Ah-Thiane L, Campion L, Allouache N, Meyer E, Pommier P, Mesgouez-Nebout N, Serre AA, Créhange G, Guimas V, Rio E, Sargos P, Ladoire S, Mahier Ait Oukhatar C, Supiot S. Combination of Abiraterone Acetate, Prostate Bed Radiotherapy, and Luteinizing Hormone-releasing Hormone Agonists in Biochemically Relapsing Patients After Prostatectomy (CARLHA): A Phase 2 Clinical Trial. Eur Urol Oncol 2024:S2588-9311(24)00108-1. [PMID: 38734543 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.04.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2024] [Revised: 03/26/2024] [Accepted: 04/23/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The relevance of next-generation hormone therapies and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are not elucidated in biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the combination of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP), prostate bed radiotherapy (PBRT), and goserelin in biochemically relapsing men after prostatectomy, and to investigate the utility of CTCs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this single-arm multicenter phase 2 trial, 46 biochemically relapsing men were enrolled between December 2012 and January 2019. The median follow-up was 47 mo. INTERVENTION All patients received AAP 1000 mg daily (but 750 mg during PBRT), salvage PBRT, and goserelin. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary outcome was 3-yr biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) when prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were ≥0.2 ng/ml. The secondary outcomes included alternative bRFS (alt-bRFS) when PSA levels were ≥0.5 ng/ml and safety assessment. CTC count was assessed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The 3-yr bRFS and alt-bRFS were 81.5% (95% confidence interval or CI [66.4-90.3%]) and 95.6% (95% CI [83.5-98.9%]), respectively. The most common acute radiotherapy-related adverse effect (AE; all grades was pollakiuria (41.3%). The most common late AE (all grades) was urinary incontinence (15.2%). Grade 3-4 acute or late radiotherapy-related AEs were scarce. Most frequent AEs nonrelated to radiotherapy were hot flashes (76%), hypertension (63%), and hepatic cytolysis (50%, of which 20% were of grades 3-4). Of the patients, 11% had a CTC count of ≥5, which was correlated with poorer bRFS (p = 0.042) and alt-bRFS (p = 0.008). The association between CTC count and higher rates of relapse was independent of the baseline PSA level and PSA doubling time (p = 0.42 and p = 0.09, respectively). This study was nonrandomized with a limited number of patients, and few clinical events were reported. CONCLUSIONS Adding AAP to salvage radiation therapy and goserelin resulted in high bRFS and alt-bRFS. AEs remained manageable, although a close liver surveillance is advised. CTC count appears as a promising biomarker for prognosis and predicting response to treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY Our study was a phase 2 clinical trial that exhibited the efficacy and tolerance of a novel androgen-receptor targeting agent (abiraterone acetate plus prednisone) in patients with prostate cancer who experienced rising prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy, in combination with prostate bed radiotherapy. The results also indicated the feasibility and potential value of circulating tumor cell detection, which constitutes a possible advance in managing prostate cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Loic Ah-Thiane
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO Rene Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France
| | - Loic Campion
- Department of Biostatistics, ICO Rene Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France
| | - Nedjla Allouache
- Department of Radiotherapy, Francois Baclesse Center, Caen, France
| | - Emmanuel Meyer
- Department of Radiotherapy, Francois Baclesse Center, Caen, France
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiotherapy, Leon Berard Center, Lyon, France
| | | | | | - Gilles Créhange
- Department of Radiotherapy, Georges Francois Leclerc Center, Dijon, France
| | - Valentine Guimas
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO Rene Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France
| | - Emmanuel Rio
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO Rene Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Bergonie Institute, Bordeaux, France
| | - Sylvain Ladoire
- Department of Radiotherapy, Georges Francois Leclerc Center, Dijon, France
| | | | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiotherapy, ICO Rene Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France; Inserm UMR1232, CNRS ERL 6001, Nantes University, Nantes, France.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Fang B, McGeachy P, Husain S, Meyer T, Thind K, Martell K. Acute toxicity outcomes from salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after prior radiotherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2024; 16:111-120. [PMID: 38808210 PMCID: PMC11129646 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2024.139278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose Isolated intra-prostatic recurrence of prostate adenocarcinoma after definitive radiotherapy presents a challenging clinical scenario. Salvage options require specialized expertise and pose risks of harm. This study aimed to present the acute toxicity results from using salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy (sHDR-BT) as treatment in locally recurrent prostate cancer cases. Material and methods Seventeen consecutive patients treated with sHDR-BT between 2019 and 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Eligible patients had to have received curative intent prostate radiotherapy previously, and showed evidence of new biochemical failure. Evaluation with American Urological Association (AUA) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) symptom assessments were performed for each case. Results The median (inter-quartile range) age prior to salvage treatment was 68 (66-74) years. The median post-sHDR-BT follow-up time was 20 (13-24) months. At baseline prior to sHDR-BT, 8 (47%) patients had significant lower urinary tract symptoms. The median AUA score prior to sHDR-BT was 7 (3-18). Three (18%) patients reported irregular bowel function and 2 (12%) reported hematochezia prior to sHDR-BT. One-month post-treatment, the median AUA score was 13 (8-21, p = 0.21). Using CTCAE scoring, there were no cases of grade 2+ bowel or rectal toxicity, and no cases of grade 3+ urinary toxicity. Reported grade 2 urinary toxicities included 10 (59%) cases of bladder spasms, 2 (12%) cases of incontinence, 1 (6%) urinary obstruction, and 4 (24%) reports of urinary urgency. All these adverse events were temporary. Conclusions This study adds to the existing literature by demonstrating that the acute toxicity profile of sHDR-BT is acceptable even without intra-operative magnetic resonance (MR) guidance or image registration. Further study is ongoing to determine long-term efficacy and toxicity of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Breanna Fang
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Philip McGeachy
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Siraj Husain
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Tyler Meyer
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Kundan Thind
- Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, United States
| | - Kevin Martell
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Henke LE. Undoing the Layers: Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Advanced Image Guidance and Adaptive Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1167-1171. [PMID: 38492968 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2023] [Revised: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren E Henke
- University Hospitals, Department of Radiation Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Kano H, Kadono Y, Naito R, Makino T, Iwamoto H, Yaegashi H, Kawaguchi S, Nohara T, Shigehara K, Izumi K, Mizokami A. Salvage Androgen Deprivation Therapy as Potential Treatment for Recurrence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1304. [PMID: 38610982 PMCID: PMC11011007 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16071304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2024] [Revised: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is unknown, and its usefulness in Japanese practice needs to be investigated. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of 85 patients who underwent RARP and were selected for intermittent ADT for postoperative recurrence at Kanazawa University Hospital between 2009 and 2019. Intermittent ADT was administered for 2 years. If prostate-specific antigen levels increased post-treatment, intermittent ADT was reinitiated. The median follow-up period was 47 months. RESULTS The 73 patients had completed the initial course of ADT, and 12 were under initial ADT. The 5-year castration-resistant prostate-cancer-free survival rates, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were 92.7%, 98.3%, and 94.7%, respectively. A subgroup analysis of 69 patients who completed intermittent ADT was conducted to evaluate the BCR rate following initial ADT. The 5-year BCR-free survival rate was 53.2%. Multivariate analysis identified testosterone ≤ 0.03 ng/mL during ADT as the sole predictor of BCR after ADT. CONCLUSIONS Salvage intermittent ADT may be an effective treatment option for BCR after RARP. In addition, it would be useful to confirm strong testosterone suppression as a criterion for transition to intermittent therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiroshi Kano
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Yoshifumi Kadono
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
- Department of Nephrology and Urology, Japanese Red Cross Fukui Hospital, Fukui 918-8501, Japan
| | - Renato Naito
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Tomoyuki Makino
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Hiroaki Iwamoto
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Hiroshi Yaegashi
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Shohei Kawaguchi
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Takahiro Nohara
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Kazuyoshi Shigehara
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Kouji Izumi
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| | - Atsushi Mizokami
- Department of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa 920-8640, Japan; (H.K.); (R.N.); (T.M.); (H.I.); (H.Y.); (S.K.); (T.N.); (K.S.); (K.I.); (A.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Xie W, Ravi P, Buyse M, Halabi S, Kantoff P, Sartor O, Soule H, Clarke N, Dignam J, James N, Fizazi K, Gillessen S, Mottet N, Murphy L, Parulekar W, Sandler H, Tombal B, Williams S, Sweeney CJ. Validation of metastasis-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in localized prostate cancer in the era of docetaxel for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:285-292. [PMID: 38061427 PMCID: PMC10922430 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.11.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Revised: 11/20/2023] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 01/21/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prior work from the Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP) consortium (ICECaP-1) demonstrated that metastasis-free survival (MFS) is a valid surrogate for overall survival (OS) in localized prostate cancer (PCa). This was based on data from patients treated predominantly before 2004, prior to docetaxel being available for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to validate surrogacy in a more contemporary era (ICECaP-2) with greater availability of docetaxel and other systemic therapies for mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible trials for ICECaP-2 were those providing individual patient data (IPD) after publication of ICECaP-1 and evaluating adjuvant/salvage therapy for localized PCa, and which collected MFS and OS data. MFS was defined as distant metastases or death from any cause, and OS was defined as death from any cause. Surrogacy was evaluated using a meta-analytic two-stage validation model, with an R2 ≥ 0.7 defined a priori as clinically relevant. RESULTS A total of 15 164 IPD from 14 trials were included in ICECaP-2, with 70% of patients treated after 2004. The median follow-up was 8.3 years and the median postmetastasis survival was 3.1 years in ICECaP-2, compared with 1.9 years in ICECaP-1. For surrogacy condition 1, Kendall's tau was 0.92 for MFS with OS at the patient level, and R2 from weighted linear regression (WLR) of 8-year OS on 5-year MFS was 0.73 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.82) at the trial level. For condition 2, R2 was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.89) from WLR of log[hazard ratio (HR)]-OS on log(HR)-MFS. The surrogate threshold effect on OS was an HR(MFS) of 0.81. CONCLUSIONS MFS remained a valid surrogate for OS in a more contemporary era, where patients had greater access to docetaxel and other systemic therapies for mCRPC. This supports the use of MFS as the primary outcome measure for ongoing adjuvant trials in localized PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Xie
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA
| | - P Ravi
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA
| | - M Buyse
- International Drug Development Institute, Louvain-la-Neuve; I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium
| | | | | | | | - H Soule
- Prostate Cancer Foundation, Santa Monica, USA
| | - N Clarke
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - J Dignam
- University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - N James
- The Institute of Cancer Research & The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - K Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - S Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona; Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - N Mottet
- Mutualite Francoise Loire, St Etienne, France
| | - L Murphy
- Medical Research Council at UCL, London, UK
| | - W Parulekar
- Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - H Sandler
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - B Tombal
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| | - S Williams
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne
| | - C J Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Koerber SA, Höcht S, Aebersold D, Albrecht C, Boehmer D, Ganswindt U, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Hölscher T, Mueller AC, Niehoff P, Peeken JC, Pinkawa M, Polat B, Spohn SKB, Wolf F, Zamboglou C, Zips D, Wiegel T. Prostate cancer and elective nodal radiation therapy for cN0 and pN0-a never ending story? : Recommendations from the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:181-187. [PMID: 38273135 PMCID: PMC10876748 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02193-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2023] [Accepted: 12/17/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024]
Abstract
For prostate cancer, the role of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) for cN0 or pN0 patients has been under discussion for years. Considering the recent publications of randomized controlled trials, the prostate cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) aimed to discuss and summarize the current literature. Modern trials have been recently published for both treatment-naïve patients (POP-RT trial) and patients after surgery (SPPORT trial). Although there are more reliable data to date, we identified several limitations currently complicating the definitions of general recommendations. For patients with cN0 (conventional or PSMA-PET staging) undergoing definitive radiotherapy, only men with high-risk factors for nodal involvement (e.g., cT3a, GS ≥ 8, PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml) seem to benefit from ENI. For biochemical relapse in the postoperative situation (pN0) and no PSMA imaging, ENI may be added to patients with risk factors according to the SPPORT trial (e.g., GS ≥ 8; PSA > 0.7 ng/ml). If PSMA-PET/CT is negative, ENI may be offered for selected men with high-risk factors as an individual treatment approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S A Koerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Barmherzige Brüder Hospital Regensburg, Prüfeninger Straße 86, 93049, Regensburg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - S Höcht
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ernst von Bergmann Hospital Potsdam, Charlottenstraße 72, 14467, Potsdam, Germany
| | - D Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital-Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Freiburgstraße 4, 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - C Albrecht
- Nordstrahl Radiation Oncology Unit, Nürnberg North Hospital, Prof.-Ernst-Nathan-Str. 1, 90149, Nürnberg, Germany
| | - D Boehmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - U Ganswindt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - N-S Schmidt-Hegemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistraße 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - T Hölscher
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fiedlerstraße 19, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - A-C Mueller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, RKH Hospital Ludwigsburg, Posilipostraße 4, 71640, Ludwigsburg, Germany
| | - P Niehoff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sana Hospital Offenbach, Starkenburgring 66, 63069, Offenbach, Germany
| | - J C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - M Pinkawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Robert Janker Klinik, Villenstraße 8, 53129, Bonn, Germany
| | - B Polat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Josef-Schneider-Straße 11, 97080, Würzburg, Germany
| | - S K B Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Straße 3, 79106, Freiburg, Germany
| | - F Wolf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paracelsus Medical University of Salzburg, Müllner Hauptstraße 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | - C Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Straße 3, 79106, Freiburg, Germany
- German Oncology Center, 1, Nikis Avenue, Agios Athanasios, 4108, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - D Zips
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - T Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Li HZ, Qi X, Gao XS, Li XM, Qin SB, Li XY, Ma MW, Bai Y, Chen JY, Ren XY, Li XY, Wang D. Dose-Intensified Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results From the PKUFH Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:697-705. [PMID: 37717784 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.09.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 09/02/2023] [Accepted: 09/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE In the randomized, single-center, PKUFH phase 3 trial, dose-intensified (72 Gy) radiation therapy was compared with conventional (66 Gy) radiation therapy. In a previous study, we found no significant difference in biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) between the 2 cohorts at 4 years. In the current analysis, we provide 7-year outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with stage pT3-4, positive surgical margins, or a prostate-specific antigen increase ≥0.2 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either 72 Gy in 36 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions. All the patients underwent image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy. The primary endpoint was bPFS. Secondary endpoints were distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Between September 2011 and November 2016, 144 patients were enrolled with 73 and 71 in the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts, respectively. At a median follow-up of 89.5 months (range, 73-97 months), there was no difference in 7-year bPFS between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts (70.3% vs 61.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.41-1.29; P = .274). However, in patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10), the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with the 66-Gy cohort (66.5% vs 30.2%; HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.17-0.82; P = .012). In addition, in patients with multiple positive surgical margins, the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with single positive surgical margin (82.5% vs 57.5%; HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13-0.99; P = .037). The 7-year DMFS (88.4% vs 84.9%; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.39-2.23; P = .867), CSS (94.1% vs 95.5%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.42-3.39; P = .745), and OS (92.8% vs 94.1%; HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.51-3.24; P = .594) had no statistical differences between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts. CONCLUSIONS The current 7-year bPFS results confirmed our previous findings that dose escalation (72 Gy) demonstrated no improvement in 7-year bPFS, DMFS, CSS, or OS compared with the 66-Gy regimen. However, patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10) or multiple positive surgical margins might benefit from the 72-Gy regimen, but this requires further prospective research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Xin Qi
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Yun Bai
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and
| | | | | | - Xue-Ying Li
- Medical Statistics, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Dian Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Majewski W, Miszczyk M, Graupner D, Goc B, Goldner G, Napieralska A. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) re-irradiation for local failures following radical prostatectomy and post-operative radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:230-238. [PMID: 38157016 PMCID: PMC10876733 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02187-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 11/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Local recurrences after radical prostatectomy (RP) and postoperative radiotherapy (RT) are challenging for salvage treatment. Retrospective analysis of own experiences with salvage re-irradiation was performed. METHODS The study included all consecutive patients treated with salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (sSBRT) for prostate bed recurrence following RP and postoperative RT at a single tertiary center between 2014 and 2021. Treatment toxicity defined as the occurrence of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 genito-urinary (GU) or gastro-intestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) was assessed. A PSA response, biochemical control (BC) and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated. RESULTS The study group included 32 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median follow-up of 41 months, treated with CyberKnife (53%) or Linac (47%) sSBRT. Total dose of 33.75-36.25 Gy in five fractions (72%) was applied in the majority of them. Approximately 19% patients reported grade ≥ 2 GU AEs both at baseline and at three months, and grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity increased from 0% at baseline to 6% at three months after sSBRT. There was some clinically relevant increase in late toxicity with 31% patients reporting late ≥ 2 GU, and 12.5% late ≥ 2 GI AEs. Two grade 3 AEs were recorded: recto-urinary fistulas. The majority of patients showed a PSA response (91% at one year post-sSBRT). The 3‑year BC was 40% and 3‑year OS was 87%. CONCLUSIONS Manageable toxicity profile and satisfactory biochemical response suggest that SBRT in patients with local recurrence following RP and postoperative RT might be a salvage option for selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wojciech Majewski
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland.
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- III Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Donata Graupner
- III Department of Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Bartłomiej Goc
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Gregor Goldner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Aleksandra Napieralska
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Wybrzeże Armii Krajowej 15, 44-100, Gliwice, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Sciarra A, Santarelli V, Salciccia S, Moriconi M, Basile G, Santodirocco L, Carino D, Frisenda M, Di Pierro G, Del Giudice F, Gentilucci A, Bevilacqua G. How the Management of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Will Be Modified by the Concept of Anticipation and Incrementation of Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:764. [PMID: 38398155 PMCID: PMC10886975 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary treatments for prostate cancer (PC) is an extremely heterogeneous phase and at least a stratification into low- and high-risk cases for early progression in metastatic disease is necessary. At present, PSA-DT represents the best parameter to define low- and high-risk BCR PC, but real precision medicine is strongly suggested to define tailored management for patients with BCR. Before defining management, it is necessary to exclude the presence of low-volume metastasis associated with PSA progression using new-generation imaging, preferably with PSMA PET/CT. Low-risk BCR cases should be actively observed without early systemic therapies. Early treatment of low-risk BCR with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can produce disadvantages such as the development of castration resistance before the appearance of metastases (non-metastatic castration-resistant PC). Patients with high-risk BCR benefit from early systemic therapy. Even with overall survival (OS) as the primary treatment endpoint, metastasis-free survival (MFS) should be used as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials, especially in long survival stages of the disease. The EMBARK study has greatly influenced the management of high-risk BCR, by introducing the concept of anticipation and intensification through the use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) and ADT combination therapy. In high-risk (PSA-DT ≤ 9 months) BCR cases, the combination of enzalutamide with leuprolide significantly improves MFS when compared to leuprolide alone, maintaining an unchanged quality of life in the asymptomatic phase of the disease. The possibility of using ARSIs alone in this early disease setting is suggested by the EMBARK study (arm with enzalutamide alone) with less evidence than with the intensification of the combination therapy. Continued use versus discontinuation of enzalutamide plus leuprolide intensified therapy upon reaching undetectable PSA levels needs to be better defined with further analysis. Real-world analysis must verify the significant results obtained in the context of a phase 3 study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Sciarra
- Department Materno Infantile e Scienze Urologiche, Sapienza University, Viale Policlinico 155, 00161 Rome, Italy; (V.S.); (S.S.); (M.M.); (G.B.); (L.S.); (D.C.); (M.F.); (G.D.P.); (F.D.G.); (A.G.); (G.B.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Lohm G, Knörnschild F, Neumann K, Budach V, Schwartz S, Burock S, Böhmer D. Salvage Radiotherapy for Relapsed Prostate Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy Is Associated with Normal Life Expectancy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:534. [PMID: 38339285 PMCID: PMC10854858 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16030534] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2023] [Revised: 01/19/2024] [Accepted: 01/23/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
In patients with prostate cancer (PCa), salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for biochemical progression (BP) after radical prostatectomy (RP) improves PCa-specific survival. However, no prospective randomized trials have compared the effect of SRT with untreated patients. In this analysis of 151 patients who received SRT for post-RP BP, we compared their overall survival (OS) with virtual, age-matched controls (n = 151,000) retrieved from government life tables. We also investigated the risk factors associated with BP and OS and compared the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling times (DTs) before and after SRT for patients with BP. The median follow-up was 9.3 years for BP and 17.4 years for OS. The risk factors significantly affecting BP were Gleason score (p < 0.001), pre-SRT PSA (p = 0.003), and negative surgical margins (p = 0.003). None of these risk factors were associated with OS. In 93 patients with BP after SRT, the median PSADT was significantly prolonged compared with pre-SRT values (3.7 vs. 8.3 months, p < 0.001). The OS did not differ between patients and controls (p = 0.112), and life expectancy was similar, likely due to the survival benefit of SRT. The prolonged PSADT after SRT further supports the beneficial role of SRT in this patient population. However, subsequent treatments were not systematically recorded, which may have affected the results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gunnar Lohm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johanniter-Hospital Genthin-Stendal, 39576 Stendal, Germany
- Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Franz Knörnschild
- Department of Hematology, Oncology and Tumor Immunology (Campus Benjamin Franklin), Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany; (F.K.); (S.S.)
| | - Konrad Neumann
- Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany;
| | - Volker Budach
- Radiation Oncology Vosspalais, Private Clinic, Voss-St. 44, 10177 Berlin, Germany;
| | - Stefan Schwartz
- Department of Hematology, Oncology and Tumor Immunology (Campus Benjamin Franklin), Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany; (F.K.); (S.S.)
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Susen Burock
- Clinical Trial Office (Campus Mitte), Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany;
| | - Dirk Böhmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Campus Benjamin Franklin), Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany;
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Takano S, Tomita N, Niwa M, Torii A, Takaoka T, Kita N, Uchiyama K, Nakanishi-Imai M, Ayakawa S, Iida M, Tsuzuki Y, Otsuka S, Manabe Y, Nomura K, Ogawa Y, Miyakawa A, Miyamoto A, Takemoto S, Yasui T, Hiwatashi A. Impact of radiation doses on clinical relapse of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Sci Rep 2024; 14:113. [PMID: 38167430 PMCID: PMC10761985 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-50434-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024] Open
Abstract
The relationship between radiation doses and clinical relapse in patients receiving salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains unclear. We identified 292 eligible patients treated with SRT between 2005 and 2018 at 15 institutions. Clinical relapse-free survival (cRFS) between the ≥ 66 Gy (n = 226) and < 66 Gy groups (n = 66) were compared using the Log-rank test, followed by univariate and multivariate analyses and a subgroup analysis. After a median follow-up of 73 months, 6-year biochemical relapse-free survival, cRFS, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival rates were 58, 92, 98, and 94%, respectively. Six-year cRFS rates in the ≥ 66 Gy and < 66 Gy groups were 94 and 87%, respectively (p = 0.022). The multivariate analysis revealed that Gleason score ≥ 8, seminal vesicle involvement, PSA at BCR after RP ≥ 0.5 ng/ml, and a dose < 66 Gy correlated with clinical relapse (p = 0.015, 0.012, 0.024, and 0.0018, respectively). The subgroup analysis showed the consistent benefit of a dose ≥ 66 Gy in patients across most subgroups. Doses ≥ 66 Gy were found to significantly, albeit borderline, increase the risk of late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity compared to doses < 66 Gy (14% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.055). This large multi-institutional retrospective study demonstrated that a higher SRT dose (≥ 66 Gy) resulted in superior cRFS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seiya Takano
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Natsuo Tomita
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan.
| | - Masanari Niwa
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Akira Torii
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Taiki Takaoka
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Nozomi Kita
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Kaoru Uchiyama
- Department of Radiology, Kariya Toyota General Hospital, 5-15 Sumiyoshi-Cho, Kariya, Aichi, 448-8505, Japan
| | - Mikiko Nakanishi-Imai
- Department of Radiology, Japanese Red Cross Aichi Medical Center Nagoya Daini Hospital, 2-9 Myoken-Cho, Showa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 466-8650, Japan
| | - Shiho Ayakawa
- Department of Radiology, Japan Community Health Care Organization Chukyo Hospital, 1-1-10 Sanjo, Minami-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 457-8510, Japan
| | - Masato Iida
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Suzuka General Hospital, 1275-53 Yamanoue, Yasuzuka-Cho, Suzuka, Mie, 513-0818, Japan
| | - Yusuke Tsuzuki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya Proton Therapy Center, Nagoya City West Medical Center, 1-1-1 Hirate-Cho, Kita-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 462-8508, Japan
| | - Shinya Otsuka
- Department of Radiology, Okazaki City Hospital, 3-1 Goshoai, Koryuji-Cho, Okazaki, Aichi, 444-8553, Japan
| | - Yoshihiko Manabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nanbu Tokushukai General Hospital, 171-1 Hokama, Yaese-Cho, Shimajiri, Okinawa, 901-0493, Japan
| | - Kento Nomura
- Department of Radiotherapy, Nagoya City West Medical Center, 1-1-1 Hirate-Cho, Kita-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 462-8508, Japan
| | - Yasutaka Ogawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kasugai Municipal Hospital, 1-1-1 Takaki-Cho, Kasugai, Aichi, 486-8510, Japan
| | - Akifumi Miyakawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Hospital Organization Nagoya Medical Center, 4-1-1, Sannomaru, Naka-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 460-0001, Japan
| | - Akihiko Miyamoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokuto Hospital, 7-5 Kisen, Inada-Cho, Obihiro, Hokkaido, 080-0833, Japan
| | - Shinya Takemoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujieda Heisei Memorial Hospital, 123-1 Mizukami-Cho, Fujieda, Shizuoka, 426-8662, Japan
| | - Takahiro Yasui
- Department of Urology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| | - Akio Hiwatashi
- Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Ferrario F, Franzese C, Faccenda V, Vukcaj S, Belmonte M, Lucchini R, Baldaccini D, Badalamenti M, Andreoli S, Panizza D, Magli A, Scorsetti M, Arcangeli S. Toxicity profile and Patient-Reported outcomes following salvage Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy to the prostate Bed: The POPART multicentric prospective study. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 44:100704. [PMID: 38111610 PMCID: PMC10726256 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 11/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Background While SBRT to the prostate has become a valuable option as a radical treatment, limited data support its use in the postoperative setting. Here, we report the updated results of the multicentric Post-Prostatectomy Ablative Radiation Therapy (POPART) trial, investigating possible predictors of toxicities and patient-reported outcomes. Methods Patients with PSA levels between 0.1-2.0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy received Linac-based SBRT to the prostate bed in five fractions every other day for a total dose of 32.5 Gy (EQD21.5 = 74.3 Gy). Late toxicity was assessed using CTCAE v.5 scale, while EPIC-CP, ICIQ-SF, IIEF 5 questionnaires and PSA levels measured quality of life and biochemical control. Pre- and post-treatment scores were compared using a paired t-test, with MID established at > 0.5 pooled SD from the baseline. A logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate potential associations between specific patient/tumor/treatment factors and outcome deterioration. Results From April 2021 to April 2023 a total of 50 pts were enrolled and treated. Median follow-up was 12.2 (3-27) months. No late ≥ G2 GI or GU toxicity was registered. Late G1 urinary and rectal toxicities occurred in 46 % and 4 % of patients, respectively. Among 47 patients completing all EPIC-CP domains, four (9 %) showed worsened QoL, and eleven (26 %) developed erectile dysfunction correlating with PTV D2% (P = 0.032). At Multivariate analysis bladder wall D10cc independently correlated with late G1 GU toxicity (P = 0.034). Median post-treatment PSA nadir was 0.04 ng/mL (0.00 - 0.84). At the last follow-up, six patients presented with biochemical failure, including two nodal relapses. Conclusions Our findings show that post-prostatectomy SBRT did not result in increased toxicity nor a significant decline in QoL measures, thus showing that it can be safely extended to the postoperative setting. Long-term follow-up and randomized comparisons with different RT schedules are needed to validate this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Ferrario
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20090 Pieve Emanuele (MI), Italy
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano (MI), Italy
| | - Valeria Faccenda
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| | - Suela Vukcaj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, 24127 Bergamo, Italy
| | - Maria Belmonte
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| | - Raffaella Lucchini
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| | - Davide Baldaccini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano (MI), Italy
| | - Marco Badalamenti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano (MI), Italy
| | - Stefano Andreoli
- Department of Medical Physics, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, 24127 Bergamo, Italy
| | - Denis Panizza
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| | - Alessandro Magli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, AULSS 1 Dolomiti, 32100 Belluno, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20090 Pieve Emanuele (MI), Italy
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano (MI), Italy
| | - Stefano Arcangeli
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, 20900 Monza, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Roberts EK, Elliott MR, Taylor JMG. Surrogacy validation for time-to-event outcomes with illness-death frailty models. Biom J 2024; 66:e2200324. [PMID: 37776057 PMCID: PMC10873101 DOI: 10.1002/bimj.202200324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2022] [Revised: 04/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/15/2023] [Indexed: 10/01/2023]
Abstract
A common practice in clinical trials is to evaluate a treatment effect on an intermediate outcome when the true outcome of interest would be difficult or costly to measure. We consider how to validate intermediate outcomes in a causally-valid way when the trial outcomes are time-to-event. Using counterfactual outcomes, those that would be observed if the counterfactual treatment had been given, the causal association paradigm assesses the relationship of the treatment effect on the surrogate outcome with the treatment effect on the true, primary outcome. In particular, we propose illness-death models to accommodate the censored and semicompeting risk structure of survival data. The proposed causal version of these models involves estimable and counterfactual frailty terms. Via these multistate models, we characterize what a valid surrogate would look like using a causal effect predictiveness plot. We evaluate the estimation properties of a Bayesian method using Markov chain Monte Carlo and assess the sensitivity of our model assumptions. Our motivating data source is a localized prostate cancer clinical trial where the two survival outcomes are time to distant metastasis and time to death.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michael R. Elliott
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
- Survey Methodology Program, Institute for Social Research Ann Arbor, MI
| | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Efstathiou JA, Morgans AK, Bland CS, Shore ND. Novel hormone therapy and coordination of care in high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2024; 122:102630. [PMID: 38035646 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 09/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023]
Abstract
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurs in 20-50% of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing primary definitive treatment. Patients with high-risk BCR have an increased risk of metastatic progression and subsequent PCa-specific mortality, and thus could benefit from treatment intensification. Given the increasing complexity of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, multidisciplinary care (MDC) can play a crucial role in the individualized management of this patient population. This review explores the role for MDC when evaluating the clinical evidence for the evolving definition of high-risk BCR and the emerging therapeutic strategies, especially with novel hormone therapies (NHTs), for patients with either high-risk BCR or oligometastatic PCa. Clinical studies have used different characteristics to define high-risk BCR and there is no consensus regarding the definition of high-risk BCR nor for management strategies. Next-generation imaging and multigene panels offer potential enhanced patient identification and precision-based decision-making, respectively. Treatment intensification with NHTs, either alone or combined with radiotherapy or metastasis-directed therapy, has been promising in clinical trials in patients with high-risk BCR or oligometastases. As novel risk-stratification and treatment options as well as evidence-based literature evolve, it is important to involve a multidisciplinary team to identify patients with high-risk features at an earlier stage, and make informed decisions on the treatments that could optimize their care and long-term outcomes. Nevertheless, MDC data are scarce in the BCR or oligometastatic setting. Efforts to integrate MDC into the standard management of this patient population are needed, and will likely improve outcomes across this heterogeneous PCa patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason A Efstathiou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | - Alicia K Morgans
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 850 Brookline Ave, Dana 09-930, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - Christopher S Bland
- US Oncology Medical Affairs, Pfizer Inc., 66 Hudson Boulevard, Hudson Yards, Manhattan, New York, NY 10001, USA.
| | - Neal D Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, GenesisCare US, 823 82nd Pkwy, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Adebahr S, Althaus A, Scharl S, Strouthos I, Farolfi A, Serani F, Lanzafame H, Trapp C, Koerber SA, Peeken JC, Vogel MME, Vrachimis A, Spohn SKB, Grosu AL, Kroeze SGC, Guckenberger M, Fanti S, Hruby G, Emmett L, Belka C, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Henkenberens C, Aebersold DM, Wiegel T, Afshar-Oromieh A, Zamboglou C, Shelan M. The prognostic significance of a negative PSMA-PET scan prior to salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2024; 51:558-567. [PMID: 37736808 PMCID: PMC10774185 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-023-06438-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023]
Abstract
AIM The optimal management for early recurrent prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with negative prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography (PSMA-PET) scan is an ongoing subject of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of salvage radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with biochemical recurrence with negative PSMA PET finding. METHODS This retrospective, multicenter (11 centers, 5 countries) analysis included patients who underwent SRT following biochemical recurrence (BR) of PC after RP without evidence of disease on PSMA-PET staging. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), metastatic-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression assessed predefined predictors of survival outcomes. RESULTS Three hundred patients were included, 253 (84.3%) received SRT to the prostate bed only, 46 (15.3%) additional elective pelvic nodal irradiation, respectively. Only 41 patients (13.7%) received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Median follow-up after SRT was 33 months (IQR: 20-46 months). Three-year bRFS, MFS, and OS following SRT were 73.9%, 87.8%, and 99.1%, respectively. Three-year bRFS was 77.5% and 48.3% for patients with PSA levels before PSMA-PET ≤ 0.5 ng/ml and > 0.5 ng/ml, respectively. Using univariate analysis, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade > 2 (p = 0.006), metastatic pelvic lymph nodes at surgery (p = 0.032), seminal vesicle involvement (p < 0.001), pre-SRT PSA level of > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.004), and lack of concomitant ADT (p = 0.023) were significantly associated with worse bRFS. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards, seminal vesicle infiltration (p = 0.007), ISUP score >2 (p = 0.048), and pre SRT PSA level > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.013) remained significantly associated with worse bRFS. CONCLUSION Favorable bRFS after SRT in patients with BR and negative PSMA-PET following RP was achieved. These data support the usage of early SRT for patients with negative PSMA-PET findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Adebahr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Alexander Althaus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Sophia Scharl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Iosif Strouthos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Andrea Farolfi
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesca Serani
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Helena Lanzafame
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Christian Trapp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan A Koerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Alexis Vrachimis
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, German Oncology Center, University Hospital of the European University, Limassol, Cyprus
- C.A.R.I.C. Cancer Research & Innovation Center, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Simon K B Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie G C Kroeze
- Radiation Oncology Center KSA-KSB, Canton Hospital of Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Stefano Fanti
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - George Hruby
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital - University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Louise Emmett
- Department of Theranostics and Nuclear medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- St Vincent's Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Henkenberens
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medical School Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Ali Afshar-Oromieh
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
- Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
An Y, Lu W, Li S, Lu X, Zhang Y, Han D, Su D, Jia J, Yuan J, Zhao B, Tu M, Li X, Wang X, Fang N, Ji S. Systematic review and integrated analysis of prognostic gene signatures for prostate cancer patients. Discov Oncol 2023; 14:234. [PMID: 38112859 PMCID: PMC10730790 DOI: 10.1007/s12672-023-00847-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancers in men and becoming the second leading cause of cancer fatalities. At present, the lack of effective strategies for prognosis of PC patients is still a problem to be solved. Therefore, it is significant to identify potential gene signatures for PC patients' prognosis. Here, we summarized 71 different prognostic gene signatures for PC and concluded 3 strategies for signature construction after extensive investigation. In addition, 14 genes frequently appeared in 71 different gene signatures, which enriched in mitotic and cell cycle. This review provides extensive understanding and integrated analysis of current prognostic signatures of PC, which may help researchers to construct gene signatures of PC and guide future clinical treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang An
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China.
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
| | - Wenyuan Lu
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Shijia Li
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Xiaoyan Lu
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Yuanyuan Zhang
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Dongcheng Han
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Dingyuan Su
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Jiaxin Jia
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Jiaxin Yuan
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Binbin Zhao
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Mengjie Tu
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Xinyu Li
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Xiaoqing Wang
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China
| | - Na Fang
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China.
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
| | - Shaoping Ji
- School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Cell Signal Transduction Laboratory, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Henan University, Jinming Street, Kaifeng, 475004, Henan, China.
- Henan Provincial Engineering Center for Tumor Molecular Medicine, Kaifeng Key Laboratory of Cell Signal Transduction, Kaifeng, 475004, China.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Ganguly S, Lone Z, Muskara A, Imamura J, Hardaway A, Patel M, Berk M, Smile TD, Davicioni E, Stephans KL, Ciezki J, Weight CJ, Gupta S, Reddy CA, Tendulkar RD, Chakraborty AA, Klein EA, Sharifi N, Mian OY. Intratumoral androgen biosynthesis associated with 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 promotes resistance to radiotherapy in prostate cancer. J Clin Invest 2023; 133:e165718. [PMID: 37966114 PMCID: PMC10645386 DOI: 10.1172/jci165718] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Half of all men with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) inherit at least 1 copy of an adrenal-permissive HSD3B1 (1245C) allele, which increases levels of 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 (3βHSD1) and promotes intracellular androgen biosynthesis. Germline inheritance of the adrenally permissive allele confers worse outcomes in men with advanced PCa. We investigated whether HSD3B1 (1245C) drives resistance to combined androgen deprivation and radiotherapy. Adrenally permissive 3βHSD1 enhanced resistance to radiotherapy in PCa cell lines and xenograft models engineered to mimic the human adrenal/gonadal axis during androgen deprivation. The allele-specific effects on radiosensitivity were dependent on availability of DHEA, the substrate for 3βHSD1. In lines expressing the HSD3B1 (1245C) allele, enhanced expression of DNA damage response (DDR) genes and more rapid DNA double-strand break (DSB) resolution were observed. A correlation between androgen receptor (AR) expression and increased DDR gene expression was confirmed in 680 radical prostatectomy specimens. Treatment with the nonsteroidal antiandrogen enzalutamide reversed the resistant phenotype of HSD3B1 (1245C) PCa in vitro and in vivo. In conclusion, 3βHSD1 promotes prostate cancer resistance to combined androgen deprivation and radiotherapy by upregulating DNA DSB repair. This work supports prospective validation of early combined androgen blockade for high-risk men harboring the HSD3B1 (1245C) allele.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Zaeem Lone
- Translational Hematology and Oncology Research
| | | | | | | | - Mona Patel
- Department of Cancer Biology, Lerner Research Institute
| | - Mike Berk
- Department of Cancer Biology, Lerner Research Institute
| | - Timothy D Smile
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Kevin L Stephans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Jay Ciezki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Shilpa Gupta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Rahul D Tendulkar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Abhishek A Chakraborty
- Department of Cancer Biology, Lerner Research Institute
- Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Eric A Klein
- Veracyte Inc., San Francisco, California, USA
- Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Nima Sharifi
- Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Desai Sethi Urology Institute and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Ohio, USA
| | - Omar Y Mian
- Translational Hematology and Oncology Research
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Lin X, Wu G, Wang S, Huang J. Bibliometric and visual analysis of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. Front Pharmacol 2023; 14:1255158. [PMID: 38026961 PMCID: PMC10665513 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1255158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2023] [Accepted: 10/27/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity represents a prevalent adverse effect encountered in patients undergoing treatment with doxorubicin. To date, there has been no bibliometric study to summarize the field of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. In our study, we aim to determine the current status and frontiers of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity by bibliometric analysis. Methods: The documents concerning doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity are obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database (WOSCC), and VOSviewer 1.6.16, CiteSpace 5.1.3 and the WOSCC's literature analysis wire were used to conduct the bibliometric analysis. Results: In total, 7,021 publications were encompassed, which are produced by 37,152 authors and 6,659 organizations, 1,323 journals, and 101 countries/regions. The most productive author, institution, country and journal were Bonnie Ky with 35 publications, University of Texas with 190 documents, the United States with 1,912 publications, and PLOS ONE with 120 documents. The first high-cited article was published in the NEJM with 8,134 citations authored by DJ Slamon et al., in 2001. For keyword analysis, there are four clusters depicted in distinct directions. The keywords in the red cluster are oxidative stress, apoptosis, and cardiomyopathy. The keywords in the green cluster are cardiotoxicity, heart failure, and anthracycline. The keywords in the blue cluster are chemotherapy, trastuzumab, and paclitaxel. The keywords in the purple cluster are doxorubicin, adriamycin, and cancer. Most of the documents were derived from the United States, China and Italy (4,080/7,021, 58.1%). The number of studies from other countries should be increased. Conclusion: In conclusion, the main research hotspots and frontiers in the field of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity include the role of doxorubicin in cardiotoxicity, the mechanisms underlying doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity, and the development of treatment strategies for doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. More studies are needed to explore the mechanisms and treatment of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Shuai Wang
- Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| | - Jinyu Huang
- Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Kato M, Higashi S, Sugino Y, Kajiwara S, Tanaka S, Kitano G, Yamashita Y, Ogura Y, Tachibana H, Kojima T, Inoue T. Clinical Efficacy and Openness to New Challenges of Low Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer. Curr Oncol 2023; 30:9824-9835. [PMID: 37999133 PMCID: PMC10670683 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30110713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2023] [Revised: 10/02/2023] [Accepted: 11/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Over a century ago, low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy was introduced to treat prostate cancer (PCa). Since then, it has been widely applied worldwide, including in East Asia. LDR brachytherapy has been performed in 88 institutes in Japan. Beneficial clinical outcomes of LDR brachytherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk PCa have been demonstrated in large clinical trials. These clinical outcomes were achieved through advances in methods, such as urological precise needle puncture and seed placement, and the quantitative decision making regarding radiological parameters by radiation oncologists. The combined use of LDR brachytherapy with other therapeutic modalities, such as external beam radiation and androgen deprivation therapy, for the clinical risk classification of PCa has led to better anticancer treatment efficacy. In this study, we summarized basic LDR brachytherapy findings that should remain unchanged and be passed down in urology departments. We also discussed the applications of LDR brachytherapy for PCa in various clinical settings, including focal and salvage therapies. In addition, we highlighted technologies associated with brachytherapy that are under development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manabu Kato
- Aichi Cancer Center, Urology, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; (S.T.); (G.K.); (H.T.); (T.K.)
| | - Shinichiro Higashi
- Department of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu 514-0001, Japan; (S.H.); (Y.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.)
| | - Yusuke Sugino
- Department of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu 514-0001, Japan; (S.H.); (Y.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.)
| | - Shinya Kajiwara
- Department of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu 514-0001, Japan; (S.H.); (Y.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.)
| | - Shiori Tanaka
- Aichi Cancer Center, Urology, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; (S.T.); (G.K.); (H.T.); (T.K.)
| | - Goshi Kitano
- Aichi Cancer Center, Urology, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; (S.T.); (G.K.); (H.T.); (T.K.)
| | | | - Yuji Ogura
- Kuwana City Medical Center, Urology, Kuwana 511-0061, Japan;
| | - Hiroyuki Tachibana
- Aichi Cancer Center, Urology, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; (S.T.); (G.K.); (H.T.); (T.K.)
| | - Takahiro Kojima
- Aichi Cancer Center, Urology, Nagoya 464-8681, Japan; (S.T.); (G.K.); (H.T.); (T.K.)
| | - Takahiro Inoue
- Department of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu 514-0001, Japan; (S.H.); (Y.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.)
| |
Collapse
|