Trends in clinical and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy before and after the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against PSA screening: a decade of experience

The Short- and Long-Term Anticipation of Prostate Cancer Incidence in Korea: Based on Social Aging Trends and Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Rate during the Last Decade

The current incidence of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, which plays a crucial role in detecting prostate cancer (PCa) in an aged population, is low in Korea. Reflecting these epidemiologic characteristics, we estimated the short- and long-term incidences of PCa. A regression equation model was extracted based on two critical pieces of information: (1) the distribution of newly detected PCa cases in each age group of the 50s, 60s, 70s, and over 80s from a recent period (2006-2020), and (2) the PSA testing rate (PSAr) from the previous decade (2006-2016) for each age subgroup. The incidence increased fourfold (4533 in 2006 to 16,815 in 2020), with each age subgroup accounting for 7.9% (50s), 31.4% (60s), 43.0% (70s), and 17.1% (over 80s) of cases in 2020. PSAr increased by an average of 1.08% annually. If these trends are maintained, 28,822 new cases will be diagnosed in 2030 (expected PSAr: 14.4%) and 40,478 cases in 2040 (expected PSAr: 26.4%). If a public PSA screening were implemented for men only in their 60s (assuming a PSAr of 60% in the 60s) and 70s (assuming a PSAr of 80% in the 70s) in 2030, 37,503 cases in 2030 (expected PSAr: 23.1%) and 43,719 cases in 2040 (expected PSAr: 29.9%) would be estimated. According to the projection, the incidence of PCa will increase twofold by 2034 compared to 2020. If national screening were only conducted in the 60s and 70s, a higher detection of almost threefold would be expected by 2040.

Surgical Management and Considerations for Patients with Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Localized high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogenous disease state with a wide range of presentations and outcomes. Historically, non-surgical management with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy was the treatment option of choice. However, surgical resection with radical prostatectomy (RP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is increasingly utilized as a primary treatment modality for patients with HRPCa. Recent studies have demonstrated that surgery is an equivalent treatment option in select patients with the potential to avoid the side effects from androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy combined. Advances in imaging techniques and biomarkers have also improved staging and patient selection for surgical resection. Advances in robotic surgical technology grant surgeons various techniques to perform RP, even in patients with HR disease, which can reduce the morbidity of the procedure without sacrificing oncologic outcomes. Clinical trials are not only being performed to assess the safety and oncologic outcomes of these surgical techniques, but to also evaluate the role of surgical resection as a part of a multimodal treatment plan. Further research is needed to determine the ideal role of surgery to potentially provide a more personalized and tailored treatment plan for patients with localized HR PCa.

Comparison between intra- and postoperative outcomes of the da Vinci SP and da Vinci Xi robotic platforms in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

The new SP robot incorporates a single trocar that houses a flexible camera and three bi-articulated arms, which minimize the number of incisions needed to assess the surgical site, allowing for a less invasive procedure. To compare the postoperative pain scale and outcomes in patients with similar demographic characteristics undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with SP and Xi robots, One-hundred consecutive patients undergoing RARP with the SP robot were matched, using a propensity score (PS), with 100 patients from a cohort of 1757 who were operated on with the da Vinci Xi from June 2019 to January 2021. We described and compared the perioperative pain scores and outcomes of both groups. The SP group had less blood loss (50 cc vs. 62.5 cc, P < 0.001) and longer operative time (114 min. vs. 94 min, P < 0.001). The only period we could show a difference in postoperative pain scores was 6 h after surgery, with a small advantage for the SP (2 vs. 2.5, P < 0.001). Both groups had satisfactory postoperative continence recovery, 91% vs. 90% for the SP and Xi, respectively. The groups had a mean follow-up of 24.5 and 22 months for SP and Xi, respectively. The tumor stage and percentage of positive surgical margins were similar between groups (15% vs. 15%, P = 1). Patients undergoing RARP with the SP had longer operative times with less blood loss than the Xi. However, despite the lower number of abdominal incisions on the SP, the groups had similar intraoperative performance, and we were unable to demonstrate clinically significant differences in postoperative pain scores between the groups 6, 12, and 18 h after surgery.

Radical prostatectomy trends between 2010 and 2020 in Ehime, Japan, identified using data from the Medical Investigation Cancer Network (MICAN) study

OBJECTIVES

The use of radical prostatectomy is increasing with the rising incidence of prostate cancer. We assessed the surgical trends related to radical prostatectomy using data from a multi-center, retrospective cohort study, the MICAN (Medical Investigation Cancer Network) study, which was conducted in all the urology-related medical facilities in Ehime Prefecture, Japan.

METHODS

We compared data from the MICAN study with prostate biopsy registry data collected in Ehime between 2010 and 2020 and recorded the surgical trends.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in the mean age of patients with positive biopsies, and the positivity rate increased from 46.3% in 2010 to 60.5% in 2020, while the number of biopsies obtained decreased. The number of radical prostatectomies performed increased over the years, with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy becoming the predominant procedure. In 2020, robot-assisted radical prostatectomies accounted for 96.0% of the surgeries performed. The age at surgery also gradually increased. Of the registered patients aged ≤75 years, 40.5% underwent surgery in 2010, compared with 83.1% in 2020. The prevalence of surgery also increased from 4.6% to 29.8% in patients aged >75 years. There was a gradual increase in the proportion of high-risk cases, from 29.3% to 44.0%, but a decrease in that of low-risk cases, from 23.8% in 2010 to 11.4% in 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

We have shown that the number of radical prostatectomies performed in Ehime is increasing in patients aged both ≤75 and >75 years. The proportion of low-risk cases has decreased, while that of high-risk cases has increased.

Trends of stratified prostate cancer risk in a single Korean province from 2003 to 2021: A multicenter study conducted using regional training hospital data

PURPOSE

To identify changes in prostate cancer (PCa) risk-stratification during the last two decades in Korea, where the social perception of PCa was limited due to a relatively low incidence but has recently been triggered by the rapidly increasing incidence of benign prostate hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data of patients who had received a diagnosis of PCa in a single Korean province (Daegu-Gyeongsangbuk) at all seven training hospitals in the years 2003, 2007, 2011, 2015, 2019, and 2021 were subjected to analysis. Changes in PCa risk-stratification were investigated with respect to serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score (GS), and clinical stage.

RESULTS

Of the 3,393 study subjects that received a diagnosis of PCa, 64.1% had high-risk disease, 23.0% intermediate, and 12.9% low-risk disease. The proportion diagnosed with high-risk disease was 54.8% in 2003, 30.6% in 2019, but then increased to 35.1% in 2021. The proportion of patients with high PSA (>20 ng/mL) steadily decreased from 59.4% in 2003 to 29.6% in 2021, whereas the proportion with a high GS (>8) increased from 32.8% in 2011 to 34.0% in 2021, and the proportion with advanced stage disease (over cT2c) increased from 26.5% in 2011 to 37.1% in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study, conducted in a single Korean province, high-risk PCa accounted for the largest proportion of newly registered Korean PCa patients during the last two decades and increased in the early 2020s. This outcome supports the adoption of nationwide PSA screening, regardless of current Western guidelines.

Effects of the 2012 and 2018 US preventive services task force prostate cancer screening guidelines on pathologic outcomes after prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

In May 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prostate cancer (PCa) screening for ages 55-69 be an individual decision. This changed from the USPSTF's May 2012 recommendation against screening for all ages. The effects of the 2012 and 2018 updates on pathologic outcomes after prostatectomy are unclear.

METHODS

This study included 647 patients with PCa who underwent prostatectomy at our institution from 2005 to 2018. Patient groups were those diagnosed before the 2012 update (n = 179), between 2012 and 2018 updates (n = 417), and after the 2018 update (n = 51). We analyzed changes in the age of diagnosis, pathologic Gleason grade group (pGS), pathologic stage, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and favorable/unfavorable pathology. Multivariable logistic regression adjusting for pre-biopsy covariables (age, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], African American race, family history) assessed impacts of 2012 and 2018 updates on pGS and pathologic stage. A p  < 0.05 was statistically significant.

RESULTS

Median age increased from 60 to 63 (p = 0.001) between 2012 and 2018 updates and to 64 after the 2018 update. A significant decrease in pGS1, pGS2, pT2, and favorable pathology (p < 0.001), and a significant increase in pGS3, pGS4, pGS5, pT3a, and unfavorable pathology (p < 0.001) was detected between 2012 and 2018 updates. There was no significant change in pT3b or LVI between 2012 and 2018 updates. On multivariable regression, diagnosis between 2012 and 2018 updates was significantly associated with pGS4 or pGS5 and pT3a (p < 0.001). Diagnosis after the 2018 update was significantly associated with pT3a (p = 0.005). Odds of pGS4 or pGS5 were 3.2× higher (p < 0.001) if diagnosed between 2012 and 2018 updates, and 2.3× higher (p = 0.051) if after the 2018 update. Odds of pT3a were 2.4× higher (p < 0.001) if diagnosed between 2012 and 2018 updates and 2.9× higher (p = 0.005) if after the 2018 update.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2012 USPSTF guidelines negatively impacted pathologic outcomes after prostatectomy. Patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2018 updates had increased frequency of higher-risk PCa and lower frequency of favorable disease. In addition, data after the 2018 update demonstrate a continued negative impact on postprostatectomy pathology. Thus, further investigation of the long-term effects of the 2018 USPSTF update is warranted.

Neurovascular bundle preservation in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: How I do it after 15.000 cases

Despite the neuroanatomy knowledge of the prostate described initially in the 1980's and the robotic surgery advantages in terms of operative view magnification, potency outcomes following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy still challenge surgeons and patients due to its multifactorial etiology. Recent studies performed in our center have described that, in addition to the surgical technique, some important factors are associated with erectile dysfunction (ED) following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). These include preoperative Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) score, age, preoperative Gleason score, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). After performing 15,000 cases, in this article we described our current Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy technique with details and considerations regarding the optimal approach to neurovascular bundle preservation.

Stratification of Potency Outcomes Following Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Based on Age, Preoperative Potency, and Nerve Sparing

Introduction: To identify factors affecting potency and to predict ideal patient subgroups who will have the highest chance of being potent after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) based on nerve sparing (NS). Materials and Methods: Analysis of 7268 patients who underwent RALP between 2008 and 2018 with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up was performed. The patients were then categorized into four separate neurovascular bundle-sparing groups (NVB 1-4). A Cox regression analysis was used to determine the independent factors predicting potency outcomes. Cumulative incidence functions were used to depict the probability and time to potency between the NS groups stratified by age and preoperative sexual health inventory in men (SHIM). Results: Cox regression analysis of age, preoperative SHIM score, and grades of NS significantly predicted potency outcomes post-RALP. Patients with SHIM score ≥22 had a better chance of potency vs patients with SHIM <17 (odds ratio [OR]: 1.69, confidence interval [CI]: 1.47-1.79). NVB1 had better potency vs NVB4 (OR: 3.1, CI: 2.51-3.83). Patients <55 years with NVB1 and no preoperative erectile dysfunction had the best potency rates of 92.5%. However, we did not see any statistical difference between NVB2 and NVB3 in this group, implying that in patient groups with SHIM ≥22 and age <55, NVB1 provided the best chance of potency recovery. As age increased and preoperative SHIM worsened, the curves corresponding to NVB 2 and 3 showed significant differences, suggesting that NVB 2 and 3 may be predictive in unfavorable age and preoperative SHIM groups, especially NVB 2 > NVB 3. Conclusions: Preoperative SHIM, age, and NS are the most influential factors for potency recovery following RALP. Patients with good baseline sexual function had similar postoperative potency, irrespective of their grades of partial NS. In patients with decreased baseline SHIM and older age, a higher grade of partial NS resulted in a significantly better potency compared with a lower grade of partial nerve spare.

COVID-19 model-based practice changes in managing a large prostate cancer practice: following the trends during a month-long ordeal

Coronavirus (COVID-19) has been a life-changing experience for both individuals and institutions. We describe changes in our practice based on real-time assessment of various national and international trends of COVID-19 and its effectiveness in the management of our resources. Initial risk assessment and peak resource requirement using the COVID-19 Hospital Impact Model for Epidemics (CHIME) and McKinsey models. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of our practice's approach during the pandemic. Based on CHIME the community followed 60% social distancing, the number of expected new patients hospitalized at maximum surge would be 401, with 100 patients requiring ventilator support. In contrast, when the community followed 15% social distancing, the maximum surge of hospitalized new patients would be 1823 and 455 patients would require a ventilator. on April 15, the expected May requirement of ICU beds at peak would be 68, with 61 patients needing ventilators. The estimated surge numbers improved throughout April, and on April 22 the expected ICU bed peak in May would be 11.7, and those requiring ventilator would be 10.5. Simultaneously, within a month, our surgical waitlist grew from 585 to over 723 patients. Our SWOT analysis revealed our internal strengths and inherent weakness, relevant to the pandemic. A graded and a guarded response to this type of situation is crucial in managing patients in a large practice.

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with preceptor's assistance: the training experience and outcomes in South America

Prostate cancer is currently the second leading cause of cancer deaths in Brazilian men. In 2020, sixty-five thousand new prostate cancer cases were expected in Brazil, and almost 30% of these patients are estimated to be from the northeast region. However, from 75 robotic platforms available in the country, only one is accessible in the state of Ceará since 2015. This study reports the intraoperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer performed by robotic surgeons during a training period supervised by a proctor. We also compared these results with the literature reporting the experience of different Brazilian centers. We retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data of 58 initial cases of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy at a private Brazilian hospital in Fortaleza, Ceará. The surgeries were performed by two robotic surgeons during the training period under proctor supervision. We reported the epidemiological and intraoperative data, complications, pathological report, functional and oncological outcomes. The median operative time was 180 min. None of the patients needed conversion or blood transfusion. The pathology report described 21.81% of positive surgical margins (16.27% of all pT2 and 45.45% of all pT3 patients). The median follow-up was 40 months. Biochemical recurrence occurred in 21.73%, continence in 92%, and potency in 79.54%. No major complications (Clavien grades III-V) were reported. In our experience, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy performed by surgeons training with proctor's assistance is feasible and safe. The operative time, complication rates, functional and oncological outcomes were satisfactory and compatible with the literature.

Association Between Oncotype DX Genomic Prostate Score and Adverse Tumor Pathology After Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

The Oncotype DX assay is a clinically validated 17-gene genomic assay that provides a genomic prostate score (GPS; scale 0-100) measuring the heterogeneous nature of prostate tumors. The test is performed on prostate tissue collected during biopsy. There is a lack of data on the association between the GPS and tumor pathology after radical prostatectomy (RP).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between GPS and final pathology, including extraprostatic extension (EPE), positive surgical margin (PSM), and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Data for the 749 patients who underwent Oncotype DX assay and RP at a referral prostate cancer center between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively assessed to evaluate the association between GPS and unfavorable pathology parameters.

INTERVENTION

After a GPS genetic test, patients underwent robotic RP performed by the same surgeon.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association between GPS and EPE, PSM, and SVI. The models were adjusted for age, clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, and time between the genomic assay and surgery. The median time between Oncotype DX assay and surgery was 176 d (interquartile range [IQR] 141-226). The median age was 63 yr (IQR 58-68), median GPS was 29 (IQR 21-39), and median PSA was 5.7 ng/ml (IQR 4.6-7.7). In multivariable analyses assessing the odds ratio (OR) per 20-point change in GPS, GPS was an independent predictor of EPE (OR 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-2.3) and SVI (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4). In addition, when patients were grouped by GPS quartile, the percentage of cases with EPE and SVI increased with the GPS quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide evidence that the Oncotype DX GPS is significantly associated with adverse pathology after RP. Specifically, the risk of EPE and SVI increases with the GPS. Therefore, use of the Oncotype DX GPS may help clinicians to improve preoperative patient counseling and develop surgical strategies for patients with a higher chance of EPE or unfavorable pathological features.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We studied whether the score for a prostate genetic test was associated with prostate cancer pathology findings for patients who had their prostate removed. We found that the risk of prostate cancer spread outside the gland and to the seminal vesicle increases with higher test scores. These findings may help surgeons in counseling patients on surgical options for prostate cancer.

Managing Patients with Prostate Cancer During COVID-19 Pandemic: The Experience of a High-Volume Robotic Surgery Center

Objectives: To report our experience and lessons learned as high-volume center of robotic surgery managing patients with prostate cancer since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in our center. Materials and Methods: We described some critical changes in our routine to minimize the COVID infection among patients and health care workers. From March 1 to May 25, 2020, we described our actions and surgical outcomes of patients treated in our center during the pandemic. Results: Preventing hospital visits, we implemented some modifications in our office routine in terms of patient appointment, follow-up, and management of nonsurgical candidates. In this period, 147 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) without intraoperative complications. The median operative time and blood loss were 91 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] = 25) and 50 mL (IQR = 50), respectively. The median hospitalization time was 15.8 hours (IQR = 2.5). None of the patients of our study had COVID in the postoperative follow-up, and only two patients were rescheduled due to a positive rapid COVID test 1 day before surgery. The final pathology described 10 patients (6.8%) Grade Group (GrGp) 1, 34 (23.1%) GrGp 2, 31 (21%) GrGp 3, 16 (10.8%) GrGp 4, 37 (25.3%) GrGp 5, and 19 (13%) with deferred Gleason. Two patients, COVID negative, were readmitted due to infected lymphocele managed with antibiotic and Interventional Radiology drainage. Conclusion: Our experience managing patients with prostate cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that changing the office routine, stratifying the patients according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk, and adopting COVID-based criteria to select patients for surgery are necessary actions to maintain the best quality of treatment and minimize the viral infection among our oncological patients. In our routine, the RARP during the COVID pandemic is safe and feasible for patients and health care workers if the necessary precautions described in this article are taken.