Long-Term Oncological Outcomes for Young Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Aquaporins as Prognostic Biomarker in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is a complex heterogeneous disease that affects millions of males worldwide. Despite rapid advances in molecular biology and innovation in technology, few biomarkers have been forthcoming in prostate cancer. The currently available biomarkers for the prognosis of prostate cancer are inadequate and face challenges, thus having limited clinical utility. To date, there are a number of prognostic and predictive biomarkers identified for prostate cancer but lack specificity and sensitivity to guide clinical decision making. There is still tremendous scope for specific biomarkers to understand the natural history and complex biology of this heterogeneous disease, and to identify early treatment responses. Accumulative studies indicate that aquaporins (AQPs) a family of membrane water channels may serve as a prognostic biomarker for prostate cancer in monitoring disease advancement. In the present review, we discuss the existing prostate cancer biomarkers, their limitations, and aquaporins as a prospective biomarker of prognostic significance in prostate cancer.

Comparison of histopathological features, survival, and oncological outcome between patients under and above 55-year-old with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy

Background:

To compare the disease course, histopathological features and survival rates of prostate cancer (PCa) between patients aged ⩽ 55 and > 55 year old.

Materials and methods:

In this retrospective study, we enrolled 644 patients with organ-confide prostate cancer who had undergone radical prostatectomy from 2005 to 2018. Seventy-six (11.8%) patients were under 55 years of age (group 1) and 568 (88.2%) patients were >55 years old (group 2).

Results:

Pre-operative hypertension was detected in 4 (5.3%) patients of group 1 and 80 (14.1%) patients of groups 2 ( p = 0.029). The mean (±SD) prostate volume was higher in group 2 compared with group 1 (34.1(±8.4) ml vs 54.1(±9.9) ml, p < 0.001). Positive surgery margin was observed in 15 (19.7%) and 58 (10.2%) patients in group 1 and 2, respectively ( p = 0.020). Co-existence of diabetes mellitus, mean pre-operative PSA, Gleason’s score, and permanent pathology and pathologic stage were similar between the two groups. Log-rank test failed to show any statistical difference in terms of biochemical-relapse free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and metastasis-free survival between the two groups ( p = 0.316, 0.441, 0.654, respectively). After performing multivariate analysis, positive surgical margin was the only factor that was independently predictive of biochemical relapse ( p < 0.001) and local recurrence/metastasis ( p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

No difference was observed in terms of histopathologic features, biochemical relapse, and local recurrence/metastasis-free survival rates between patients younger and older than 55 years of age.

Current Mental Distress Among Men With a History of Radical Prostatectomy and Related Adverse Correlates

Recent reviews and observational studies have reported that patients with prostate cancer (PCa) are at increased risk of mental health issues, which in turn negatively affects oncological outcomes. Here, we examine possible explanatory variables of mental distress in a population-based cohort of men who have undergone radical prostatectomy (RP). Data were derived from a Maritimes-Canada online survey assessing patient-reported quality of life outcomes between 2017 and 2019 administered to 136 men (47–88 years old, currently in a relationship) who have undergone RP for their PCa diagnosis. The primary outcome was a validated assessment of mental distress, the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Urinary function was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score, and relationship satisfaction was assessed using the Dyadic Assessment Scale. A multivariate logistic regression assessed the contribution of urinary function, relationship satisfaction, age, multimorbidity, additional treatments, medication for depression and/or anxiety, and survivorship time. A total of 16.2% men in this sample screened positive for mental distress. The severity of urinary problems was positively associated with increased mental distress (OR = 4.79, 95% CI [1.04, 22.03]), while increased age (OR = 0.87, 95% CI [0.78, 0.97]), relationship satisfaction (OR = 0.14, 95% CI [0.3, .077]), and current medication for anxiety, depression, or both (OR = 0.09, 95% CI [0.02, 0.62]) were protective factors. Survivorship time, the presence of additional comorbidities, or PCa treatments were not identified to be statistically significant contributions to the fitted model. Here, we report that RP survivors are prone to presenting with increased mental distress long after treatment. Screening for mental distress during RP survivorship is recommended.

Significance of Time Until PSA Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy Without Neo- or Adjuvant Treatment to Clinical Progression and Cancer-Related Death in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients

Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of time until biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) without neo- or adjuvant treatment on clinical progression (CP) and cancer-related death (CRD) in high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) patients. Materials and methods: A total of 433 men with clinically HRPCa treated between 2001 and 2017 were identified. HRPCa was defined as clinical stage ≥T2c and/or biopsy Gleason score (GS) ≥8 and/or preoperative prostate specific antigen (PSA) value ≥20 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria were neo- or adjuvant treatment and incomplete pathological or follow-up data. BCR was defined as two consecutive PSA values ≥0.2 ng/ml after RP. CP was identified as skeletal lesions, local or loco-regional recurrence. CRD was defined as death from PCa. All men were divided into two groups according to BCR. The chi-square and t-tests were used to compare baseline characteristics between groups. Biochemical progression free survival (BPFS), clinical progression free survival (CPFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Patients with detected BCR were analyzed for prediction of CP and CRD with respect to time until BCR. The impact of baseline parameters on BCR, CP, and CRD was assessed by Cox regression analysis. Results: BCR, CP, and CRD rates were 47.8% (207/433), 11.3% (49/433), and 5.5% (24/433), respectively. Median (quartiles) time of follow-up after RP was 64 (40-110) months. Ten-year BPFS rate was 34.2%; CPFS, 81%; and CSS, 90.1%. Men with detected BCR were analyzed for prediction of CP and CRD with respect to time until BCR. The most informative cutoff for time from RP until CP and CRD was ≤ 1 year (p < 0.008). According to this cutoff, men were divided into two groups: BCR detected within 1 year and after a 1-year period. Ten-year CPFS was 49.8% in men with early BCR vs. 81.1% in men with late BCR; CSS was 70.9 vs. 92.8% (p = 0.001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that time until BCR within 1 year predicts CP (p = 0.005) and CRD (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Early BCR is associated with poorer oncological outcomes. The presented results may help both to improve follow-up strategy and opt for more aggressive multimodal treatment of HRPCa in men with very early BCR.

Pathological Characteristics of Prostate Cancer Occurring in Younger Men: A Retrospective Study of Prostatectomy Patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine if differences exist in the pathological characteristics of prostate cancer occurring in younger men as compared to the disease when it occurs in older men.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on prostatectomy specimens from the prostate cancer database of a single large Australian pathology practice which services a large proportion of hospitals within 1 state. Data were extracted regarding the pathological characteristics of the cancers and a univariate analysis was conducted against 2 age cutoffs.

RESULTS

Data were extracted for all prostatectomy specimens between 2011 and 2017 in 11,551 men. One hundred and thirty-two men were 45 years old and younger, and 545 were 50 years old and younger. Statistically significant differences were found in a number of pathological characteristics. Younger men had lower grade group disease, and within that had less adverse pathological characteristics. In particular, even after controlling for confounding in men 45 and younger, in Grade Group 2 disease there was a lower risk of extra prostatic extension (17.5% vs 34.4%, P = .003), and lymph node involvement (0% vs 0.8%, P = .006), with trends toward superiority in other domains.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that prostate cancer in younger men tends to be lower grade and stage disease compared to older men. This is in contrast to persistent views within the urological community and may have an impact on disease management in younger men.

Age and aggressiveness of prostate cancer: analysis of clinical and pathological characteristics after radical prostatectomy for men with localized prostate cancer

Introduction

The aim of this study was to describe age- related prostate cancer (PCa) characteristics in men after radical prostatectomy (RP).

Material and methods

There were 2,373 men who underwent RP for clinically localized PCa between 2002 and 2017 and had complete data that were included into the study. Among them, 315 (13.3%) men aged ≤55 years (GR-1), 1,098 (46.3%) men aged between 56 to 65 years (GR-2) and 960 (40.4%) men aged older than 65 years (GR-3) were identified. All preoperative and pathological parameters were compared between all three groups and between each group separately. High-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) cases were analyzed separately. Regression analysis was used to evaluate the impact of age on cancer aggressiveness.

Result

Clinical stage (cT), biopsy Gleason score and D'Amico risk groups were different comparing age-related study groups (all p <0.01), respectively. Preoperatively cT1 and Gleason 6 were in the highest rate for GR-1 in comparison with GR-3: 35.9 vs. 27.1%, p = 0.003 and 65.1% vs. 56.7%, p = 0.008, respectively. Analyzing pathological parameters, only Gleason 9–10 was different between GR-1 and GR-3–3.8 vs. 7.6%, p = 0.02. There were 921 (38.8%) HRPCa cases identified. Age was a significant predictor for HRPCa (p = 0.019) in the regression analysis. The oldest men (GR-3) had up to 1.5 fold increased risk for HRPCa detection in comparison with the youngest one (p = 0.008, HR1.44. 95% CI 1.098–1.87).

Conclusions

Younger, ≤55-year-old men, are more likely to present with less aggressive clinical and pathological PCa features in comparison with the older ones. Increasing age has a significant influence on HRPCa detection after RP.

Comparative toxicity outcomes of proton-beam therapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the postoperative setting

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing utilization of proton-beam therapy (PBT) in the postprostatectomy setting, no data exist regarding toxicity outcomes relative to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The authors compared acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity outcomes in patients with prostate cancer (PC) who received treatment with postprostatectomy IMRT versus PBT.

METHODS

With institutional review board approval, patients with PC who received adjuvant or salvage IMRT or PBT (70.2 gray with an endorectal balloon) after prostatectomy from 2009 through 2017 were reviewed. Factors including combined IMRT and PBT and/or concurrent malignancies prompted exclusion. A case-matched cohort analysis was performed using nearest-neighbor 3-to-1 matching by age and GU/GI disorder history. Logistic and Cox regressions were used to identify univariate and multivariate associations between toxicities and cohort/dosimetric characteristics. Toxicity-free survival (TFS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Three hundred seven men (mean ± SD age, 59.7 ± 6.3 years; IMRT, n = 237; PBT, n = 70) were identified, generating 70 matched pairs. The median follow-up was 48.6 and 46.1 months for the IMRT and PBT groups, respectively. Although PBT was superior at reducing low-range (volumes receiving 10% to 40% of the dose, respectively) bladder and rectal doses (all P ≤ .01), treatment modality was not associated with differences in clinician-reported acute or late GU/GI toxicities (all P ≥ .05). Five-year grade ≥2 GU and grade ≥1 GI TFS was 61.1% and 73.7% for IMRT, respectively, and 70.7% and 75.3% for PBT, respectively; and 5-year grade ≥3 GU and GI TFS was >95% for both groups (all P ≥ .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Postprostatectomy PBT minimized low-range bladder and rectal doses relative to IMRT; however, treatment modality was not associated with clinician-reported GU/GI toxicities. Future prospective investigation and ongoing follow-up will determine whether dosimetric differences between IMRT and PBT confer clinically meaningful differences in long-term outcomes.

Markers of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition reflect tumor biology according to patient age and Gleason score in prostate cancer

Introduction

Prostate carcinoma (PRAD) is one of the most frequently diagnosed malignancies amongst men worldwide. It is well-known that androgen receptor (AR) plays a pivotal role in a vast majority of prostate tumors. However, recent evidence emerged stating that estrogen receptors (ERs) may also contribute to prostate tumor development. Moreover, progression and aggressiveness of prostate cancer may be associated with differential expression genes of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Therefore we aimed to assess the significance of receptors status as well as EMT marker genes expression among PRAD patients in accordance to their age and Gleason score.

Materials and methods

We analyzed TCGA gene expression profiles of 497 prostate tumor samples according to 43 genes involved in EMT and 3 hormone receptor genes (AR, ESR1, ESR2) as well as clinical characteristic of cancer patients. Then patients were divided into four groups according to their age and 5 groups according to Gleason score. Next, we evaluated PRAD samples according to relationship between the set of variables in different combinations and compared differential expression in subsequent groups of patients. The analysis was applied using R packages: FactoMineR, gplots, RColorBrewer and NMF.

Results

MFA analysis resulted in distinct grouping of PRAD patients into four age categories according to expression level of AR, ESR1 and ESR2 with the most distinct group of age less than 50 years old. Further investigations indicated opposite expression profiles of EMT markers between different age groups as well as strong association of EMT gene expression with Gleason score. We found that depending on age of prostate cancer patients and Gleason score EMT genes with distinctly altered expression are: KRT18, KRT19, MUC1 and COL4A1, CTNNB1, SNAI2, ZEB1 and MMP3.

Conclusions

Our major observation is that prostate cancer from patients under 50 years old compared to older ones has entirely different EMT gene expression profiles showing potentially more aggressive invasive phenotype, despite Gleason score classification.