1
|
Marra G, Calleris G, Conte F, Benfant N, Rajwa P, Ahmed M, Abreu A, Cacciamani G, Smith JA, Joniau S, Rodriguez-Sanchez L, Sanchez-Salas R, Cathcart P, Gill I, Karnes RJ, Tilki D, Shariat SF, Touijer K, Gontero P. Recurrent Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer After Radiotherapy or Ablation: Should We Observe Them All? Results from a Large Multicenter Salvage Radical Prostatectomy Consortium. Eur Urol Focus 2023:S2405-4569(23)00194-3. [PMID: 37704503 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.08.007] [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: 05/14/2023] [Revised: 08/10/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) yields poor functional outcomes and relatively high complication rates. Gleason score (GS) 6 prostate cancer (PCa) has genetic and clinical features showing little, if not absent, metastatic potential. However, the behavior of GS 6 PCa recurring after previous PCa treatment including radiotherapy and/or ablation has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the oncological outcomes of sRP for radio- and/or ablation-recurrent GS 6 PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective data of sRP for recurrent PCa after local nonsurgical treatment were collected from 14 tertiary referral centers from 2000 to 2021. INTERVENTION Prostate biopsy before sRP and sRP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS A survival analysis was performed for pre-sRP biopsy and sRP-proven GS 6. Concordance between PCa at pre-sRP biopsy and sRP histology was assessed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS We included GS 6 recurrent PCa at pre-sRP biopsy (n = 142) and at sRP (n = 50), as two cohorts. The majority had primary radiotherapy and/or brachytherapy (83.8% of GS 6 patients at pre-sRP biopsy; 78% of GS 6 patients at sRP) and whole-gland treatments (91% biopsy; 85.1% sRP). Biopsy GS 6 10-yr metastasis, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were 79% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61-89%), 98% (95-99%), and 89% (78-95%), respectively. Upgrading at sRP was 69%, 35.5% had a pT3 stage, and 13.4% had positive nodes. The sRP GS 6 10-yr metastasis-free survival, CSS, and OS were 100%, 100%, and 90% (95% CI 58-98%) respectively; pT3 and pN1 disease were found in 12% and 0%, respectively. Overall complications, high-grade complications, and severe incontinence were experienced by >50%, >10%, and >15% of men, respectively (in both the biopsy and the sRP cohorts). Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and absence of a centralized pathological review. CONCLUSIONS GS 6 sRP-proven PCa recurring after nonsurgical primary treatment has almost no metastatic potential, while patients experience relevant morbidity of the procedure. However, a significant proportion of GS 6 cases at pre-sRP biopsy are upgraded at sRP. In the idea not to overtreat, efforts should be made to improve the diagnostic accuracy of pre-sRP biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY We investigated the oncological results of salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer of Gleason score (GS) 6 category. We found a very low malignant potential of GS 6 confirmed at salvage radical prostatectomy despite surgical complications being relatively high. Nonetheless, biopsy GS 6 was frequently upgraded and had less optimal oncological control. Overtreatment for recurrent GS 6 after nonsurgical first-line treatment should be avoided, and efforts should be made to increase the diagnostic accuracy of biopsies for recurrent disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giancarlo Marra
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Urology Clinic, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Giorgio Calleris
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Urology Clinic, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy.
| | - Francesca Conte
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Urology Clinic, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| | - Nicole Benfant
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mohamed Ahmed
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Andre Abreu
- USC Institute of Urology & The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Giovanni Cacciamani
- USC Institute of Urology & The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Joseph A Smith
- Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lara Rodriguez-Sanchez
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | - Rafael Sanchez-Salas
- Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | | | - Inderbir Gill
- USC Institute of Urology & The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - 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
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA; Research Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Iranian EBM Center: A Joanna Briggs Institute Center of Excellence, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Karim Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Urology Clinic, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rajwa P, Pfister D, Rieger C, Heidenreich J, Drzezga A, Persigehl T, Shariat SF, Heidenreich A. Importance of magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients treated with salvage radical prostatectomy for radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Prostate 2023; 83:385-391. [PMID: 36564936 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24470] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Revised: 11/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Accurate staging and identification of optimal candidates for local salvage therapy, such as salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP), is necessary to ensure optimal care in patients with radiorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to analyze performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for predicting pathologic nonorgan confined disease (pT3) and lymph node involvement (pN+) in patients treated with SRP for radiorecurrent PCa. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the institutional database to identify patients who underwent MRI or 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT before SRP for radiorecurrent PCa. The diagnostic estimates of MRI and PSMA-PET/CT for pT3 and pN+, were calculated. RESULTS We identified 113 patients with radiorecurrent PCa who underwent preoperative MRI followed by SRP; 53 had preoperative 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT. For the detection of pT3 disease, the overall accuracy of MRI was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61-78), sensitivity 40% (95% CI 26-55) and specificity 94% (95% CI 85-98); PSMA-PET/CT had slightly higher accuracy of 77% (95% CI 64-88), and higher sensitivity of 90% (95% CI 68-99), but lower specificity of 70% (95% CI 51-84). For pN+ disease, MRI had poor sensitivity of 14% (95% CI 3-36), specificity of 50 (95% CI 39-61) and total accuracy of 43% (95% CI 34-53); PSMA-PET/CT had an accuracy of 85% (95% CI 72-93), sensitivity of 27% (95% CI 6-61), and specificity of 100% (95% CI 92-100). CONCLUSION In patients with radiorecurrent PCa, both, MRI, and 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT are valuable tools for the pre-SRP staging and should be integrated into the standard workup. For lymph node metastases, 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT is a strong rule-in test with nearly perfect specificity; in contrast MRI had a low accuracy for lymph node metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| | - David Pfister
- Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Constantin Rieger
- Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Julian Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Alexander Drzezga
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Thorsten Persigehl
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Axel Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
David J, Luu M, Lu D, Zumsteg ZS, Sandler H, Kamrava M. Outcomes with brachytherapy based dose escalation for gleason 8 versus 9-10 prostate cancer: An NCDB analysis. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:829.e19-829.e26. [PMID: 34049784 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.04.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2020] [Revised: 03/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/11/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The addition of brachytherapy (BT) in high risk prostate cancer is supported by Level 1 evidence. Whether all high risk patients benefit from BT to the same extent is unknown. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to investigate overall survival (OS) differences between GS 8 and 9-10 treated with external beam radiation (EBRT) only or BT +/- EBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS We included localized prostate adenocarcinoma definitively treated with radiation between 2004-2014. Patients were stratified into various radiation treatment groups: EBRT 7560 - 8640 cGy, EBRT 5940 - 7540 cGy, and BT +/- EBRT. All EBRT only and BT +/- EBRT patients received ADT. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess OS. Propensity score matching was used to account for differences between groups. Median survival was determined based on Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS 30,698 patients were included. On multivariable analysis among GS 8 patients, BT was associated with improved OS compared to 7560 - 8640 cGy (HR-0.80 (95% CI 0.70-0.92, P = 0.002). In Gleason 9-10 BT did not result in improved OS compared to 7560 - 8640 cGy (HR- 0.91 (95% CI 0.79 - 1.05, P = 0.212). Results remained significant with propensity score matching and removing patients with medical comorbidities. CONCLUSION BT was associated with improved OS when compared to 7560 - 8640 cGy in GS 8, but not in Gleason 9-10 disease. This hypothesis generating study suggests there may be variable benefit with BT in high risk prostate cancer patients on OS. Future prospective studies are needed to investigate whether the benefit of BT is similar across all high risk prostate cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John David
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Michael Luu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8687 Melrose Ave Suite G-593, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Diana Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Zachary S Zumsteg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Howard Sandler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Mitchell Kamrava
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Sinai Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd AC 1031, Los Angeles, CA.
| |
Collapse
|