The efficacy and safety of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anorectal function and symptoms 6 months after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-center study

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) is a common procedure for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Anorectal symptoms such as fecal incontinence (FI), rectal urgency or disturbed defecation have been reported after the operation. Anorectal function is dependent on the integrity of anal and pelvic nerves and muscles, rectal sensory function as well as rectal reservoir function. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential influence of RALP on anorectal physiological function and bowel symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this pilot study, 29 patients with localised prostate cancer scheduled for RALP were included. Anorectal physiology was used to measure rectal sensitivity and reservoir function as well as anal sphincter pressures. Bowel symptoms were measured by a bowel function questionnaire and a 2-week bowel function diary. Measurements were done before the operation and repeated at 6 months after the operation.

RESULTS

The study observed a significant postoperative increase in rectal sensory threshold for rectal balloon distention, from 20 to 40 mmHg, P < 0.001. This change is indicative of a decrease in rectal sensation after RALP. There were no other statistical significant differences in any of the physiological tests performed. Importantly, there was no change in any of the bowel symptoms after surgery.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that RALP may lead to impaired rectal sensory function. This finding did not, however, seem to have any influence on the patients´ postoperative clinical bowel function.

Biochemical recurrence after chemohormonal therapy followed by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in very-high-risk prostate cancer patients

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become one of the standard radical treatments for prostate cancer (PCa). A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted on patients with PCa who underwent RARP at Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and September 2022. In this study, patients were classified into three groups based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification: low/intermediate-risk, high-risk, and very-high-risk groups. Patients with high- and very-high-risk PCa who were registered in the study received neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy prior to RARP. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) after RARP in patients with PCa was the primary endpoint of this study. The secondary endpoint was the relationship between biochemical recurrence (BCR) and clinical covariates. We enrolled 230 patients with PCa in our study, with a median follow-up of 17.0 months. When the time of follow-up was over, 19 patients (8.3%) had BCR, and the 2 years BRFS rate for the enrolled patients was 90.9%. Although there was no significant difference in BRFS between the low- and intermediate-risk group and the high/very-high-risk group, the 2 years BRFS rate was 100% in the high-risk group and 68.3% in the very-high-risk group (P = 0.0029). Multivariate analysis showed that positive surgical margins were a significant predictor of BCR in patients with PCa treated with RARP. Multimodal therapies may be necessary to improve the BCR in patients with very-high-risk PCa.

Identification of Early Biochemical Recurrence Predictors in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy and Androgen Deprivation Therapy

The aim of this retrospective study was to identify clinical predictors of early biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). A total of 670 high-risk PCa patients treated with CIRT and ADT were included in the study. Early BCR was defined as recurrence occurring during adjuvant ADT after CIRT or within 2 years after completion of ADT. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify clinical predictors of early BCR. Patients were also classified according to the Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate cancer (STAMPEDE) PCa classification. Early BCR was observed in 5.4% of the patients. Multivariate analysis identified clinical T3b stage and ≥75% positive biopsy cores as clinical predictors of early BCR after CIRT and ADT. The STAMPEDE PCa classification was also significantly associated with early BCR based on univariate analysis. These predictors can help clinicians identify patients who are at risk of early BCR. In the future, combination therapy of ADT with abiraterone may be an option for high-risk PCa patients who are at risk of early BCR, based on the results of the STAMPEDE study.

The Current Trend of Radiation Therapy for Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer

A recent approach to radiotherapy for prostate cancer is the administration of high doses of radiation to the prostate while minimizing the risk of side effects. Thus, image-guided radiotherapy utilizes advanced imaging techniques and is a feasible strategy for increasing the radiation dose. New radioactive particles are another approach to achieving high doses and safe procedures. Prostate brachytherapy is currently considered as a combination therapy. Spacers are useful to protect adjacent organs, specifically the rectum, from excessive radiation exposure.

Advances in high-risk localized prostate cancer: Staging and management

Nearly 15% of individuals with localized prostate cancer are identified as high risk for recurrence and progression of the disease, which is why the correct staging is vital for the definition of correct treatment-also developing novel therapeutic strategies to find a balance between getting better outcomes without sacrificing the quality of life (QoL). In this narrative review, we introduced the current standards of staging and primary treatment of high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa), based on international guidelines and arguments in the debate, under the light of the most recent literature. It brings essential tools such as PSMA PET/CT and different nomograms (Briganti. MSKCC, Gandaglia) for accurate staging and selecting wisely the definitive therapy. Even though there is a broad discussion over the best local treatment in curative-intent treatment, it looks more important to define which patient profile would adapt correctly to every different treatment, highlighting the benefits and superior outcomes with multimodal treatment.

A Personalized Clinical Dynamic Prediction Model to Characterize Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: Analysis of the CHHiP Phase 3 Trial

PURPOSE

The CHHiP trial assessed moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy in localized prostate cancer. We utilized longitudinal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements collected over time to evaluate and characterize patient prognosis.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We developed a clinical dynamic prediction joint model to predict the risk of biochemical or clinical recurrence. Modeling included repeated PSA values and adjusted for baseline prognostic risk factors of age, tumor characteristics, and treatment received. We included 3071 trial participants for model development using a mixed-effect submodel for the longitudinal PSAs and a time-to-event hazard submodel for predicting recurrence of prostate cancer. We evaluated how baseline prognostic factor subgroups affected the nonlinear PSA levels over time and quantified the association of PSA on time to recurrence. We assessed bootstrapped optimism-adjusted predictive performance on calibration and discrimination. Additionally, we performed comparative dynamic predictions on patients with contrasting prognostic factors and investigated PSA thresholds over landmark times to correlate with prognosis.

RESULTS

Patients who developed recurrence had generally higher baseline and overall PSA values during follow-up and had an exponentially rising PSA in the 2 years before recurrence. Additionally, most baseline risk factors were significant in the mixed-effect and relative-risk submodels. PSA value and rate of change were predictive of recurrence. Predictive performance of the model was good across different prediction times over an 8-year period, with an overall mean area under the curve of 0.70, mean Brier score of 0.10, and mean integrated calibration index of 0.048; these were further improved for predictions after 5 years of accrued longitudinal posttreatment PSA assessments. PSA thresholds <0.23 ng/mL after 3 years were indicative of a minimal risk of recurrence by 8 years.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully developed a joint statistical model to predict prostate cancer recurrence, evaluating prognostic factors and longitudinal PSA. We showed dynamically updated PSA information can improve prognostication, which can be used to guide follow-up and treatment management options.

Radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy with androgen deprivation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

To summarize recent evidence in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functional and oncological outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP) compared to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number registry on 29 march 2021. Comparative studies, published since 2016, that reported on treatment with RP versus dose-escalated EBRT and ADT for high-risk non-metastatic PCa were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to appraise quality and risk of bias. A qualitative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies, all non-randomized, met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias assessment indicated low (n = 14) to moderate/high (n = 5) risk of bias. Only three studies reported functional outcomes and/or HRQoL using different measurement instruments and methods. A clinically meaningful difference in HRQoL was not observed. All studies reported oncological outcomes and survival was generally good (5-year survival rates > 90%). In the majority of studies, a statistically significant difference between both treatment groups was not observed, or only differences in biochemical recurrence-free survival were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence clearly demonstrating superiority in terms of oncological outcomes of either RP or EBRT combined with ADT is lacking. Studies reporting functional outcomes and HRQoL are very scarce and the magnitude of the effect of RP versus dose-escalated EBRT with ADT on HRQoL and functional outcomes remains largely unknown.

Comparison of chronic gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities between brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

125I BT is an effective radiotherapy for prostate cancer. However, comparison data of GI and GU toxicities between BT, BT + EBRT, and EBRT-alone patient groups is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To define the GI and GU toxicities in prostate cancer to prevent adverse events after treatment.

METHODS

We searched published studies in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases up to December 31, 2022. The endpoints were the RRs of GI and GU toxicities. Pooled data were assessed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fifteen eligible studies were included into this analysis. LDR-BT had significantly lower RRs than LDR-BT + EBRT for acute GI (2.13; 95% CI, 1.22-3.69; P= 0.007) and late GI toxicities (3.96; 95% CI, 1.23-12.70; P= 0.02). Moreover, EBRT had significantly higher RRs than LDR-BT for acute GU (2.32; 95% CI, 1.29-4.15; P= 0.005) and late GU toxicities (2.38; 95% CI, 1.27-4.44; P= 0.007). HDR-BT had significantly higher RRs for acute GU toxicities than LDR-BT alone (0.30; 95% CI, 0.23-0.40; P< 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

The results implied that BT with and without EBRT can result in both GI and GU toxicities in patients with prostate cancer, with LDR-BT leading to a poorer urinary function than EBRT.

Oncological and functional outcomes of high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer patients after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

This study investigated the oncological and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP) in high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred localized prostate cancer patients receiving RaRP from August 2015 to December 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. According to NCCN risk classification, patients were classified into two groups, below high-risk group, and high-risk/very high-risk group, to analyze continence outcome within postoperative year one and biochemical recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

The mean age of the cohort was 69.7 ± 7.4 years with a median follow-up of 26.4 (range 3.3-71.3) months. Among them, 53%, and 47% patients were below high-risk group, and high-risk/very high-risk group, respectively. The median biochemical recurrence-free survival of the entire cohort was 53.1 months. The high-risk/very high-risk group without adjuvant treatment had significantly worse biochemical recurrence-free survival than the high-risk/very high-risk group with adjuvant treatment (19.6 vs. 60.5 months, p = 0.029). Rates of postoperative stress urinary incontinence at 1 week, 1 month, and 12 months were 50.7%, 43.7%, and 8.5%, respectively. High-risk/very high-risk patients had significantly higher rates of stress urinary incontinence at postoperative week 1 (75.8% vs. 28.9%) and month 1 (63.6% vs. 26.3%) than the below high-risk group (both p < 0.01). Rates of stress urinary incontinence after RaRP did not differ between two groups from postoperative 3 months to 12 months. The factor of high-risk / very high-risk group was a predictor of immediate but not for long-term postoperative stress urinary incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving a combination of RaRP and adjuvant treatment had comparable biochemical recurrence-free survival to below high-risk prostate cancer patients. The high-risk/very high-risk factor impeded early but not long-term postoperative recovery of continence. RaRP can be considered a safe and feasible option for high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer patients.

The Evaluation of Survival Rate in Patients with Prostate Cancer by Bayesian Weibull Parametric Accelerated Failure-Time Model

Background

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent malignancy in men. This study was carried out to determine effective factors on the survival rate of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer in Kerman, Iran.

Methods

The present study was conducted as a retrospective cohort of 238 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer from 2011 to 2019 in Kerman, Iran. First, the demographic and clinical information of patients were collected. Then, the information on patient survival up to June 2019 was tracked, and their latest statuses of death or survival were recorded. Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Bayesian Weibull parametric accelerated failure-time model were used for data analysis. Data analysis was carried out by Stata and SAS.

Results

The mean age of patients in the diagnosis was 73.28±10.08 year. The patient's 1, 2, 3 and 5-years of overall survival rates were equal to 78.54%, 65.97%, 56.64% and 49.30, respectively. Patients under surgical therapy relatively held longer survival times compared to the rest of the therapies. Patients under chemotherapy had shorter survival times. Age at diagnosis, occupation, chemotherapy, surgery, education, and smoking variables significantly affected patients' survival (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Patients' survival duration increases if the disease is diagnosed at younger ages and its preliminary development stages. Smoking cessation is strongly recommended after diagnosis, as it is associated with a lower survival rate. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy surgery showed higher survival rates than radiotherapy, hormone ablation, or chemotherapy. Moreover, patients with higher education had more prolonged survival.

Treatment outcomes in high-risk prostate cancer: a single-centre experience

Aim: The aim of that study was to evaluate the treatment results of patients with high-risk prostate cancer who received image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy with curative intent. Material and Method: Patients who underwent curative radiotherapy (RT) for high-risk prostate cancer were evaluated retrospectively in our clinic from April 2010 to April 2021. Demographics, prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels, gleason score (GS), the TNM stage of the tumor, and the success of treatment and complications were noted. Results: Eighty-two patients were evaluated. The mean follow-up time was 39.1 months. The mean age was 71.2±6.2 (range 50-84 years) years. The mean PSA levels of the patients was 41.1±33.8, and the median was 27 ng/ml (range 8-129 ng/ml). The mean GS of the patients was 8.3±0.6, and the median was 8 (range 7-10). The mean overall survival (OS) rate was 75.6%; survival rates for 24 months and 36 months were 91.1% and 80.4% respectively. The progression-free survival (PFS) was found to be 62.8%. Moreover, the PFS time was found to be 66,6 months. Twenty-four months and 36 months PFS rates were 83.6% and 65.4%, respectively. Conclusion: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy is a safe and effective treatment modality for elderly patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

[High risk localized and locally advanced prostate cancer: Long-term oncological outcomes after prostatectomy]

INTRODUCTION

High risk localized and locally advanced forms are responsible for the vast majority of specific deaths from prostate cancer among non-metastatic diseases at diagnosis. No randomized study has yet been published to establish the best local treatment in terms of survival.

AIM

Conduct a large-volume cohort study with long-term follow-up to analyze specific and overall survival outcomes after surgery.

METHOD

A single-center retrospective study of all patients operated on for localized high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer was performed. Actuarial survival analyses and multivariate analyses were performed to discern predictive risk factors.

RESULTS

Five hundred patients were included. MRI stage was≥iT3a in 40.7% of cases and 50.2% of patients had a Gleason score≥8 on biopsy. The mean follow-up was 63.1 months. The overall, specific and biological recurrence-free survival were respectively 77.6%, 93.9% and 26.8% at 10 years. A PSA level≥20, a Gleason score on biopsy≥9 and a MRI stage≥iT3a were significantly associated with the 10-years biological recurrence risk.

CONCLUSION

This study shows very good long-term oncological results. In the absence of a randomized controlled trial, these results suggest the primary role of surgery in this indication and support the evolution of current practices. We pointed out very pejorative features that might help selection of the best candidates for surgical treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

External validation of the Candiolo nomogram for high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with carbon ion radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation therapy: a retrospective cohort study

The aim of this study was to reclassify high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with carbon-ion radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy using the Candiolo nomogram and evaluate usefulness to predict the following 10-year biochemical recurrence. Six hundred seventy-two high-risk prostate cancer patients were reclassified according to the Candiolo nomogram. The cumulative incidence curves for biochemical recurrence were compared by Gray’s test. Furthermore, five predictors of the Candiolo nomogram in our patients were evaluated by Fine and Gray regression hazards model. The higher the Candiolo risk, the worse the biochemical recurrence, especially in high- and very high-risk patients. Out of five predictors, age ≥70 years, cT3 stage, biopsy Gleason score ≥9 or the percentage of positive biopsy cores ≥50% had significant impacts on 10-year biochemical recurrence in our patients. The Candiolo nomogram can reclassify our high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with carbon-ion radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy and evaluate the biochemical recurrence preciously.

Effect of Clinical Parameters on Risk of Death from Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Background: The study aimed to assess predictors and to identify patients at increased risk of prostate-cancer-specific mortality (CSM) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: A total of 2421 men with localized and locally advanced PCa who underwent RP in 2001−2017 were included in the study. CSM predictors were assessed using multivariate competing risk analysis. Death from other causes was considered a competing event. Cumulative CSM and other-cause mortality (OCM) were calculated in various combinations of predictors. Results: During the median 8 years (interquartile range 4.4−11.7) follow-up, 56 (2.3%) of registered deaths were due to PCa. Cumulative 10 years CSM and OCM was 3.6% (95% CI 2.7−4.7) and 15.9% (95% CI 14.2−17.9), respectively. The strongest predictors of CSM were Grade Group 5 (GG5) (hazard ratio (HR) 19.9, p < 0.0001), lymph node invasion (HR 3.4, p = 0.001), stage pT3b-4 (HR 3.1, p = 0.009), and age (HR 1.1, p = 0.0007). In groups created regarding age, stage, and GG, cumulative 10 years CSM ranged from 0.4−84.9%, whereas OCM varied from 0−43.2%. Conclusions: CSM after RP is related to GGs, pathological stage, age, and combinations of these factors, whereas other-cause mortality is only associated with age. Created CSM and OCM plots can help clinicians identify patients with the most aggressive PCa who could benefit from more intensive or novel multimodal treatment strategies.

Creation and Psychometric Validation of the Sexual Minorities and Prostate Cancer Scale (SMACS) in Sexual Minority Patients-The Restore-2 Study

BACKGROUND

Existing measures of sexual functioning in prostate cancer survivors focus primarily on erectile function and do not adequately measure the experiences of sexual minority men.

AIM

To develop and psychometrically evaluate a new scale to measure sexual functioning among sexual minority men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Sexual minority prostate cancer patients (n = 401) completed an online battery of urinary and sexual functioning tests in 2019, including a new 37-item instrument about their sexual functioning post-treatment for prostate cancer.

OUTCOMES

We used confirmatory factor analysis to determine the construct validity of a new scale including five subscales: a four-factor model for all participants (n = 401) evaluated Sexual Satisfaction, Sexual Confidence, Frequency of Sexual Problems, and Urinary Incontinence in Sex. A single-factor model completed only by participants who had attempted or desired receptive anal sex (n = 255) was evaluated in the fifth subscale: Problematic Receptive Anal Sex. To evaluate criterion validity, we calculated the intercorrelations between each Sexual Minorities and Prostate Cancer Scale (SMACS) subscale and four related scales: the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-50 (EPIC), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate, the Brief Symptom Inventory-18, and the International Consultation on incontinence questionnaire. Cronbach's alphas were calculated to measure internal consistency (ie, reliability).

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.64 to 0.89. Loadings (0.479-0.926) and model fit indices were strong (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation: 0.085, Standardized root mean squared residual: 0.063, comparative fit index: 0.927, Tucker-Lewis Index: 0.907). For criterion validity, Sexual Satisfaction, Sexual Confidence, and Frequency of Sexual Problems were moderately correlated with EPIC function and bother scores (r = 0.50-0.72) and Urinary incontinence in sex correlated moderately with EPIC Urinary Function and International Consultation on incontinence questionnaire scores (0.45-0.56).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The SMACS can be used by clinicians and researchers to comprehensively measure sexual functioning in sexual minority men, in conjunction with existing scales.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

This new scale is validated in a large, geographically diverse cohort of sexual minority cancer survivors and fills an important gap in existing measures of sexual functioning. Limitations include a lack of a validation sample.

CONCLUSION

The SMACS is a valid and reliable new scale that measures sexual minority men's experience of urinary incontinence in sex, problematic receptive anal sex, and sexual distress. Polter EJ, Kohli N, Rosser BRS, et al. Creation and Psychometric Validation of the Sexual Minorities and Prostate Cancer Scale (SMACS) in Sexual Minority Patients-The Restore-2 Study. J Sex Med 2022;19:529-540.

Impact of prostate biopsy secondary pathology review on radiotherapy management

BACKGROUND

The Gleason scoring system is the most widely used method to assess prostate adenocarcinoma pathology however interobserver variability is significant. Gleason score, PSA level, and clinical stage comprise the NCCN risk stratification that guides treatment decision making. Given the importance of an accurate Gleason score and wide interobserver variability, referral centers routinely review outside pathology at the time of consultation. We sought to address the impact a secondary pathology review had on radiation therapy treatment recommendations in men with prostate cancer at our institution.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected patient data on 342 patients seen at our institution from January 2012 to December 2018. Clinicopathologic data were used to subdivide patients into risk groups and available treatment options per NCCN criteria. Cases reviewed by our genitourinary pathologist (GUP) were compared with reports from outside pathologists. Inter-rater reliability between pathologists was assessed with weighted Cohen's kappa statistic and agreement of treatment options was determined by McNemar's exact tests.

RESULTS

GUP scored more cores positive in 16.47% of cases on secondary review. Primary Gleason score was changed in 12.28% of patients and secondary score in 26.02% of cases. Total Gleason score was different in 29.24% of cases, 19.01% were downgraded and 10.23% upgraded. The weighted kappa statistic was 0.759 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.711, 0.807). 18.77% of patients were assigned to a different NCCN risk group following secondary review. The weighted kappa statistic comparing NCCN risk stratification was 0.802 (95% CI: 0.754, 0.850). Secondary review influenced radiation therapy recommendations pertaining to brachytherapy boost and androgen deprivation therapy in men with high risk disease (χ²  = 5.33, p = 0.0386; χ²  = 8.05, p = 0.0072, respectively). Kappa statistic was found to be highest when GUP assessed high-risk disease versus all other categories (κ = 0.823, 95% CI: 0.750, 0.895).

CONCLUSIONS

We found nearly one in five men (18.7%) was assigned a different NCCN risk group and thus offered potentially different treatment options after a secondary pathology review at our institution. Given the inherent nature of prostate cancer and lung disease-specific survival associated with modern therapies, our study demonstrates the importance of a secondary pathology review and its potential impact on radiation therapy recommendations.

Radiation therapy for prostate cancer: What's the best in 2021

Radiotherapy is highly involved in the management of prostate cancer. Its features and potential applications experienced a radical evolution over last decades, as they are associated to the continuous evolution of available technology and current oncological innovations. Some application of radiotherapy like brachytherapy have been recently enriched by innovative features and multidisciplinary dedications. In this report we aim to put some questions regarding the following issues regarding multiple aspects of modern application of radiation oncology: the current application of radiation oncology; the modern role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for both the management of primary lesions and for lymph-nodal recurrence; the management of the oligometastatic presentations; the role of brachytherapy; the aid played by the application of the organ at risk spacer (spacer OAR), fiducial markers, electromagnetic tracking systems and on-line Magnetic Resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT), and the role of the new opportunity represented by radiomic analysis.

Characterizing Surgical and Radiotherapy Outcomes in Non-metastatic High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background Identifying the optimal management of high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is an important public health concern, given the large burden of this disease. We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing PCa-specific mortality (CSM) among men diagnosed with high-risk non-metastatic PCa who were treated with primary radiotherapy (RT) and radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods Medline and Embase were searched for articles between January 1, 2005, and February 11, 2020. After title and abstract screening, two authors independently reviewed full-text articles for inclusion. Data were abstracted, and a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, involving a comprehensive list of confounding variables, was used to assess the risk of bias. Results Fifteen studies involving 131,392 patients were included. No difference in adjusted CSM in RT relative to RP was shown (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% confidence interval: 0.84, 1.25]). Increased CSM was found in a subgroup analysis comparing external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with RP (1.35 [1.10, 1.68]), whereas EBRT combined with brachytherapy (BT) versus RP showed lower CSM (0.68 [0.48, 0.95]). All studies demonstrated a high risk of bias as none fully adjusted for all confounding variables. Conclusion We found no difference in CSM between men diagnosed with non-metastatic high-risk PCa and treated with RP or RT; however, this is likely explained by increased CSM in men treated with EBRT and decreased CSM in men treated with EBRT + BT studies relative to RP. High risk of bias in all studies identifies the need for better data collection and confounding control in the PCa research.

Comparative Survival Outcomes of High-risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Radical Prostatectomy or Definitive Radiotherapy Regimens

Background

Observational data has indicated improved survival after radical prostatectomy (RP) compared with definitive radiotherapy (RT) in men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

Objective

To compare PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall mortality (OM) in men with high-risk PCa treated with RP or RT, providing information on target doses and fractionations.

Design, setting, and participants

This is an observational study from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Patients were diagnosed with high-risk PCa during 2006–2015, treated with RP ≤12 mo or RT ≤15 mo after diagnosis, and stratified according to RP or RT modality; external beam radiotherapy (EBRT; 70–<74, 74–<78, or 78 Gy), hypofractionated RT or EBRT combined with brachytherapy (BT-RT).

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Competing risk and Kaplan-Meier methods estimated PCSM and OM, respectively. Multivariable Cox regression models evaluated hazard ratios (HRs) for PCSM and OM.

Results and limitations

In total, 9254 patients were included (RP 47%, RT 53%). RT patients were older, had poorer performance status and more unfavorable disease characteristics. With a median follow-up time of seven and eight yrs, the overall 10-yr PCSM was 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.4–8.0) and OM was 22.9% (95% CI 21.8–24.1). Compared with RP, EBRT 70–<74 Gy was associated with increased (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.33–2.65, p < 0.001) and BT-RT with decreased (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24–0.96, p = 0.039) 10-yr PCSM. Patients treated with EBRT 70–78 Gy had higher adjusted 10-yr OM than those treated with RP.

Conclusions

In men with high-risk PCa, treatment with EBRT <74 Gy was associated with increased adjusted 10-yr PCSM and OM, and BT-RT with decreased 10-yr PCSM, compared with RP.

Patient summary

In this study, we compared mortality after radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT) in men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa); the results suggest that men receiving lower-dose RT have higher, and patients receiving brachytherapy may have lower, risk of death from PCa than patients treated with prostatectomy.

Management of prostate cancer radiotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A necessary paradigm change

PURPOSE

To adapt the management of prostate malignancy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

In according to the recommendations of the European Association of Urology, we have developed practical additional document on the treatment of prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Low-Risk Group Watchful Waiting should be offered to patients >75 years old, with a limited life expectancy and unfit for local treatment. In Active Surveillance (AS) patients re-biopsy, PSA evaluation and visits should be deferred for up to 6 months, preferring non-invasive multiparametric-MRI. The active treatment should be delayed for 6-12 months. Intermediate-Risk Group AS should be offered in favorable-risk patients. Short-course neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with ultra-hypo-fractionation radiotherapy should be used in unfavorable-risk patients. High-Risk Group Neoadjuvant ADT combined with moderate hypofractionation should be preferred. Whole-pelvis irradiation should be offered to patients with positive lymph nodes in locally advanced setting. ADT should be initiated if PSA doubling time is < 12 months in radio-recurrent patients, as well as in low priority/low volume of metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer. If radiotherapy cannot be delayed, hypo-fractionated regimens should be preferred. In high priority class metastatic disease, treatment with androgen receptor-targeted agents should be offered. When palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastasis is required, single fraction of 8 Gy should be offered.

CONCLUSIONS

In Covid-19 Era, the challenge should concern a correct management of the oncologic patient, reducing the risk of spreading the virus without worsening tumor prognosis.

Optimal timing of radiotherapy in high risk prostate cancer: Do missed days matter?

Introduction

High-risk prostate cancer is associated with poorer overall survival (OS) and biochemical control compared to more favorable risk groups. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is widely used; however, outcomes data are limited with respect to time elapsed between diagnosis and initiation of EBRT.

Methods

The National Cancer Database was queried from 2004 to 2015 for patients diagnosed with high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate who received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and definitive EBRT. Logistic regression was utilized to determine covariates associated with missing EBRT treatments. OS was analyzed using multivariate cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching.

Results

9,610 patients met inclusion criteria with median follow-up of 40.6 months and median age of 72 years. Median PSA was 8.7 and median EBRT dose was 78 Gy. ADT was initiated at a median of 36 days and EBRT at a median of 63 days post-diagnosis. Median number of prolonged treatment days was 2.2. Black race (OR: 1.40; p < 0.01), treatment at a community clinic (OR: 1.32; p < 0.01), and living in an urban/densely populated area were associated with prolonged treatment. Time elapsed between ADT and EBRT > 74 days (HR: 1.20; p = 0.01) and prolonged treatment>3 days of EBRT (HR: 1.26; p = 0.005) were associated with an increased hazard of death. The 5-year OS was 79.6% and 82.9% for patients with prolonged treatment of 3 days or more of EBRT and those missing 3 days or less, respectively (p = 0.0006).

Conclusion

In this hypothesis-generating study, prolonged treatment delays and missing three or more EBRT treatments was associated with poorer OS in patients with high-risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

Survival Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy + Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection and Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Patients With a Risk of Lymph Node Invasion Over 5%: A Population-Based Analysis

Purpose

We aimed to compare the efficacy of radical prostatectomy (RP) + extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) and radiotherapy (RT) in localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients with a risk of lymph node invasion (LNI) over 5%.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) databases were used to identify patients with PCa from 2010 to 2014. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline characteristics between patients in different treatment groups. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to assess the effects of treatments on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Overall 20584 patients were included in this study, with 4,057 and 16,527 patients receiving RP + ePLND and RT, respectively. After PSM, patients with RP + ePLND had similar CSS (5-year CSS rate: 97.8% vs. 97.2%, P=0.310) but longer OS (5-year OS rate: 96.0% vs. 90.8%, P<0.001) compared to those receiving RT. When separating RT cohort into external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) group and EBRT+ brachytherapy (BT) group, treatments with RP + ePLND and EBRT+ BT achieved equivalent OS and were both superior to EBRT alone (5-year OS rate: 96.0% vs. 94.4% vs. 90.0%, P<0.001). Subgroup analyses and multivariate analyses further confirmed the superiority of RP + ePLND and EBRT+ BT.

Conclusion

RP + ePLND and EBRT + BT were associated with better survival outcomes compared to EBRT alone in PCa patients with a probability of LNI over 5%. However, no survival difference was observed between RP + ePLND and EBRT + BT.

Challenges in Urology during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health threat. This disease has brought about huge changes in the priorities of medical and surgical procedures. This short review article summarizes several test methods for COVID-19 that are currently being used or under development. This paper also introduces the corresponding changes in the diagnosis and treatment of urological diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. We further discuss the potential impacts of the pandemic on urology, including the outpatient setting, clinical work, teaching, and research.

Definitive radiotherapy for prostate cancer in Norway 2006-2015: Temporal trends, performance and survival

BACKGROUND

More studies are needed to document nation-wide use and effectiveness of curative definitive radiotherapy (Def-RT) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

For 38,960 men diagnosed with PCa without distant metastases from 2006 to 2015 data from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Registry and a national radiotherapy database (NoRadBase) was analyzed. Overall survival and PCa-specific mortality were described comparing EQD-2 < 74 Gy ("low-dose") with EQD-2 ≥ 74 Gy ("escalated dose").

RESULTS

Use of Def-RT decreased (27-24%) whereas the proportion of radical prostatectomies (RPs) increased (31-38%). In high-risk patients the use of RP doubled (18-36%), while the proportion of Def-RT remained stable (about 35%). Before 2010, almost a quarter of patients received low-dose Def-RT with gradual increase of escalated Def-RT thereafter. Escalated Def-RT was associated with significantly more favorable 10-year PCa-specific mortality (4.4% [95% CI: 2.7-10.7%]) than observed after low-dose Def- RT (8.8% [95% CI: 6.2-9.8%), with the most beneficial effects in high-risk patients. Our analyses indicated the need to expand the NoRadBase by consensus-based quality measures.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide cohort, the overall use of Def-RT decreased slightly. In high-risk patients the provision of Def-RT remained stable and was accompanied by doubling of patients with RP and reduction of a "no curative treatment" strategy. Escalated dose Def-RT significantly reduced 10-year PCa-specific mortality compared to low-dose Def-RT. Aiming for cancer care equity national radiotherapy registries for PCa should regularly monitor data based on consensus-based quality measures enabling feedback to the responsible hospitals.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Health-Related Quality of Life in Uro-oncologic Patients: What Should We Wait For?

PURPOSE

To investigate the health-related quality of life of uro-oncologic patients whose surgery was postponed without being rescheduled during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the March 1 to April 26, 2020, major urologic surgeries were drastically reduced at our tertiary-care referral hospital. In order to evaluate health-related quality-of-life outcomes, the SF-36 questionnaire was sent to all patients scheduled for major surgery at our department 3 weeks after the cancellation of the planned surgical procedures because of the COVID-19 emergency.

RESULTS

All patients included in the analysis had been awaiting surgery for a median (interquartile range) time of 52.85 (35-72) days. The SF-36 questionnaire measured 8 domains: physical functioning (PF), role limitations due to physical health (PH), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE), energy/fatigue (EF), emotional well-being (EWB), social functioning (SF), bodily pain (BP), general health perceptions (GHP). When considering physical characteristics as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, PF was 91.5 (50-100) and PH was 82.75 (50-100) with a BP of 79.56 (45-90). For emotional and social aspects, RE was 36.83 (0-100) with a SF of 37.98 (12.5-90). Most patients reported loss of energy (EF 35.28 [15-55]) and increased anxiety (EWB 47.18 [interquartile range, 20-75]). All patients perceived a reduction of their health conditions, with GHP of 49.47 (15-85). Generally, 86% of patients (n = 43) noted an almost intact physical function but a significant emotional alteration characterized by a prevalence of anxiety and loss of energy.

CONCLUSION

The lockdown due to the novel coronavirus that has affected most operating rooms in Italy could be responsible for the increased anxiety and decrement in health status of oncologic patients. Without any effective solution, we should expect a new medical catastrophe-one caused by the increased risk of tumor progression and mortality in uro-oncologic patients.

Where do urologists stand in the era of novel coronavirus-2019 disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The novel coronavirus-2019 disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had devastating consequences on healthcare systems globally. The effect this has on urologists and the patients they care for is not fully understood and presents the challenge of prioritizing the most urgent cases. We aim to review the impact on urology services and evaluate strategies to minimize disruption.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various healthcare systems have been forced to postpone treatment for many urological conditions as resources are dedicated to the treatment of COVID-19. Training has been postponed as staff are reallocated to areas of need. Face-to-face contact is largely minimized and innovative, virtual communication methods are used in the outpatient setting and multidisciplinary team meetings. Surgical practice is changing because of the risks posed by COVID-19 and procedures can be prioritized in a nonurgent, low priority, high priority or emergency category.

SUMMARY

Although the COVID-19 pandemic will inevitably affect urological services, steps can be taken to mitigate the impact and prioritize the patients most in need of urgent care. Similarly, in future; simulation, e-learning and webinars will allow interaction to share, discuss and debate focused training and education.

Virtual reality tumor navigated robotic radical prostatectomy by using three‐dimensional reconstructed multiparametric prostate MRI and 68 Ga‐PSMA PET/CT images: A useful tool to guide the robotic surgery?

Objectives

To evaluate the use and benefits of tumor navigation during performing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Patients and Methods

Borders of the visible tumor(s) was/were and surrounding structures marked on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and ⁶⁸Ga‐labeled prostate‐specific membrane antigen ligand using positron emission computed tomography (Ga68 PSMA‐PET/CT). Three dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the images were done that were transferred to virtual reality (VR) headsets and Da Vinci surgical robot via TilePro. Images were used as a guide during RARP procedures in five cases. Indocyanine green (ICG) guided pelvic lymph node dissection (n = 2) and Martini Klinik Neurosafe technique (n = 2) were also applied.

Results

Mean patient age was 60.6 ± 3.7 years (range, 56‐66). All VR models were finalized with the agreement of radiologist, urologist, nuclear physician, and engineer. Surgeon examined images before the surgery. All VR models were found very useful particularly in pT3 diseases. Pathological stages included pT2N0 (n = 1), pT3aN0 (n = 1), pT3aN1 (n = 2), and pT3bN1 (n = 1). Positive surgical margins (SMs) occurred in two patients with extensive disease (pT3aN1 and pT3bN1) and tumor occupied 30% and 50% of the prostate volumes. Mean estimated blood loss was 150 ± 86.6 cc (range, 100‐300). Mean follow‐up was 3.4 ± 1.7 months (range, 2‐6). No complication occurred during perioperative (0‐30 days) and postoperative (30‐90 days) periods in any patient.

Conclusions

3D reconstructed VR models by using mpMRI and Ga68 PSMA‐PET/CT images can be accurately prepared and effectively applied during RARP that might be a useful tool for tumor navigation. Images show prostate tumors and anatomy and might be a guide for the console surgeon. This is promising new technology that needs further study and validation.

Recent advances in de-intensification of radiotherapy in elderly cancer patients

Cancer in the elderly remains an evolving issue and a health challenge. Several improvements in the radiotherapy field allow the delivery of higher doses/fractions with a safe toxicity profile, permitting the reduction of radiation treatment protocols in the elderly. Regarding breast, prostate, and lung cancer, the under-representation of older patients in clinical trials limits the extension of treatment recommendations to elderly patients in routine clinical practice. Among the feasible alternatives to standard whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) in older patients are shorter courses using higher hypofractionation (HF) and accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). The boost continues to be used in women at high risk of local recurrence but is less widely accepted for women at lower risk and patients over 70 years of age. Regarding prostate cancer, there are no published studies with a focus on the elderly. Current management decisions are based on life expectancy and geriatric assessment. Regimens of HF and ultra-HF protocols are feasible strategies for older patients. Several prospective non-randomized studies have documented the safe delivery of ultra-HF for patients with localized prostate cancer, and multiple phase III trials and meta-analyses have confirmed that the HF regimen should be offered with similar acute toxicity regardless of patient age and comorbidity. A recent pooled analysis from two randomized trials comparing surgery to stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in older adult patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer did show comparable outcomes between surgery and SBRT. Elderly cancer patients are significantly under-represented in all clinical trials. Thus, the inclusion of older patients in clinical studies should be strongly encouraged to strengthen the evidence base for this age group. We suggest that the creation of oncogeriatric coordination units may promote individualized care protocols, avoid overtreatment with aggressive and unrecommended therapies, and support de-escalating treatment in elderly cancer patients.