1
|
Jochems KFT, Menges D, Sanchez D, de Glas NA, Wildiers H, Eberli D, Puhan MA, Bastiaannet E. Outcomes in studies regarding older patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol 2024; 15:101763. [PMID: 38575500 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2024.101763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2023] [Revised: 03/24/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Older patients are often deemed ineligible for clinical research, and many frequently-used endpoints and outcome measures are not as relevant for older patients for younger ones. This systematic review aimed to present an overview of outcomes used in clinical research regarding patients over the age of 65 years with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS PubMed and Embase were systematically searched to identify studies on prostate cancer (treatment) in patients aged ≥65 between 2016 and 2023. Data on title, study design, number of participants and age, stage of disease, treatment, and investigated outcomes were synthesized and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS Sixty-eight studies were included. Of these most included patients over 65 years, while others used a higher age. Overall, 39 articles (57.3%) reported on survival-related outcomes, 22 (32.4%) reported on progression of disease and 38 (55.9%) used toxicity or adverse events as an outcome measure. Health-related quality of life and functional outcomes were investigated in 29.4%, and cognition in two studies. The most frequently investigated survival-related outcomes were overall and cancer-specific survival (51.3%); however, 38.5% only studied overall survival. DISCUSSION The main focus of studies included in this review remains survival and disease progression. There is limited attention for health-related quality of life and functional status, although older patients often prioritize the latter. Future research should incorporate outcome measures tailored to the aged population to improve care for older patients with prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim F T Jochems
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Dominik Menges
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Dafne Sanchez
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Nienke A de Glas
- Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Hans Wildiers
- Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Daniel Eberli
- Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Milo A Puhan
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Esther Bastiaannet
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lin Z, Feng F, Liang J, Zeng H, Li J. lncRNA RP11-10A14.5: a potential prognosis biomarker for LUAD through regulation on proliferation and metastasis. Discov Oncol 2022; 13:32. [PMID: 35575835 PMCID: PMC9110618 DOI: 10.1007/s12672-022-00493-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Lung cancer is the malignancy most commonly seen worldwide. Emerging evidences indicated that lncRNAs may serve as a prognosis marker and play important role in NSCLC tumor biology. In this work, we analyzed the prognosis value of RP11-10A14.5 using TCGA and GEPIA database and expression profiles using PCR and FISH assay. The biological roles of RP11-10A14.5 in cell growth and invasion were determined by in vitro and in vivo experiments. Expression of RP11-10A14.5 is correlated with increased clinical stage and poor survival prognosis. In vitro experiments revealed that RP11-10A14.5 was widely expressed in lung cancer cell lines and mainly distributed in the cytoplasm and enhanced the growth, invasion and migration ability of NSCLC cell lines. Immunofluorescence assay suggested that RP11-10A14.5 may promote EMT by downregulating E-cadherin and upregulating N-cadherin and Vimentin. Flow cytometry results suggested that RP11-10A14.5 did not significantly affect cell cycle function, but could significantly inhibit apoptosis which may further enhance metastasis cell survival. In conclusion, RP11-10A14.5 is associated with clinical stage and poor survival outcome, may serve as a diagnosis and prognosis predictor for LUAD. Further, RP11-10A14.5 could promote LUAD cell growth and metastasis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhijie Lin
- Department of Immunology, Institute of Translational Medicine, Medical College, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, 225009 China
| | - Fenglan Feng
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University/State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510120 China
| | - Jiaming Liang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University/State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510120 China
| | - Haikang Zeng
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University/State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510120 China
| | - Jin Li
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University/State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510120 China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Menyailo ME, Bokova UA, Ivanyuk EE, Khozyainova AA, Denisov EV. Metastasis Prevention: Focus on Metastatic Circulating Tumor Cells. Mol Diagn Ther 2021; 25:549-562. [PMID: 34287797 DOI: 10.1007/s40291-021-00543-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Metastasis is the main cause of cancer death. Metastatic foci are derived from tumor cells that detach from the primary tumor and then enter the circulation. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are generally associated with a high probability of distant metastasis and a negative prognosis. Most CTCs die in the bloodstream, and only a few cells form metastases. Such metastatic CTCs have a stem-like and hybrid epithelial-mesenchymal phenotype, can avoid immune surveillance, and show increased therapy resistance. Targeting metastatic CTCs and their progenitors in primary tumors and their descendants, particularly disseminated tumor cells, represents an attractive strategy for metastasis prevention. However, current therapeutic strategies mainly target the primary tumor and only indirectly affect metastasis-initiating cells. Here, we consider potential methods for preventing metastasis based on targeting molecular and cellular features of metastatic CTCs, including CTC clusters. Also, we emphasize current knowledge gaps in CTC biology that should be addressed to develop highly effective therapeutics and strategies for metastasis suppression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maxim E Menyailo
- Laboratory of Cancer Progression Biology, Cancer Research Institute, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Kooperativny Str. 5, Tomsk, 634009, Russia
| | - Ustinia A Bokova
- Laboratory of Cancer Progression Biology, Cancer Research Institute, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Kooperativny Str. 5, Tomsk, 634009, Russia
| | - Elena E Ivanyuk
- Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Cancer Research Institute, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Kooperativny Str. 5, Tomsk, 634009, Russia
| | - Anna A Khozyainova
- Laboratory of Cancer Progression Biology, Cancer Research Institute, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Kooperativny Str. 5, Tomsk, 634009, Russia
| | - Evgeny V Denisov
- Laboratory of Cancer Progression Biology, Cancer Research Institute, Tomsk National Research Medical Center, Kooperativny Str. 5, Tomsk, 634009, Russia.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wenzel M, Würnschimmel C, Chierigo F, Mori K, Tian Z, Terrone C, Shariat SF, Saad F, Tilki D, Graefen M, Mandel P, Roos FC, Chun FKH, Karakiewicz PI. Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy. Eur Urol Focus 2021; 8:710-717. [PMID: 33933420 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2021] [Revised: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 04/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous cancer-specific mortality (CSM) analyses for different Gleason patterns in Gleason grade group (GGG) 5 cancer were limited by sample size. OBJECTIVE To test for differences in CSM according to biopsy GG 5 patterns (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database treated with RP and EBRT (2004-2016) were identified and stratified according to Gleason 4 + 5 versus 5 + 4 versus 5 + 5. INTERVENTION RP or EBRT. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models predicting CSM were constructed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 17 263 eligible patients with GG 5 cancer at biopsy (RP: n = 7208; EBRT: n = 10 055), 12 705 had Gleason 4 + 5, 3302 had Gleason 5 + 4, and 1256 had Gleason 5 + 5 disease. Median age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and advanced cT and cN stages significantly differed by Gleason pattern (Gleason 4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5; all p < 0.001). The 10-yr CSM rate was 18.2% for Gleason 4 + 5, 28.0% for Gleason 5 + 4, and 39.1% for Gleason 5 + 5 (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses for the entire cohort adjusted for PSA, age at diagnosis, and cT and cN stage, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.2-fold higher CSM, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5. In addition, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.5-fold, and 1.5- and 2.1-fold higher CSM rates in the RP and EBRT subgroups, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5 (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS For patients with biopsy GG 5 prostate cancer treated with RP or EBRT, there are important CSM differences by Gleason pattern (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5). Ideally, the individual Gleason pattern should be considered in pretreatment risk stratification. PATIENT SUMMARY For patients with grade 5 prostate cancer, we found differences in cancer-specific death rates according to the pattern of abnormal cells in the prostate, called the Gleason score. The highest death rate was found for a Gleason pattern score of 5 + 5, followed by Gleason 5 + 4 and then Gleason 4 + 5. These differences were observed for both patients who were treated with prostate removal and patients who underwent radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada.
| | - Christoph Würnschimmel
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada; Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada; Department of Urology, Policlinico San Martino Hospital, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Department of Urology, Policlinico San Martino Hospital, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Frederik C Roos
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|