1
|
Wilcox Vanden Berg RN, Vertosick EA, Sjoberg DD, Cha EK, Coleman JA, Donahue TF, Eastham JA, Ehdaie B, Laudone VP, Pietzak EJ, Smith RC, Goh AC. Implementation and Validation of an Automated, Longitudinal Robotic Surgical Evaluation and Feedback Program at a High-volume Center and Impact on Training. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 62:81-90. [PMID: 38468865 PMCID: PMC10926308 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Surgical education lacks a standardized, proficiency-based approach to evaluation and feedback. Objective To assess the implementation and reception (ie, feasibility) of an automated, standardized, longitudinal surgical skill assessment and feedback system, and identify baseline trainee (resident and fellow) characteristics associated with achieving proficiency in robotic surgery while learning robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Design setting and participants A quality improvement study assessing a pilot of a surgical experience tracking program was conducted over 1 yr. Participants were six fellows, eight residents, and nine attending surgeons at a tertiary cancer center. Intervention Trainees underwent baseline self-assessment. After each surgery, an evaluation was completed independently by the trainee and attending surgeons. Performance was rated on a five-point anchored Likert scale (trainees were considered "proficient" when attending surgeons' rating was ≥4). Technical skills were assessed using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) and Prostatectomy Assessment and Competency Evaluation (PACE). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Program success and utility were assessed by evaluating completion rates, evaluation completion times, and concordance rates between attending and trainee surgeons, and exit surveys. Baseline characteristics were assessed to determine associations with achieving proficiency. Results and limitations Completion rates for trainees and attending surgeons were 72% and 77%, respectively. Fellows performed more steps/cases than residents (median [interquartile range]: 5 [3-7] and 3 [2-4], respectively; p < 0.01). Prior completion of robotics or laparoscopic skill courses and surgical experience measures were associated with achieving proficiency in multiple surgical steps and GEARS domains. Interclass correlation coefficients on individual components were 0.27-0.47 on GEARS domains. Conclusions An automated surgical experience tracker with structured, longitudinal evaluation and feedback can be implemented with good participation and minimal participant time commitment, and can guide curricular development in a proficiency-based education program by identifying modifiable factors associated with proficiency, individualizing education, and identifying improvement areas within the education program. Patient summary An automated, standardized, longitudinal surgical skill assessment and feedback system can be implemented successfully in surgical education settings and used to inform education plans and predict trainee proficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Emily A. Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D. Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eugene K. Cha
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jonathan A. Coleman
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Timothy F. Donahue
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent P. Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eugene J. Pietzak
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert C. Smith
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alvin C. Goh
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Bitting R, Chapin B, Cheng HH, D'Amico AV, Desai N, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Farrington TA, Gao X, Gupta S, Guzzo T, Ippolito JE, Karnes RJ, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, Lotan T, McKay RR, Morgan T, Pow-Sang JM, Reiter R, Roach M, Robin T, Rosenfeld S, Shabsigh A, Spratt D, Szmulewitz R, Teply BA, Tward J, Valicenti R, Wong JK, Snedeker J, Freedman-Cass DA. Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2024; 22:140-150. [PMID: 38626801 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2024.0019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/19/2024]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nabil Adra
- 3Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | - Yi An
- 4Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital
| | | | - Brian Chapin
- 6The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Neil Desai
- 9UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Xin Gao
- 13Mass General Cancer Center
| | - Shilpa Gupta
- 14Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - Thomas Guzzo
- 15Abramson Cancer Center at The University of Pennsylvania
| | - Joseph E Ippolito
- 16Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | - Tamara Lotan
- 20The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | - Todd Morgan
- 22University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Mack Roach
- 25UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | - Stan Rosenfeld
- 27University of California San Francisco Patient Services Committee
| | - Ahmad Shabsigh
- 28The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Daniel Spratt
- 14Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Flores JM, Vertosick E, Jenkins LC, Cooper J, Benfante N, Sjoberg D, Vickers AJ, Eastham JA, Laudone VP, Scardino PT, Nelson CJ, Mulhall JP. Do Phosphodiesterase Type 5 Inhibitors Increase the Risk of Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy? J Urol 2024; 211:400-406. [PMID: 38194487 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000003823] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 01/11/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE There have been conflicting studies on the association between phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) use and biochemical recurrence (BCR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Our aim was to determine whether PDE5i drug exposure after RP increases the risk of BCR in patients undergoing RP. MATERIALS AND METHODS An institutional database of prostate cancer patients treated between January 2009 and December 2020 was reviewed. BCR was defined as 2 PSA measurements greater than 0.1 ng/mL. PDE5i exposure was defined using a 0 to 3 scale, with 0 representing never use, 1 sometimes use, 2 regularly use, and 3 routinely use. The risk of BCR with any PDE5i exposure, the quantity of exposure, and the duration of PDE5i exposure were assessed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS The sample size included 4630 patients to be analyzed, with 776 patients having BCR. The median follow-up for patients without BCR was 27 (IQR 12, 49) months. Eighty-nine percent reported taking a PDE5i at any time during the first 12 months after RP, and 60% reported doing so for 6 or more months during the year after RP. There was no evidence of an increase in the risk of BCR associated with any PDE5i use (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.84, 1.31, P = .7) or duration of PDE5i use in the first year (HR 0.98 per 1 month duration, 95% CI 0.96, 1.00, P = .055). Baseline oncologic risk was lower in patients using PDE5i, but differences between groups were small, suggesting that residual confounding is unlikely to obscure any causal association with BCR. CONCLUSIONS Prescription of PDE5i to men after RP can be based exclusively on quality of life considerations. Patients receiving PDE5is can be reassured that their use does not increase the risk of BCR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jose M Flores
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emily Vertosick
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Lawrence C Jenkins
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - John Cooper
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniel Sjoberg
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - James A Eastham
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Christian J Nelson
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - John P Mulhall
- Sexual & Reproductive Medicine Program, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mahal BA, Kwak L, Xie W, Eastham JA, James ND, Sandler HM, Feng FY, Brihoum M, Fizazi K, Sweeney C, Ravi P, D’Amico AV. Mortality Risk for Docetaxel-Treated, High-Grade Prostate Cancer With Low PSA Levels: A Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2340787. [PMID: 37910103 PMCID: PMC10620614 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.40787] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Patients with high-grade prostate cancer with low levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA; <4 ng/mL) are at high risk of mortality, necessitating an improved treatment paradigm. Objective To assess for these patients whether adding docetaxel to standard of care (SOC) treatment is associated with decreased prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Data Sources PubMed search from 2000 to 2022. Study Selection Five prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) performed in the US, France, and the United Kingdom evaluating SOC treatment with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or with radical prostatectomy vs SOC plus docetaxel. Data Extraction and Synthesis Individual data were included from patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer, a PSA level of less than 4 ng/mL, and a Gleason score of 8 to 10. Patients initiated treatment between February 21, 2006, and December 31, 2015 (median follow-up, 7.1 [IQR, 5.4-9.9] years). Data were analyzed on December 16, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures Hazard ratio (HR) of ACM and subdistribution HR (sHR) of PCSM adjusted for performance status (1 vs 0 or good health), Gleason score (9 or 10 vs 8), tumor category (T3-T4 vs T1-T2 or TX), and duration of ADT (2 years vs 4-6 months). Results From a cohort of 2184 patients, 145 patients (6.6%) in 4 RCTs were eligible (median age, 63 [IQR, 46-67] years). Thirty-one patients died, and of these deaths, 22 were due to prostate cancer. Performance status was 0 for 139 patients (95.9%) and 1 for 6 patients (4.1%). A reduced but nonsignificant risk of ACM (HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.24-1.09]) and PCSM (sHR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.17-1.02]) was associated with patients randomized to SOC plus docetaxel compared with SOC. The risk reduction in ACM (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.21-1.02]) was more pronounced among patients with a performance status of 0 and was significant for PCSM (sHR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.11-0.86]). Conclusions and Relevance Adding docetaxel to SOC treatment for patients who are in otherwise good health with a PSA level of less than 4 ng/mL and a Gleason score of 8 to 10 was associated with a significant reduction in PCSM and therefore has the potential to improve prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brandon A. Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Lucia Kwak
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Wanling Xie
- Department of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - James A. Eastham
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nicholas D. James
- Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS (National Health Service) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Howard M. Sandler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Felix Y. Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Urology, University of California, San Francisco
| | - Meryem Brihoum
- Unicancer, Urogenital Tumor Study Group (GETUG), Paris, France
| | - Karim Fizazi
- Institute Gustave Roussy, Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Christopher Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Praful Ravi
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Anthony V. D’Amico
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Paula Domino M, Vertosick EA, Vickers AJ, Eastham JA, Sandhu JS. The Association Between Low Preoperative Serum Testosterone and Post-radical Prostatectomy Urinary Function. Urology 2023; 180:190-193. [PMID: 37516254 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.07.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Revised: 07/14/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 07/31/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine if hypogonadism leads to delayed urinary function recovery post-radical prostatectomy (RP) by studying the effect of preoperative factors including age, membranous urethral length, radiation therapy, and Body Mass Index on urinary continence in patients with or without hypogonadism. MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified 1209 patients treated by RP with both pretreatment T and post-treatment urinary outcome. We assessed whether there was an association between low preoperative T level (prenoon T ≤ 300 ng/dL) and continence (using ≤1 pad/d) at 6 and 12months post-RP. Patient-reported continence was used when available, otherwise, surgeon-assessed continence was used. Logistic regression models were used, adjusted for age at RP and nerve-sparing status. RESULTS Median age at RP was 61 (Intraquatile Range (IQR) 56, 66), 92% of patients had at least one nerve spared and 99% were continent at baseline. Continence in patients with low T was nonsignificantly lower at 6months (odds ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.44, 1.06; P = .10) and nonsignificantly higher at 12months (odds ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.71, 1.58; P = .8). Sensitivity analyses excluding patients with preoperative metastasis or treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and including testosterone as a continuous predictor were consistent with the primary analysis; similarly finding no evidence of an association. CONCLUSION Although we cannot rule out an effect on early continence, overall the evidence does not suggest that low serum testosterone adversely impacts urinary function recovery after RP. This finding can be used to counsel patients enrolled in neoadjuvant ADT trials or those patients undergoing RP who have had prior ADT, such as in the setting of oligometastatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Paula Domino
- Voiding Dysfunction and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS
| | - Emily A Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jaspreet S Sandhu
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Barocas D, Bitting R, Bryce A, Chapin B, Cheng HH, D'Amico AV, Desai N, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Farrington TA, Gao X, Gupta S, Guzzo T, Ippolito JE, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, Lotan T, McKay RR, Morgan T, Netto G, Pow-Sang JM, Reiter R, Roach M, Robin T, Rosenfeld S, Shabsigh A, Spratt D, Teply BA, Tward J, Valicenti R, Wong JK, Shead DA, Snedeker J, Freedman-Cass DA. Prostate Cancer, Version 4.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2023; 21:1067-1096. [PMID: 37856213 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding the workup of patients with prostate cancer, risk stratification and management of localized disease, post-treatment monitoring, and treatment of recurrence and advanced disease. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on the management of metastatic castration-sensitive disease, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with treatment intensification is strongly recommended for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. For patients with nonmetastatic CRPC, ADT is continued with or without the addition of certain secondary hormone therapies depending on prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In the mCRPC setting, ADT is continued with the sequential addition of certain secondary hormone therapies, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, the presence or absence of visceral disease, symptoms, and potential side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nabil Adra
- 3Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | - Yi An
- 4Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital
| | | | | | - Alan Bryce
- 7Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | - Brian Chapin
- 8The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Neil Desai
- 11UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Xin Gao
- 10Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center | Mass General Cancer Center
| | - Shilpa Gupta
- 15Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - Thomas Guzzo
- 16Abramson Cancer Center at The University of Pennsylvania
| | - Joseph E Ippolito
- 17Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | - Tamara Lotan
- 20The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | - Todd Morgan
- 22University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Mack Roach
- 26UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | - Stan Rosenfeld
- 28University of California San Francisco, Patient Services Committee Chair
| | - Ahmad Shabsigh
- 29The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Daniel Spratt
- 15Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pekala KR, Bergengren O, Eastham JA, Carlsson SV. Active surveillance should be considered for select men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer. BMC Urol 2023; 23:152. [PMID: 37777716 PMCID: PMC10541702 DOI: 10.1186/s12894-023-01314-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2023] [Accepted: 09/03/2023] [Indexed: 10/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer must balance patient preferences, oncologic risk, and preservation of sexual, urinary and bowel function. While Active Surveillance (AS) is the recommended option for men with Grade Group 1 (Gleason Score 3 + 3 = 6) prostate cancer without other intermediate-risk features, men with Grade Group 2 (Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7) are typically recommended active treatment. For select patients, AS can be a possible initial management strategy for men with Grade Group 2. Herein, we review current urology guidelines and the urologic literature regarding recommendations and evidence for AS for this patient group. MAIN BODY AS benefits men with prostate cancer by maintaining their current quality of life and avoiding treatment side effects. AS protocols with close follow up always allow for an option to change course and pursue curative treatment. All the major guideline organizations now include Grade Group 2 disease with slightly differing definitions of eligibility based on risk using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, clinical stage, and other factors. Selected men with Grade Group 2 on AS have similar rates of deferred treatment and metastasis to men with Grade Group 1 on AS. There is a growing body of evidence from randomized controlled trials, large observational (prospective and retrospective) cohorts that confirm the oncologic safety of AS for these men. While some men will inevitably conclude AS at some point due to clinical reclassification with biopsy or imaging, some men may be able to stay on AS until transition to watchful waiting (WW). Magnetic resonance imaging is an important tool to confirm AS eligibility, to monitor progression and guide prostate biopsy. CONCLUSION AS is a viable initial management option for well-informed and select men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer, low volume of pattern 4, and no other adverse clinicopathologic findings following a well-defined monitoring protocol. In the modern era of AS, urologists have tools at their disposal to better stage patients at initial diagnosis, risk stratify patients, and gain information on the biologic potential of a patient's prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly R Pekala
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1133 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Oskar Bergengren
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1133 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
- Department of Urology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1133 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Sigrid V Carlsson
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1133 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
- Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Scuderi S, Pellegrino F, Tin A, Beech BB, Gandaglia G, Stabile A, Eastham JA, Montorsi F, Briganti A, Vickers AJ. The Highest Grade Group Does Not Drive the Risk of Recurrence when Systematic and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-targeted Biopsies are Discordant: Preliminary Findings Using Radical Prostatectomy Pathology as a Surrogate for MRI-targeted Biopsy Grade. Eur Urol Focus 2023:S2405-4569(23)00188-8. [PMID: 37739916 PMCID: PMC10950835 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.07.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 07/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 09/24/2023]
Abstract
Pathology grading of prostate biopsy follows the rule that the highest International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) is the GG assigned. This rule was developed in the systematic biopsy (SBx) era and makes sense when samples are from very different areas of the prostate. This rule has been kept for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx), for which multiple samples-targeted and systematic-are taken from small areas. In particular, if the results for SBx and MRI-TBx are discordant, the patient is assigned the higher GG. However, the most appropriate grading when MRI-TBx and SBx grades are discordant has never been investigated empirically. A cohort of patients who have undergone SBx and MRI-TBx with long oncological follow-up does not yet exist. To estimate the risk of recurrence for every combination of biopsy and pathological grades, we used the GG on radical prostatectomy (RP) as a surrogate for GG on MRI-TBx GG surrogate. We analyzed data for 12 468 men who underwent SBx and RP at a tertiary referral center and assessed 5-yr biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) for each pairwise combination of biopsy and surgical GG results. We found that for cases with discordant SBx and RP grades, the risk of recurrence was intermediate, irrespective of whether the highest grade was at RP or SBx. For instance, the 5-yr bRFS rate was 57% for men with GG 3 on RP and 60% for men with GG 3 on SBx, but 63% for men with RP GG 3 and SBx GG 2, and 79% for men with RP GG 2 and SBx GG 3. Translating these findings to MRI-TBx casts doubt on current grading practice: when GGs are discordant between SBx and MRI-TBx, the risk of biochemical recurrence risk is not driven by the highest grade but by an intermediate between the two grades. Our findings should motivate studies assessing long-term outcomes for patients undergoing both MRI-TBx and SBx with a view to empirically evaluating current grading practices. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with prostate cancer may undergo two biopsy types: (1) systematic biopsy, for which sampling follows a systematic template; and (2) targeted biopsy, for which samples are taken from lesions detected on scans. There may be a difference in prostate cancer grade identified by the two approaches. In such cases, the risk of cancer recurrence seems to be predicted by an intermediate grade between the lower and higher grades.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Scuderi
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Francesco Pellegrino
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Amy Tin
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Benjamin B Beech
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Armando Stabile
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Gianfranco Soldera Prostate Cancer Lab, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pellegrino F, Tin AL, Sjoberg DD, Benfante NE, Weber RC, Porwal SP, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Eastham JA, Laudone VP, Vickers AJ. The effect of the da Vinci ® Vessel Sealer on robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy complications. J Robot Surg 2023; 17:1763-1768. [PMID: 37043122 PMCID: PMC10852274 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01595-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2023] [Indexed: 04/13/2023]
Abstract
The da Vinci® Vessel Sealer is a major contributor to the total cost of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). We aimed to assess whether the use of the Vessel Sealer is associated with better surgical outcomes in a population of patients that underwent RALP with lymphadenectomy. We tested whether the use of the Vessel Sealer is associated with the development of lymphocele and/or other surgical outcomes. Most surgeons used the Vessel Sealer in almost all or almost no patients. Thus, to avoid the potential confounding variable of surgeon skill, we performed the initial analyses using data from a single surgeon who changed practice over time, and then using the entire population. Overall, the Vessel Sealer was used in 500 (36%) RALPs. Surgeon 1 performed 492 surgeries, and used the Vessel Sealer in 191 (39%). The Vessel Sealer was not associated with better surgical outcomes in patients operated on by Surgeon 1. The odds ratio for development of lymphocele was 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-6.75). In the entire population, use of the sealer was significantly associated with a very small reduction of blood loss (22 cc, CI 13-30) but with a 32-min increase in the operating room time (CI 26-37). Use of the Vessel Sealer will have, at best, a very small effect on RALP outcomes that is of highly questionable relevance given its cost. In light of these results, the Vessel Sealer will only be used at our institution in the context of clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Pellegrino
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy.
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ryan C Weber
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shaun P Porwal
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Perera M, Jibara G, Tin AL, Haywood S, Sjoberg DD, Benfante NE, Carlsson SV, Eastham JA, Laudone V, Touijer KA, Fine S, Scardino PT, Vickers AJ, Ehdaie B. Outcomes of Grade Group 2 and 3 Prostate Cancer on Initial Versus Confirmatory Biopsy: Implications for Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Focus 2023; 9:662-668. [PMID: 36566100 PMCID: PMC10285029 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 12/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Active surveillance (AS) is recommended as the preferred treatment for men with low-risk disease. In order to optimize risk stratification and exclude undiagnosed higher-grade disease, most AS protocols recommend a confirmatory biopsy. OBJECTIVE We aimed to compare outcomes among men with grade group (GG) 2/3 prostate cancer on initial biopsy with those among men whose disease was initially GG1 but was upgraded to GG2/3 on confirmatory biopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We reviewed patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) in two cohorts: "immediate RP group," with GG2/3 cancer on diagnostic biopsy, and "AS group," with GG1 cancer on initial biopsy that was upgraded to GG2/3 on confirmatory biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Probabilities of biochemical recurrence (BCR) and salvage therapy were determined using multivariable Cox regression models with risk adjustment. Risks of adverse pathology at RP were also compared using logistic regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The immediate RP group comprised 4009 patients and the AS group comprised 321 patients. The AS group had lower adjusted rates of adverse pathology (27% vs 35%, p = 0.003). BCR rates were lower in the AS group, although this did not reach conventional significance (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-1.06, p = 0.10) compared with the immediate RP group. Risk-adjusted 1- and 5-yr BCR rates were 4.6% (95% CI 3.0-6.5%) and 10.4% (95% CI 6.9-14%), respectively, for the AS group compared with 6.3% (95% CI 5.6-7.0%) and 20% (95% CI 19-22%), respectively, in the immediate RP group. A nonsignificant association was observed for salvage treatment-free survival favoring the AS group (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42, 1.06, p = 0.087). CONCLUSIONS We found that men with GG1 cancer who were upgraded on confirmatory biopsy tend to have less aggressive disease than men with the same grade found at initial biopsy. These results must be confirmed in larger series before recommendations can be made regarding a more conservative approach in men with upgraded pathology on surveillance biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY We studied men with low-risk prostate cancer who were initially eligible for active surveillance but presented with more aggressive cancer on confirmatory biopsy. We found that outcomes for these men were better than the outcomes for those diagnosed initially with more serious cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marlon Perera
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ghalib Jibara
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samuel Haywood
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sigrid V Carlsson
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samson Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Pellegrino F, Sjoberg DD, Tin AL, Benfante NE, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Vickers AJ, Lilja H, Laudone VP. Predictive value of kallikrein forms and β-microseminoprotein in blood from patients with evidence of detectable levels of PSA after radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2023; 41:1489-1495. [PMID: 37209144 PMCID: PMC10547122 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04420-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2023] [Accepted: 05/05/2023] [Indexed: 05/22/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine whether β-microseminoprotein or any of the kallikrein forms in blood-free, total or intact PSA or total hK2-predict metastasis in patients with evidence of detectable levels of PSA in blood after radical prostatectomy. METHOD We determined marker concentrations in blood from 173 men treated with radical prostatectomy and evidence of detectable levels of PSA in the blood (PSA ≥ 0.05) after surgery between 2014 and 2015 and at least 1 year after any adjuvant therapy. We used Cox regression to determine whether any marker was associated with metastasis using both univariate and multivariable models that included standard clinical predictors. RESULTS Overall, 42 patients had metastasis, with a median follow-up of 67 months among patients without an event. The levels of intact and free PSA and free-to-total PSA ratio were significantly associated with metastasis. Discrimination was highest for free PSA (c-index: 0.645) and free-to-total PSA ratio (0.625). Only free-to-total PSA ratio remained associated with overall metastasis (either regional or distant) after including standard clinical predictors (p = 0.025) and increased discrimination from 0.686 to 0.697. Similar results were found using distant metastasis as an outcome (p = 0.011; c-index increased from 0.658 to 0.723). CONCLUSION Our results provide evidence that free-to-total PSA ratio can risk stratifying patients with evidence of detectable levels of PSA in blood after RP. Further research is warranted on the biology of prostate cancer markers in patients with evidence of detectable levels of PSA in blood after radical prostatectomy. Our findings on the free-to-total ratio for predicting adverse oncologic outcomes need to be validated in other cohorts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Pellegrino
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy.
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hans Lilja
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Medicine (GU-Oncology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Pellegrino F, Tin AL, Martini A, Vertosick EA, Porwal SP, Stabile A, Gandaglia G, Eastham JA, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Vickers AJ. Prostate-specific Antigen Density Cutoff of 0.15 ng/ml/cc to Propose Prostate Biopsies to Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Efficient Threshold or Legacy of the Past? Eur Urol Focus 2023; 9:291-297. [PMID: 36270887 PMCID: PMC10578357 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.10.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2022] [Revised: 08/29/2022] [Accepted: 10/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) cutoff of 0.15 ng/ml/cc is a commonly recommended threshold to identify patients with negative prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) who should proceed to a prostate biopsy. We were unable to find any study that explicitly examined the properties of this threshold compared with others. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether the 0.15 cutoff is justified for selecting patients at risk of harboring high-grade cancer (Gleason score ≥3 + 4) despite negative MRI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A cohort of 8974 prostate biopsies provided by the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) was included in the study. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Locally weighted scatterplot smoothing was used to investigate whether there was a change in the risk of high-grade cancer around this value. We examined whether the use of this cutoff in patients with negative MRI corresponds to a reasonable threshold probability for a biopsy (defined as a 10% risk of high-grade disease). To do so, we applied the negative likelihood ratio of MRI, calculated from eight studies on prostate MRI, to the risk curve derived from the PBCG. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS There was no discontinuity in the risk of high-grade prostate cancer at a PSAd cutoff of 0.15. This cutoff corresponded to a probability of high-grade disease ranging from 2.6% to 10%, depending on MRI accuracy. Using 10% as threshold probability, the corresponding PSAd cutoff varied between 0.15 and 0.38, with the threshold increasing for greater MRI accuracy. Possible limitations include difference between studies on MRI and the use of ultrasound to measure prostate volume. CONCLUSIONS The 0.15 cutoff to recommend prostate biopsies in patients with negative MRI is justified only under an extreme scenario of poor MRI properties. We recommend a value of at least ≥0.20. Our results suggest the need for future studies to look at how to best identify patients who need prostate biopsies despite negative MRI, likely by using individualized risk prediction. PATIENT SUMMARY In this study, we investigated whether the commonly used prostate-specific antigen density cutoff of 0.15 is justified to identify patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) who should proceed to a prostate biopsy. We found that this cutoff is appropriate only in case of very poor MRI quality, and a higher cutoff (≥0.20) should be used for the average MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Pellegrino
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Martini
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Emily A Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Shaun P Porwal
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Armando Stabile
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Perera M, Lebdai S, Tin AL, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, Beech BB, Alvim RG, Touijer AS, Jenjitranant P, Ehdaie B, Laudone VP, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Touijer KA. Oncologic outcomes of patients with lymph node invasion at prostatectomy and post-prostatectomy biochemical persistence. Urol Oncol 2023; 41:105.e19-105.e23. [PMID: 36435708 PMCID: PMC10391319 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.10.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Revised: 08/30/2022] [Accepted: 10/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pathologic nodal invasion at prostatectomy is frequently associated with persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and with increased risk of disease recurrence. Management strategies for these patients are poorly defined. We aimed to explore the long-term oncologic outcomes and patterns of disease progression. METHODS We included men treated between 2000 and 2017 who had lymph node invasion at radical prostatectomy and persistently detectable prostate-specific antigen post-prostatectomy. Postoperative imaging and management strategies were collated. Patterns of recurrence and probability of metastasis-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS Among our cohort of 253 patients, 126 developed metastasis. Twenty-five had a positive scan within 6 months of surgery; of these, 15 (60%) had a nodal metastasis, 10 (40%) had a bone metastasis, and 4 (16%) had local recurrence. For metastasis-free survival, 5- and 10-year probabilities were 52% (95% CI 45%, 58%) and 37% (95% CI 28%, 46%), respectively. For prostate cancer-specific survival, 5- and 10-year probabilities were 89% (95% CI 84%, 93%) and 67% (95% CI 57%, 76%), respectively. A total of 221 patients proceeded to hormonal deprivation treatment alone. Ten patients received postoperative radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS Biochemical persistence in patients with lymph node invasion is associated with high risk of disease progression and reduced prostate cancer-specific survival. Management was hindered by the limitation of imaging modalities utilized during the study period in accurately detecting residual disease. Novel molecular imaging may improve staging and help design a therapeutic strategy adapted to patients' specific needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marlon Perera
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Souhil Lebdai
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, University of Angers, France
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Benjamin B Beech
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Ricardo G Alvim
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Adam S Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Pocharapong Jenjitranant
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Truong H, Breen K, Nandakumar S, Sjoberg DD, Kemel Y, Mehta N, Lenis AT, Reisz PA, Carruthers J, Benfante N, Joseph V, Khurram A, Gopalan A, Fine SW, Reuter VE, Vickers AJ, Birsoy O, Liu Y, Walsh M, Latham A, Mandelker D, Stadler ZK, Pietzak E, Ehdaie B, Touijer KA, Laudone VP, Slovin SF, Autio KA, Danila DC, Rathkopf DE, Eastham JA, Chen Y, Morris MJ, Offit K, Solit DB, Scher HI, Abida W, Robson ME, Carlo MI. Gene-based Confirmatory Germline Testing Following Tumor-only Sequencing of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2023; 83:29-38. [PMID: 36115772 PMCID: PMC10208030 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.08.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2022] [Revised: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 08/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tumor-only genomic profiling is an important tool in therapeutic management of men with prostate cancer. Since clinically actionable germline variants may be reflected in tumor profiling, it is critical to identify which variants have a higher risk of being germline in origin to better counsel patients and prioritize genetic testing. OBJECTIVE To determine when variants found on tumor-only sequencing of prostate cancers should prompt confirmatory germline testing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Men with prostate cancer who underwent both tumor and germline sequencing at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 1, 2015 to January 31, 2020 were evaluated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Tumor and germline profiles were analyzed for pathogenic and likely pathogenic ("pathogenic") variants in 60 moderate- or high-penetrance genes associated with cancer predisposition. The germline probability (germline/germline + somatic) of a variant was calculated for each gene. Clinical and pathologic factors were analyzed as potential modifiers of germline probability. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of the 1883 patients identified, 1084 (58%) had a somatic or germline pathogenic variant in one of 60 cancer susceptibility genes, and of them, 240 (22%) had at least one germline variant. Overall, the most frequent variants were in TP53, PTEN, APC, BRCA2, RB1, ATM, and CHEK2. Variants in TP53, PTEN, or RB1 were identified in 746 (40%) patients and were exclusively somatic. Variants with the highest germline probabilities were in PALB2 (69%), MITF (62%), HOXB13 (60%), CHEK2 (55%), BRCA1 (55%), and BRCA2 (47%), and the overall germline probability of a variant in any DNA damage repair gene was 40%. Limitations were that most of the men included in the cohort had metastatic disease, and different thresholds for pathogenicity exist for somatic and germline variants. CONCLUSIONS Of patients with pathogenic variants found on prostate tumor sequencing, 22% had clinically actionable germline variants, for which the germline probabilities varied widely by gene. Our results provide an evidenced-based clinical framework to prioritize referral to genetic counseling following tumor-only sequencing. PATIENT SUMMARY Patients with advanced prostate cancer are recommended to have germline genetic testing. Genetic sequencing of a patient's prostate tumor may also identify certain gene variants that are inherited. We found that patients who had variants in certain genes, such as ones that function in DNA damage repair, identified in their prostate tumor sequencing, had a high risk for having an inherited cancer syndrome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hong Truong
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kelsey Breen
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Subhiksha Nandakumar
- Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yelena Kemel
- Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nikita Mehta
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew T Lenis
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter A Reisz
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jessica Carruthers
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vijai Joseph
- Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aliya Khurram
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anuradha Gopalan
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samson W Fine
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Victor E Reuter
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ozge Birsoy
- Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ying Liu
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael Walsh
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alicia Latham
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Diana Mandelker
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Zsofia K Stadler
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Medicine, Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eugene Pietzak
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Susan F Slovin
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Karen A Autio
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel C Danila
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dana E Rathkopf
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yu Chen
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Morris
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - David B Solit
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Howard I Scher
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wassim Abida
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mark E Robson
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Maria I Carlo
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Niehaus Center for Inherited Cancer Genomics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Pellegrino F, Sjoberg DD, Tin AL, Benfante NE, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Eastham JA, Mulhall JP, Vickers AJ. Relationship Between Age, Comorbidity, and the Prevalence of Erectile Dysfunction. Eur Urol Focus 2023; 9:162-167. [PMID: 36031560 PMCID: PMC10353735 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.08.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2022] [Revised: 07/17/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Erectile dysfunction (ED) increases with age. Remarkably, the relationship between age and the risk of ED has only been described in crude categories, such as risk for men aged 50-59 yr, without taking comorbidities into account. OBJECTIVE To understand how the risk of patient-reported ED varies according to age and comorbidity status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study included a cohort of 17 250 patients with prostate cancer who completed the International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain (IIEF-EF) questionnaire before any prostate treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS We created a logistic regression model to predict the probability of ED using age and comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and hypertension as predictors. We used age as a nonlinear term to allow a curvilinear relationship between age and ED. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The prevalence of patient-reported ED among men without any comorbidities increased from 10% to 79% from the age of 40 and 80 yr. The risk of ED increased sharply with comorbidity: the probability of ED for 50- and 75-yr-old individuals was 20% and 68% for healthy men, but 41% and 85% for those with hypertension, obesity, and diabetes. Men with several comorbidities have the same risk of ED as that of healthy men 15-25 yr older. Limitations include a healthier-than-average patient group and lack of information about some comorbidities and the severity of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS Our results allow us to better understand how the risk of ED changes with age and comorbidities. Further research should evaluate the impact of other risk factors not considered in the present study and should take risk factor severity into account. PATIENT SUMMARY Our study shows how the probability of erectile dysfunction (ED) changes with increasing age, analyzed alone and when taking into account the presence of other risk factors for this condition (eg, diabetes, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease). Our results help in better understanding the probability of ED for men with and without comorbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Pellegrino
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy.
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Urological Research Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - John P Mulhall
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Barocas D, Bitting R, Bryce A, Chapin B, Cheng HH, D'Amico AV, Desai N, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Farrington TA, Gao X, Gupta S, Guzzo T, Ippolito JE, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, Lotan T, McKay RR, Morgan T, Netto G, Pow-Sang JM, Reiter R, Roach M, Robin T, Rosenfeld S, Shabsigh A, Spratt D, Teply BA, Tward J, Valicenti R, Wong JK, Berardi RA, Shead DA, Freedman-Cass DA. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2023. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022; 20:1288-1298. [PMID: 36509074 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and include management options for localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel meets annually to reevaluate and update their recommendations based on new clinical data and input from within NCCN Member Institutions and from external entities. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarizes much of the panel's discussions for the 4.2022 and 1.2023 updates to the guidelines regarding systemic therapy for metastatic prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nabil Adra
- 3Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | - Yi An
- 4Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital
| | | | | | | | - Brian Chapin
- 8The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Neil Desai
- 11UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Xin Gao
- 15Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center
| | - Shilpa Gupta
- 16Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - Thomas Guzzo
- 17Abramson Cancer Center at The University of Pennsylvania
| | - Joseph E Ippolito
- 18Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | - Tamara Lotan
- 21The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | - Todd Morgan
- 23University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Mack Roach
- 27UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | - Stan Rosenfeld
- 29University of California San Francisco Patient Services
| | - Ahmad Shabsigh
- 30The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Daniel Spratt
- 16Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Fine SW, Al-Ahmadie HA, Vertosick E, Vickers AJ, Chen YB, Gopalan A, Sarungbam J, Sirintrapun SJ, Tickoo SK, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Reuter VE. Impact of Zone of Origin in Anterior Dominant Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Biochemical Recurrence-Free Survival in an Anatomically Well-Characterized Cohort. Urol Pract 2022; 9:459-465. [PMID: 37145713 PMCID: PMC9988228 DOI: 10.1097/upj.0000000000000322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Revised: 04/14/2022] [Accepted: 05/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Our goal was to determine whether zonal origin of anterior dominant prostate cancers is associated with clinical outcome among patients treated with radical prostatectomy. METHODS We investigated the clinical outcomes of 197 patients with previously well-characterized anterior dominant prostatic tumors on radical prostatectomy. Univariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to test for an association between anterior peripheral zone (PZ) or transition zone (TZ) tumor location and clinical outcomes. RESULTS Zonal origin of anterior dominant tumors: 97/197 (49%) anterior PZ, 70 (36%) TZ, 14 (7%) both zones and 16 (8%) indeterminate zone. Comparing anterior PZ and TZ tumors, there were no significant differences in Grade group, incidence of extraprostatic extension or surgical margin positivity rate. Overall, 19 (9.6%) patients experienced biochemical recurrence (BCR), including 10 with anterior PZ origin and 5 with TZ origin. Median followup time among those without BCR was 9.5 years (IQR 7.2, 12.7). BCR-free survival at 5 and 10 years was 91% and 89% for anterior PZ tumors, and 94% and 92% for TZ tumors, respectively. On univariate analysis, there was no evidence of a difference in time to BCR between anterior PZ and TZ tumor zone of origin (p=0.5). CONCLUSIONS In this anatomically well-characterized cohort of anterior dominant prostate cancers, long-term BCR-free survival was not significantly associated with zone of origin. Future studies utilizing zone of origin as a parameter should consider separating anterior and posterior PZ localization, as outcomes may differ.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samson W. Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Hikmat A. Al-Ahmadie
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emily Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew J. Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ying-Bei Chen
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anuradha Gopalan
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Judy Sarungbam
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Satish K. Tickoo
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - James A. Eastham
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Peter T. Scardino
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Victor E. Reuter
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Alberto M, Yim A, Papa N, Siva S, Ischia J, Touijer K, Eastham JA, Bolton D, Perera M. Role of PSMA PET-guided metastases-directed therapy in oligometastatic recurrent prostate cancer. Front Oncol 2022; 12:929444. [PMID: 36059632 PMCID: PMC9433573 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.929444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2022] [Accepted: 07/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC) has been proposed as an intermediary state between localised disease and widespread metastases, with varying definitions including 1, 3, or ≤5 visceral or bone metastasis. Traditional definitions of OMPC are based on staging with conventional imaging, such as computerised tomography (CT) and whole-body bone scan (WBBS). Novel imaging modalities such as prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA PET) have improved diagnostic utility in detecting early metastatic prostate cancer (PC) metastases compared with conventional imaging. Specifically, meta-analytical data suggest that PSMA PET is sensitive in detecting oligometastatic disease in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) post-radical treatment of PC. Recent trials have evaluated PSMA PET-guided metastases-directed therapy (MDT) in oligometastatic recurrent disease, typically with salvage surgery or radiotherapy (RT). To date, these preliminary studies demonstrate promising results, potentially delaying the need for systemic therapy. We aim to report a comprehensive, multidisciplinary review of PSMA-guided MDT in OMPC. In this review, we highlight the utility of PMSA PET in biochemically recurrent disease and impact of PSMA PET on the definition of oligometastatic disease and outline data pertaining to PSMA-guided MDT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Alberto
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Arthur Yim
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Nathan Papa
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Shankar Siva
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Joseph Ischia
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Karim Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Damien Bolton
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Marlon Perera
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
- *Correspondence: Marlon Perera,
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Perera M, Vilaseca A, Tin AL, Nguyen DP, Corradi RB, Touijer AS, Martin-Malburet AG, Alvim R, Benfante N, Sjoberg DD, Laudone V, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Touijer KA. Morbidity of salvage radical prostatectomy: limited impact of the minimally invasive approach. World J Urol 2022; 40:1637-1644. [PMID: 35596018 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04031-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to report the morbidity profile of salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) after radiotherapy failure and assess the impact of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) on postoperative complications and functional outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between 1985 and 2019, a total of 293 patients underwent SRP; 232 underwent open SRP; and 61 underwent laparoscopic SRP with or without robotic assistance. Complications were recorded and classified into standardized categories per the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS Twenty-nine patients (10%) experienced grade 3 complications within 30 days, 22 (9.5%) after open and 7 (11%) after MIS (p = 0.6). Between 30 and 90 days after surgery, 7.3% of patients in the open group and 10% in the MIS group had grade 3 complications (p = 0.5). The most common complication was bladder neck contracture (BNC), representing 40% of the 30-90 day complications. Within one year of SRP, 81 patients (31%, 95% CI 25%, 37%) developed BNC; we saw non-significant lower rates in MIS (25 vs 32%; p = 0.4). Functional outcomes were poor after SRP and showed no difference between open and MIS groups for urinary continence (16 vs 18%, p = 0.7) and erectile function (7 vs 13%, p = 0.4). 5 year cancer-specific survival and overall survival was 95% and 88% for the entire cohort, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Our outcomes suggest poor functional recovery after SRP, regardless of the operative approach. Currently there is no evidence favoring the use of open or MIS approach. Further studies are required to ensure comparable outcomes between these approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marlon Perera
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Antoni Vilaseca
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.,Urology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel P Nguyen
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.,Urology Department, Reseau Hospitalier Neuchatelois, Neuchatel, Switzerland
| | - Renato B Corradi
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Adam S Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Alexandre Godefroy Martin-Malburet
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.,Urology Department, Reseau Hospitalier Neuchatelois, Neuchatel, Switzerland
| | - Ricardo Alvim
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Chesnut GT, Tin AL, Fleshner KA, Benfante NE, Vickers AJ, Eastham JA, Sjoberg DD, Carlsson SV. Correction: Estimating patient health in prostate cancer treatment counseling. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022; 25:598. [PMID: 35361969 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-022-00530-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory T Chesnut
- Center for Prostate Disease Research, Murtha Cancer Center Research Program, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.,Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sigrid V Carlsson
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. .,Department of Surgery (Urology Service), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. .,Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Clements MB, Gmelich CC, Vertosick EA, Hu JC, Sandhu JS, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Laudone VP, Touijer KA, Coleman JA, Vickers AJ, Ehdaie B. Have urinary function outcomes after radical prostatectomy improved over the past decade? Cancer 2022; 128:1066-1073. [PMID: 34724196 PMCID: PMC8837675 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2021] [Revised: 08/29/2021] [Accepted: 09/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Changes in surgical technique and postoperative care that target improvements in functional outcomes are widespread in the literature. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is one such procedure that has seen multiple advances over the past decade. The objective of this study was to leverage RP as an index case to determine whether practice changes over time produced observable improvements in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS This study analyzed patients undergoing RP by experienced surgeons at a tertiary care center with prospectively maintained patient-reported outcome data from 2008 to 2019. Four patient-reported urinary function outcomes at 6 and 12 months after RP were defined with a validated instrument: good urinary function (domain score ≥ 17), no incontinence (0 pads per day), social continence (≤1 pad per day), and severe incontinence (≥3 pads per day). Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated changes in outcomes based on the surgical date. RESULTS Among 3945 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, excellent urinary outcomes were reported throughout the decade but without consistent observable improvements over time. Specifically, there were no improvements in good urinary function at 12 months (P = .087) based on the surgical date, and there were countervailing effects on no incontinence (worsening; P = .005) versus severe incontinence (improving; P = .003). Neither approach (open, laparoscopic, or robotic), nor nerve sparing, nor membranous urethral length mediated changes in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS In a decade with multiple advances in surgical and postoperative care, there was evidence of improvements in severe incontinence, but no measurable improvements across 3 other urinary outcomes. Although worsening disease factors could contribute to the stable observed outcomes, a more systematic approach to evaluating techniques and implementing patient selection and postoperative care advances is needed. LAY SUMMARY Although there have been advances in radical prostatectomy over the past decade, consistent observable improvements in postoperative incontinence were not reported by patients. To improve urinary function outcomes beyond the current high standard, the approach to studying innovations in surgical technique needs to be changed, and further development of other aspects of prostatectomy care is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew B. Clements
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Caroline C. Gmelich
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Emily A. Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jim C. Hu
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Jaspreet S. Sandhu
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Peter T. Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Vincent P. Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Karim A. Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan A. Coleman
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Andrew J. Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY,Corresponding author: Behfar Ehdaie, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, T: 646-422-4406, F: 212-988-0759,
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kan KM, Tin AL, Stearns GL, Eastham JA, Sjoberg DD, Sandhu JS. De Novo Urinary Storage Symptoms Are Common after Radical Prostatectomy: Incidence, Natural History and Predictors. J Urol 2022; 207:601-608. [PMID: 34694923 PMCID: PMC10031753 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000002312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE After radical prostatectomy (RP), clinical complaints of new onset storage symptoms may be related to anastomotic strictures or may accommodate for stress urinary incontinence; however, a subgroup of men will experience de novo storage symptoms in the absence of stricture or stress urinary incontinence. As therapies for overactive bladder have improved, we sought to assess the prevalence, natural history and risk factors of de novo storage dysfunction in continent men. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed urinary symptom questionnaires completed by patients who were continent prior to RP and did not have postoperative anastomotic strictures at our institution from 2002 to 2019. De novo storage dysfunction, assessed as new onset or worsening urgency or frequency, was assessed at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after RP, and association between it and patient and preoperative factors was determined. RESULTS A total of 2,619 patients were included in the final analysis. An initial 34% of patients reported de novo storage symptoms at 6 months, which decreased to 26% at later followup. We found evidence that minimally invasive surgery and nonWhite race were associated with reporting worsening symptoms. The association between postoperative hematoma and worsening symptoms was less conclusive but was of clear clinical relevance (OR 3.15; 95% CI 1.04, 9.54; p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS A significant number of RP patients experience de novo storage symptoms. Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery are at higher risk. At-risk patients should be counseled on the incidence of de novo storage symptoms and offered early treatment per overactive bladder guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amy L Tin
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Dason S, Vertosick EA, Udo K, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Al-Ahmadie H, Chen YB, Gopalan A, Sirintrapun SJ, Tickoo SK, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Reuter VE, Fine SW. Clinical utility of subclassifying positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2022; 129:194-200. [PMID: 34161656 PMCID: PMC9514027 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15524] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2021] [Revised: 04/29/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine whether subclassification of positive surgical margins (PSMs) increases predictive ability for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and aids clinical decision-making in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS We studied 2147 patients with pT2 and pT3a prostate cancer with detailed surgical margin parameters and BCR status. We compared a base model, a linear predictor calculated from the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center postoperative nomogram (prostate-specific antigen, pathological tumour grade and stage), with the addition of surgical margin status to five additional models (base model plus surgical margin subclassifications) to evaluate enhancement in predictive accuracy. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to determine the clinical utility of parameters that enhanced predictive accuracy. RESULTS Among 2147 men, 205 had PSMs, and 231 developed BCR. Discrimination for the base model with addition of surgical margin status was high (c-index = 0.801) and not meaningfully improved by adding surgical margin subclassification in the full cohort. In analyses considering only men with PSMs (N = 55 with BCR), adding surgical margin subclassification to the base model increased discrimination for total length of all PSMs - alone or with maximum Gleason grade at the margin (c-index improvement = 0.717 to 0.752 and 0.753, respectively). DCA demonstrated a modest benefit to clinical utility with the addition of these parameters. CONCLUSIONS Specific subclassification parameters add predictive accuracy for BCR and may aid clinical utility in decision-making for patients with PSMs. These findings may be useful for patient counselling and future adjuvant therapy trial design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shawn Dason
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Emily A. Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Kazuma Udo
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Daniel D. Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Andrew J. Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | | | - Ying-Bei Chen
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Peter T. Scardino
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - James A. Eastham
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | | | - Samson W. Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Jiang Y, Meyers TJ, Emeka AA, Cooley LF, Cooper PR, Lancki N, Helenowski I, Kachuri L, Lin DW, Stanford JL, Newcomb LF, Kolb S, Finelli A, Fleshner NE, Komisarenko M, Eastham JA, Ehdaie B, Benfante N, Logothetis CJ, Gregg JR, Perez CA, Garza S, Kim J, Marks LS, Delfin M, Barsa D, Vesprini D, Klotz LH, Loblaw A, Mamedov A, Goldenberg SL, Higano CS, Spillane M, Wu E, Carter HB, Pavlovich CP, Mamawala M, Landis T, Carroll PR, Chan JM, Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Morgan TM, Siddiqui J, Martin R, Klein EA, Brittain K, Gotwald P, Barocas DA, Dallmer JR, Gordetsky JB, Steele P, Kundu SD, Stockdale J, Roobol MJ, Venderbos LD, Sanda MG, Arnold R, Patil D, Evans CP, Dall’Era MA, Vij A, Costello AJ, Chow K, Corcoran NM, Rais-Bahrami S, Phares C, Scherr DS, Flynn T, Karnes RJ, Koch M, Dhondt CR, Nelson JB, McBride D, Cookson MS, Stratton KL, Farriester S, Hemken E, Stadler WM, Pera T, Banionyte D, Bianco FJ, Lopez IH, Loeb S, Taneja SS, Byrne N, Amling CL, Martinez A, Boileau L, Gaylis FD, Petkewicz J, Kirwen N, Helfand BT, Xu J, Scholtens DM, Catalona WJ, Witte JS. Genetic Factors Associated with Prostate Cancer Conversion from Active Surveillance to Treatment. HGG Adv 2022; 3:100070. [PMID: 34993496 PMCID: PMC8725988 DOI: 10.1016/j.xhgg.2021.100070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) are increasingly electing active surveillance (AS) as their initial management strategy. While this may reduce the side effects of treatment for prostate cancer, many men on AS eventually convert to active treatment. PC is one of the most heritable cancers, and genetic factors that predispose to aggressive tumors may help distinguish men who are more likely to discontinue AS. To investigate this, we undertook a multi-institutional genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 5,222 PC patients and 1,139 other patients from replication cohorts, all of whom initially elected AS and were followed over time for the potential outcome of conversion from AS to active treatment. In the GWAS we detected 18 variants associated with conversion, 15 of which were not previously associated with PC risk. With a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), we found two genes associated with conversion (MAST3, p = 6.9×10-7 and GAB2, p = 2.0×10-6). Moreover, increasing values of a previously validated 269-variant genetic risk score (GRS) for PC was positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the highest to the two middle deciles gave a hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]= 0.94-1.36); whereas, decreasing values of a 36-variant GRS for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the lowest to the two middle deciles gave a HR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.50). These results suggest that germline genetics may help inform and individualize the decision of AS-or the intensity of monitoring on AS-versus treatment for the initial management of patients with low-risk PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Jiang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Travis J. Meyers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Adaeze A. Emeka
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Lauren Folgosa Cooley
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Phillip R. Cooper
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Nicola Lancki
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Irene Helenowski
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Linda Kachuri
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Daniel W. Lin
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Janet L. Stanford
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Epidemiology Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Lisa F. Newcomb
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Suzanne Kolb
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Epidemiology Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Antonio Finelli
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Neil E. Fleshner
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Maria Komisarenko
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christopher J. Logothetis
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Justin R. Gregg
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Cherie A. Perez
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sergio Garza
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeri Kim
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Danielle Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Danny Vesprini
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Laurence H. Klotz
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Alexandre Mamedov
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - S. Larry Goldenberg
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Celestia S. Higano
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Maria Spillane
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Eugenia Wu
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - H. Ballentine Carter
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Christian P. Pavlovich
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mufaddal Mamawala
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Tricia Landis
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Peter R. Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - June M. Chan
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Matthew R. Cooperberg
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Janet E. Cowan
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Todd M. Morgan
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Javed Siddiqui
- Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Rabia Martin
- Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Eric A. Klein
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Karen Brittain
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Paige Gotwald
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Daniel A. Barocas
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jeremiah R. Dallmer
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jennifer B. Gordetsky
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Pam Steele
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Shilajit D. Kundu
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Jazmine Stockdale
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Monique J. Roobol
- Department of Urology, Erasmus Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lionne D.F. Venderbos
- Department of Urology, Erasmus Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martin G. Sanda
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Rebecca Arnold
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Dattatraya Patil
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Christopher P. Evans
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Marc A. Dall’Era
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Anjali Vij
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Anthony J. Costello
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Ken Chow
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Niall M. Corcoran
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Soroush Rais-Bahrami
- Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Courtney Phares
- Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Douglas S. Scherr
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Thomas Flynn
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Michael Koch
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Courtney Rose Dhondt
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Joel B. Nelson
- Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Dawn McBride
- Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Michael S. Cookson
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Kelly L. Stratton
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Stephen Farriester
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Erin Hemken
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | | | - Tuula Pera
- University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | | | | | - Stacy Loeb
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samir S. Taneja
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nataliya Byrne
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Ann Martinez
- Department of Urology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Luc Boileau
- Department of Urology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Franklin D. Gaylis
- Genesis Healthcare Partners, Department of Urology, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| | | | - Nicholas Kirwen
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Brian T. Helfand
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Jianfeng Xu
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Denise M. Scholtens
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - William J. Catalona
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - John S. Witte
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Departments of Epidemiology and Population Health, Biomedical Data Science, and Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Tzeng M, Vertosick E, Basourakos SP, Eastham JA, Ehdaie B, Scardino PT, Vickers AJ, Hu JC. Addition of Prostate Volume and Prostate-specific Antigen Density to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Prostate Cancer Nomograms. EUR UROL SUPPL 2021; 30:13-15. [PMID: 34337542 PMCID: PMC8317781 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density is an established prognostic marker for prostate cancer. We investigated whether the inclusion of PSA density or prostate volume in the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomograms improves the prediction of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Among the 11 725 men included, 2140 developed BCR. Neither PSA density nor prostate volume was associated with BCR when added to either the pre-RP or post-RP model (all p values ≥0.10) and changes in the C index were very small (largest change, 0.002). The results were robust to exclusion of outlying prostate volumes and restriction to patients treated after 2005. There is no justification for adding prostate volume or PSA density to BCR nomograms. Patient summary Addition of prostate volume or prostate-specific antigen density to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center prediction schemes did not improve the prediction of recurrence of prostate cancer after removal of the prostate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Tzeng
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Emily Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Spyridon P. Basourakos
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter T. Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew J. Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jim C. Hu
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
- Corresponding author. Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, Laudone VP, Ehdaie B, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Vickers A. Limited versus Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4:532-539. [PMID: 33865797 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2020] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/19/2021] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is the most reliable procedure for lymph node staging. However, the therapeutic benefit remains unproven; although most radical prostatectomies at academic centers are accompanied by PLND, there is no consensus regarding the optimal anatomical extent of PLND. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether extended PLND results in a lower biochemical recurrence rate. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We conducted a single-center randomized trial. Patients, enrolled between October 2011 and March 2017, were scheduled to undergo radical prostatectomy and PLND. Patients were assigned to limited or extended PLND by cluster randomization. Specifically, surgeons were randomized to perform limited or extended PLND for 3-mo periods. INTERVENTION Randomization to limited (external iliac nodes) or extended (external iliac, obturator fossa and hypogastric nodes) PLND. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was the rate of biochemical recurrence. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 1440 patients included in the final analysis, 700 were randomized to limited PLND and 740 to extended PLND. The median number of nodes retrieved was 12 (interquartile range [IQR] 8-17) for limited PLND and 14 (IQR 10-20) extended PLND; the corresponding rate of positive nodes was 12% and 14% (difference -1.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.4% to 1.5%; p = 0.3). With median follow-up of 3.1 yr, there was no significant difference in the rate of biochemical recurrence between the groups (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.93-1.15; p = 0.5). Rates for grade 2 and 3 complications were similar at 7.3% for limited versus 6.4% for extended PLND; there were no grade 4 or 5 complications. CONCLUSIONS Extended PLND did not improve freedom from biochemical recurrence over limited PLND for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. However, there were smaller than expected differences in nodal count and the rate of positive nodes between the two templates. A randomized trial comparing PLND to no node dissection is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY In this clinical trial we did not find a difference in the rate of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer between limited and extended dissection of lymph nodes in the pelvis. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01407263.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karim A Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrew Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, Ortega D, Gill K, Dell'Oglio P, Thalmann GN, Heidenreich A, Eastham JA, Evans CP, Karnes RJ, De Castro Abreu AL, Briganti A, Artibani W, Gill I, Montorsi F. Impact of Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection and Its Extent on Perioperative Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4:134-149. [PMID: 33745687 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Revised: 01/22/2021] [Accepted: 02/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) yields the most accurate staging in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa), although it can be associated with morbidity. OBJECTIVE To systematically evaluate the impact of PLND extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing RP. A new PLND-related complication assessment tool is proposed. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) was conducted. MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched to yield studies discussing perioperative complications following RP and PLND. The extent of PLND was classified according to the European Association of Urology PCa guidelines. Studies were categorized according to the extent of PLND. Intra- and postoperative complications were classified as "strongly," "likely," or "unlikely" related to PLND. Anatomical site of perioperative complications was recorded. A cumulative meta-analysis of comparative studies was conducted using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Our search generated 3645 papers, with 176 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Details of 77 303 patients were analyzed. Of these studies, 84 (47.7%), combining data on 28 428 patients, described intraoperative complications as an outcome of interest. Overall, 534 (1.8%) patients reported one or more intraoperative complications. Postoperative complications were reported in 151 (85.7%) studies, combining data on 73 629 patients. Overall, 10 401 (14.1%) patients reported one or more postoperative complication. The most reported postoperative complication strongly related to PLND was lymphocele (90.6%). The pooled meta-analysis revealed that RP + limited PLND/standard PLND had a significantly decreased risk of experiencing any intraoperative complication (risk ratio [RR]: 0.55; p = 0.01) and postoperative complication strongly related to PLND (RR: 0.46; p = <0.00001), particularly for lymphocele formation (RR: 0.52; p = 0.0003) and thromboembolic events (RR: 0.59; p = 0.008), when compared with extended/superextended PLND. The extent of PLND was confirmed to be an independent predictor of lymphocele formation (RR: 1.77; p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS The perioperative morbidity of PLND in patients undergoing RP and PLND for PCa significantly correlates with the extent of PLND. More standardized reporting of intra- and postoperative complications is needed to better estimate the direct impact of PLND extent on perioperative morbidity. PATIENT SUMMARY Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is the most accurate method for staging in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, although it can be associated with complications. This study aims to systematically evaluate the impact of PLND extent on perioperative complications in these patients. We found that intra- and postoperative complications correlate significantly with the extent of PLND. A more rigorous assessment and thorough reporting of perioperative complications are recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanni E Cacciamani
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - Marissa Maas
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Nima Nassiri
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - David Ortega
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Karanvir Gill
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - George N Thalmann
- Department of BioMedical Research, Urology Research Laboratory, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Axel Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot Assisted and Reconstructive Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christopher P Evans
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis, CA, USA; UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | | | - Andre L De Castro Abreu
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute (URI), IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Walter Artibani
- Urologic Clinic, Department of Oncological and Surgical Sciences, AOU Integrata and University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Inderbir Gill
- The Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute (URI), IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Chesnut GT, Tin AL, Sivaraman A, Takeda T, Lee T, Fainberg J, Benfante N, Sjoberg DD, Vargas HA, Fine SW, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Coleman JA, Touijer KA, Zelefsky MJ, Ehdaie B. Defining the index lesion for potential salvage partial or hemi-gland ablation after radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:495.e17-495.e24. [PMID: 33583697 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2020] [Revised: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 01/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Salvage partial gland ablation (sPGA) has been proposed to treat some localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer. The role of prostate biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics to identify patients eligible for sPGA is unknown. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the ability of MRI and prostate biopsy characteristics to identify an index lesion suitable for sPGA and validate this selection using detailed tumor maps created from whole-mount slides from salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) specimens. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Men who underwent sRP for recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy between 2000 and 2014 at a single high-volume cancer center were eligible. Those with tumor maps, MRI and biopsy data were included in analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Primary outcome was the ability of clinicopathologic and imaging criteria to identify patients who may be eligible for sPGA based on detailed tumor map from whole-mount sRP slides. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 216 men who underwent sRP following whole gland radiotherapy, tumor maps, MRI, and biopsy data were available for 77. Of these, 15 (19%) were determined to be eligible for sPGA based on biopsy-proven unilateral disease in contiguous sextant segments, a dominant lesion on MRI concordant with biopsy location or no focal region of interest, and no imaging evidence of extraprostatic disease. Review of tumor maps identified 6 additional men who would have met criteria for sPGA, resulting in sensitivity of 71% (95% C.I. 48%-89%) and specificity of 100% (lower bound of 95% C.I. 94%). None of the 15 men who met the criteria for sPGA on clinical data were identified incorrectly on tumor maps to require full gland surgery (upper bound of 95% C.I. 22%). Median tumor volume of the index lesion was 0.4 cc and recurrent cancer was noted in the apex, mid-gland, and base in 81%, 100%, and 29% of men. CONCLUSIONS In men with recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy, biopsy findings and MRI can be used to select index lesions potentially amenable for sPGA and can guide patient evaluation for inclusion in clinical trials of sPGA following radiation failure. Larger, prospective studies are required to evaluate both the role of MRI and clinical criteria in guiding focal salvage therapy and the effectiveness of this modality for radiorecurrent prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory T Chesnut
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Arjun Sivaraman
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Toshikazu Takeda
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Taehyoung Lee
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan Fainberg
- Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - Samson W Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan A Coleman
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Jibara G, Sjoberg DD, Stearns GL, Stabholz Y, Fathollahi A, Leddy LS, Benfante N, Ehdaie B, Coleman JA, Eastham JA, Sandhu JS. Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate in the Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance. Urology 2021; 156:225-230. [PMID: 33539897 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.01.040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2020] [Revised: 01/20/2021] [Accepted: 01/21/2021] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of photoselective vaporization of the prostate in alleviating refractory lower urinary tract symptoms in prostate cancer patients who are managed with active surveillance and to explore the association of this procedure with prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and cancer progression rates. METHODS Between 2008-2018, active surveillance patients who had refractory symptoms and needed surgery were studied. Perioperative functional variables were collected and analyzed. Disease progression was defined as an upgrade or upstage on surveillance biopsies or multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging. Mean postop scores were estimated using locally-weighted methods. The risk of progression was reported using Kaplan-Meier's method. RESULTS Seventy-one patients were included in the study. The median age was 68 years and the median surveillance time before surgery was 4 years. At 12 months, there were substantial improvements in the mean International Prostate Symptom Score (18-5.9), maximum flow rate (6.8-14 mL/s), postvoid residual (240-73mL), PSA (8.1-5.2 ng/mL), and prostate volume (85-57mL). At 30-days, only 2 patients with grade-III complications. Late consequences included tissue regrowth in 4 and urethral stricture (requiring a single dilation) in 3 patients. PSA levels decreased by 36% at 12 months postoperatively. With a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 7 men progressed and received radical treatment. At 3 years, the probability of remaining on surveillance was 93% (95% CI 87%- 100%). CONCLUSION Photoselective vaporization of the prostate offers substantial relief of symptoms in active surveillance patients with refractory symptoms, without adverse effects on disease progression rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ghalib Jibara
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | | | - Yariv Stabholz
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Ali Fathollahi
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Laura S Leddy
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Jonathan A Coleman
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| | - Jaspreet S Sandhu
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Schaeffer E, Srinivas S, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ, Bekelman JE, Cheng H, D’Amico AV, Davis BJ, Desai N, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Farrington TA, Gao X, Horwitz EM, Ippolito JE, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, McKay R, McKenney J, Netto G, Penson DF, Pow-Sang JM, Reiter R, Richey S, Roach, III M, Rosenfeld S, Shabsigh A, Spratt DE, Teply BA, Tward J, Shead DA, Freedman-Cass DA. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2021. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:134-143. [DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 126] [Impact Index Per Article: 42.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and include management options for localized, regional, and metastatic disease. Recommendations for disease monitoring and treatment of recurrent disease are also included. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel meets annually to reevaluate and update their recommendations based on new clinical data and input from within NCCN Member Institutions and from external entities. This article summarizes the panel’s discussions for the 2021 update of the guidelines with regard to systemic therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Schaeffer
- 1Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Heather Cheng
- 6Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
| | - Anthony Victor D’Amico
- 7Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center
| | | | - Neil Desai
- 9UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Xin Gao
- 7Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center
| | | | - Joseph E. Ippolito
- 14Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | - Jesse McKenney
- 18Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | | | | | - Sylvia Richey
- 23St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center
| | | | - Stan Rosenfeld
- 25University of California San Francisco Patient Services Committee Chair
| | - Ahmad Shabsigh
- 26The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | | | | | - Jonathan Tward
- 29Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah; and
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Mungovan SF, Carlsson SV, Gass GC, Graham PL, Sandhu JS, Akin O, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Patel MI. Preoperative exercise interventions to optimize continence outcomes following radical prostatectomy. Nat Rev Urol 2021; 18:259-281. [PMID: 33833445 PMCID: PMC8030653 DOI: 10.1038/s41585-021-00445-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Urinary incontinence is a common and predictable consequence among men with localized prostate cancer who have undergone radical prostatectomy. Despite advances in the surgical technique, urinary continence recovery time remains variable. A range of surgical and patient-related risk factors contributing to urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy have been described, including age, BMI, membranous urethral length and urethral sphincter insufficiency. Physical activity interventions incorporating aerobic exercise, resistance training and pelvic floor muscle training programmes can positively influence the return to continence in men after radical prostatectomy. Traditional approaches to improving urinary continence after radical prostatectomy have typically focused on interventions delivered during the postoperative period (rehabilitation). However, the limited efficacy of these postoperative approaches has led to a shift from the traditional reactive model of care to more comprehensive interventions incorporating exercise-based programmes that begin in the preoperative period (prehabilitation) and continue after surgery. Comprehensive prehabilitation interventions include appropriately prescribed aerobic exercise, resistance training and specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and exercise training programmes. Transperineal ultrasonography is a non-invasive and validated method for the visualization of the action of the pelvic floor musculature, providing real-time visual biofeedback to the patient during specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and training. Importantly, the waiting time before surgery can be used for the delivery of comprehensive prehabilitation exercise-based interventions to increase patient preparedness in the lead-up to surgery and optimize continence and health-related quality-of-life outcomes following radical prostatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sean F. Mungovan
- Westmead Private Physiotherapy Services, Westmead Private Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales Australia ,The Clinical Research Institute, Westmead, New South Wales Australia ,grid.1027.40000 0004 0409 2862Department of Professions, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria Australia
| | - Sigrid V. Carlsson
- grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Urology Service at the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA ,grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA ,grid.8761.80000 0000 9919 9582Institute of Clinical Sciences, Department of Urology, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Gregory C. Gass
- The Clinical Research Institute, Westmead, New South Wales Australia ,grid.420519.b0000 0000 9952 4517Physical Therapy Program, University of Jamestown, Fargo, ND USA
| | - Petra L. Graham
- grid.1004.50000 0001 2158 5405Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, New South Wales Australia
| | - Jaspreet S. Sandhu
- grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Urology Service at the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Oguz Akin
- grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Peter T. Scardino
- grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Urology Service at the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - James A. Eastham
- grid.51462.340000 0001 2171 9952Urology Service at the Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY USA
| | - Manish I. Patel
- grid.1013.30000 0004 1936 834XSpecialty of Surgery, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales Australia ,grid.413252.30000 0001 0180 6477Department of Urology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales Australia
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Abrams-Pompe RS, Fanti S, Schoots IG, Moore CM, Turkbey B, Vickers AJ, Walz J, Steuber T, Eastham JA. The Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Primary Staging of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol Oncol 2020; 4:370-395. [PMID: 33272865 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2020] [Revised: 10/22/2020] [Accepted: 11/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) is guided in part by accurate clinical staging. The role of imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), in initial staging remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the studies of MRI and/or PET/CT in the staging of newly diagnosed PCa with respect to tumor (T), nodal (N), and metastatic (M) staging (TNM staging). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We performed a systematic review of the literature using MEDLINE and Web of Science databases between 2012 and 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 139 studies (83 on T, 47 on N, and 24 on M status) were included. Ninety-nine (71%) were retrospective, 39 (28%) were prospective, and one was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Most studies on T staging examined MRI, while PET/CT was used primarily for N and M staging. Sensitivity for the detection of extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node invasion ranged widely. When imaging was incorporated into existing risk tools, gain in accuracy was observed in some studies, although these findings have not been replicated. For M staging, most favorable results were reported for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT, which demonstrated significantly better performance than conventional imaging. CONCLUSIONS A variety of studies on modern imaging techniques for TNM staging in newly diagnosed PCa exist. For T and N staging, reported sensitivity of imaging modalities such as MRI or PET/CT varied widely due to data heterogeneity, small sample size, and low event rates resulting in large confidence intervals and a high level of uncertainty. Therefore, uniformity in data presentation and standardization on this topic are needed. The most promising technique for M staging, which was evaluated recently in an RCT, is PSMA-PET/CT. PATIENT SUMMARY We performed a systematic review of currently available imaging modalities to stage newly diagnosed prostate cancer. With respect to local tumor and lymph node assessment, performance of imaging ranged widely. However, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography showed favorable results for the detection of distant metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raisa S Abrams-Pompe
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
| | - Stefano Fanti
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Policlinico S. Orsola, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Ivo G Schoots
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jochen Walz
- Department of Urology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes Cancer Center, Marseille, France
| | - Thomas Steuber
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Mohler JL, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ, D'Amico AV, Davis BJ, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Enke CA, Farrington TA, Higano CS, Horwitz EM, Hurwitz M, Ippolito JE, Kane CJ, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, McKenney J, Netto G, Penson DF, Plimack ER, Pow-Sang JM, Pugh TJ, Richey S, Roach M, Rosenfeld S, Schaeffer E, Shabsigh A, Small EJ, Spratt DE, Srinivas S, Tward J, Shead DA, Freedman-Cass DA. Prostate Cancer, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:479-505. [PMID: 31085757 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 814] [Impact Index Per Article: 203.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations regarding diagnosis, risk stratification and workup, treatment options for localized disease, and management of recurrent and advanced disease for clinicians who treat patients with prostate cancer. The portions of the guidelines included herein focus on the roles of germline and somatic genetic testing, risk stratification with nomograms and tumor multigene molecular testing, androgen deprivation therapy, secondary hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Joseph E Ippolito
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | - Jesse McKenney
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - George Netto
- University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | - Sylvia Richey
- St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center
| | - Mack Roach
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | - Edward Schaeffer
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Ahmad Shabsigh
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Eric J Small
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Jonathan Tward
- Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah; and
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Mason BR, Eastham JA, Davis BJ, Mynderse LA, Pugh TJ, Lee RJ, Ippolito JE. Current Status of MRI and PET in the NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:506-513. [PMID: 31085758 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.7306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2018] [Accepted: 03/29/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) represents a significant source of morbidity and mortality for men in the United States, with approximately 1 in 9 being diagnosed with PCa in their lifetime. The role of imaging in the evaluation of men with PCa has evolved and currently plays a central role in diagnosis, treatment planning, and evaluation of recurrence. Appropriate use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and MRI-guided transrectal ultrasound (MR-TRUS) biopsy increases the detection of clinically significant PCa while decreasing the detection of clinically insignificant PCa. This process may help patients with clinically insignificant PCa avoid the adverse effects of unnecessary therapy. In the setting of a known PCa, patients with low-grade disease can be observed using active surveillance, which often includes a combination of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, serial mpMRI, and, if indicated, follow-up systematic and targeted TRUS-guided tissue sampling. mpMRI can provide important information in the posttreatment setting, but PET/CT is creating a paradigm shift in imaging standards for patients with locally recurrent and metastatic PCa. This article examines the strengths and limitations of mpMRI for initial PCa diagnosis, active surveillance, recurrent disease evaluation, and image-guided biopsies, and the use of PET/CT imaging in men with recurrent PCa. The goal of this review is to provide a rational basis for current NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for PCa as they pertain to the use of these advanced imaging modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brandon R Mason
- Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Thomas J Pugh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado; and
| | - Richard J Lee
- Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Joseph E Ippolito
- Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Eastham JA. Salvage Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Nodal Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy Results in Minimal Clinical Benefit. Eur Urol 2020; 78:670. [PMID: 32736930 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.07.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2020] [Accepted: 07/11/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Eastham JA, Heller G, Halabi S, Monk JP, Beltran H, Gleave M, Evans CP, Clinton SK, Szmulewitz RZ, Coleman J, Hillman DW, Watt CR, George S, Sanda MG, Hahn OM, Taplin ME, Parsons JK, Mohler JL, Small EJ, Morris MJ. Cancer and Leukemia Group B 90203 (Alliance): Radical Prostatectomy With or Without Neoadjuvant Chemohormonal Therapy in Localized, High-Risk Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:3042-3050. [PMID: 32706639 DOI: 10.1200/jco.20.00315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Radical prostatectomy (RP) alone is often inadequate in curing men with clinically localized, high-risk prostate cancer (PC). We hypothesized that chemohormonal therapy (CHT) with androgen-deprivation therapy plus docetaxel before RP would improve biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) over RP alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS Men with clinically localized, high-risk PC were assigned to RP alone or neoadjuvant CHT with androgen deprivation plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 body surface area every 3 weeks for 6 cycles) and RP. The primary end point was 3-year BPFS. Biochemical failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level > 0.2 ng/mL that increased on 2 consecutive occasions that were at least 3 months apart. Secondary end points included 5-year BPFS, overall BPFS, local recurrence, metastasis-free survival (MFS), PC-specific mortality, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS In total, 788 men were randomly assigned. Median follow-up time was 6.1 years. The overall rates of grade 3 and 4 adverse events during chemotherapy were 26% and 19%, respectively. No difference was seen in 3-year BPFS between neoadjuvant CHT plus RP and RP alone (0.89 v 0.84, respectively; 95% CI for the difference, -0.01 to 0.11; P = .11). Neoadjuvant CHT was associated with improved overall BPFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.99), improved MFS (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.95), and improved OS (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.94) compared with RP alone. CONCLUSION The primary study end point, 3-year BPFS, was not met. Although some improvement was seen in secondary end points, any potential benefit must be weighed against toxicity. Our data do not support the routine use of neoadjuvant CHT and RP in patients with clinically localized, high-risk PC at this time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Glenn Heller
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Susan Halabi
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC
| | - J Paul Monk
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Martin Gleave
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Steven K Clinton
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - David W Hillman
- Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Colleen R Watt
- Alliance Protocol Operations Office, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Saby George
- Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY
| | | | - Olwen M Hahn
- Alliance Protocol Operations Office, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | | | | | | | - Eric J Small
- University of California, San Francisco, Medical Center-Mount Zion, San Francisco, CA
| | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Carlsson SV, Eastham JA, Crawford ED, Harris RG. "PSA Surveillance in the Septuagenarian": A Proposed New Terminology for Clinical Follow-up to Assess Risk of Prostate Cancer in Men Aged 70 Years and Older. Eur Urol 2020; 78:136-137. [PMID: 32273182 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/20/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
We propose a new terminology for assessing the risk of prostate cancer among men aged >70 yr: "PSA surveillance in the septuagenarian."
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sigrid V Carlsson
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Ito Y, Vertosick EA, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Al-Ahmadie HA, Chen YB, Gopalan A, Sirintrapun SJ, Tickoo SK, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Reuter VE, Fine SW. In Organ-confined Prostate Cancer, Tumor Quantitation Not Found to Aid in Prediction of Biochemical Recurrence. Am J Surg Pathol 2020; 43:1061-1065. [PMID: 31107718 DOI: 10.1097/pas.0000000000001291] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
In the eighth edition AJCC staging, all organ-confined disease is assigned pathologic stage T2, without subclassification. We investigated whether total tumor volume (TTV) and/or maximum tumor diameter (MTD) of the index lesion are useful in improving prediction of biochemical recurrence (BCR) in pT2 patients. We identified 1657 patients with digital tumor maps and quantification of TTV/MTD who had pT2 disease on radical prostatectomy (RP). Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess whether TTV and/or MTD are independent predictors of BCR when adjusting for a base model incorporating age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, RP grade group, and surgical margin status. If either tumor quantification added significantly, we calculated and reported the c-index. Ninety-five patients experienced BCR after RP; median follow-up for patients without BCR was 5.7 years. The c-index was 0.737 for the base model. Although there was some evidence of an association between TTV and BCR (P=0.088), this did not meet conventional levels of statistical significance and only provided a limited increase in discrimination (0.743; c-index improvement: 0.006). MTD was not associated with BCR (P>0.9). In analyses excluding patients with grade group 1 on biopsy who would be less likely to undergo RP in contemporary practice (622 patients; 59 with BCR), TTV/MTD was not a statistically significant predictor (P=0.4 and 0.8, respectively). Without evidence that tumor quantitation, in the form of either TTV or MTD of the index lesion, is useful for the prediction of BCR in pT2 prostate cancer, we cannot recommend its routine reporting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yujiro Ito
- Departments of Surgery (Urology Service)
| | | | | | | | | | - Ying-Bei Chen
- Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | - Satish K Tickoo
- Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | | | - Victor E Reuter
- Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Samson W Fine
- Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Bravi CA, Tin A, Montorsi F, Mulhall JP, Eastham JA, Vickers AJ. Erectile Function and Sexual Satisfaction: The Importance of Asking About Sexual Desire. J Sex Med 2020; 17:349-352. [PMID: 31735617 PMCID: PMC7641190 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.09.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2019] [Revised: 09/25/2019] [Accepted: 09/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Erectile function, libido, and sexual bother are incompletely correlated: a man may or may not be satisfied for a given level of erectile function; similarly, 2 men may have the same erectile function and different levels of sexual desire. AIM To explore the relationship between erectile function, sexual satisfaction and sexual desire. METHODS We examined the Spearman correlation among erectile function (International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF-6]), sexual desire, and sexual bother in 3,944 questionnaires completed by patients after radical prostatectomy as part of routine care. IIEF-6 scores were adjusted if a patient indicated that the reason for not having intercourse was other than lack of ability of confidence (eg, lack of partner). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Patient-reported outcome instruments. RESULTS Median age at surgery and preoperative IIEF-6 were 63 years and 26, respectively. Among questionnaires completed after surgery, there was moderate correlation among the IIEF-6 score and both sexual desire (Spearman rho: 0.41) and sexual bother (Spearman rho: 0.30). In men who reported high or moderate bother relating to sexual function, there was a narrow distribution of erectile function scores, with most men reporting poor function (median IIEF-6: 6, interquartile range 3, 11). For men who reported small or no problem with sexual function, the distribution of erectile function scores was wide, and particularly bimodal as a function of sexual desire. Among patients with high desire, the correlation between sexual bother and erectile function was 0.61 (ie, the poorer is your function, the greater you are bothered), whereas it was -0.081 among patients with low desire, meaning that some men are not bothered by poor erections. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS We provided useful insights to help physicians during sexual counselling after surgery for prostate cancer. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS The study included a large number of patients and provides evidence for implementation of patient-reported outcome insturments. Limitations include the retrospective nature of our data. CONCLUSION Sexual desire helps explain the moderate correlation between erectile function and sexual bother. Sexual desire and bother questions should be incorporated in patient-reported outcome instruments for male sexual function. Bravi CA, Tin A, Montorsi F, et al. Erectile Function and Sexual Satisfaction: The Importance of Asking About Sexual Desire. J Sex Med 2020;17:349-352.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Andrea Bravi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Amy Tin
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - John P Mulhall
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Saylor PJ, Rumble RB, Tagawa S, Eastham JA, Finelli A, Reddy PS, Kungel TM, Nissenberg MG, Michalski JM. Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer: ASCO Endorsement of a Cancer Care Ontario Guideline. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:1736-1743. [PMID: 31990618 DOI: 10.1200/jco.19.03148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In 2017, Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-Based Care released the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline. This guideline included recommendations across a relatively broad clinical spectrum within prostate cancer. Topics addressed ranged from management of osteoporotic fracture risk in nonmetastatic disease to management of men with castration-resistant prostate cancer metastatic to bone. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS The Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel then reviewed the content and the recommendations. RESULTS The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline were clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO wholly endorses the Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS The ASCO Expert Panel endorses all the original guideline recommendations as written and offers a series of discussion points to guide practice for clinicians as they manage bone-related risks within this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Antonio Finelli
- Princess Margaret Cancer Center, University Health Network, and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Takeda T, Tin AL, Corradi RB, Alvim R, Hashimoto T, Ito Y, Nguyen DP, Mamoor M, Robertson NL, Vargas HA, Benfante NE, Sjoberg DD, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Fine SW, Oya M, Touijer KA. Extensive disease among potential candidates for hemi-ablative focal therapy for prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2019; 27:179-185. [PMID: 31833113 DOI: 10.1111/iju.14161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2019] [Accepted: 11/05/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine a set of proposed eligibility factors for hemi-ablative focal therapy in prostate cancer and to determine the likelihood of residual extensive disease. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data from 98 patients with unilateral prostate cancer on biopsy with detailed tumor maps from whole-mount slides and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging data. These patients met the focal therapy consensus meeting inclusion criteria (prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, clinical stage T1c-T2a and Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4 on needle biopsy), and underwent radical prostatectomy between 2000 and 2014. Extensive disease was defined as having Gleason pattern 4/5 in bilateral lobes, any extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node invasion. Both lobes of the prostate were scored on magnetic resonance imaging. Preoperative characteristics including biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging data were used to predict extensive disease. RESULTS Among our cohort of 98 patients, 40% (95% CI 30-50%) had extensive disease. A total of 33% (95% CI 24-43%) had Gleason pattern 4/5 in both lobes with a median Gleason pattern 4/5 tumor volume in the biopsy negative lobe of 0.06 cm3 , 17 patients had pathological tumor stage ≥3 and one patient had lymph node invasion. CONCLUSIONS An important number of patients meeting the focal therapy consensus meeting inclusion criteria can present extensive disease. Further studies using targeted biopsies might provide more accurate information about the selection of focal therapy candidates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Toshikazu Takeda
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA.,Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Renato B Corradi
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA.,Mario Penna Cancer Institute, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| | - Ricardo Alvim
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Takeshi Hashimoto
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Yujiro Ito
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Daniel P Nguyen
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA.,Urology Service, Hospital Neuchâtelois, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
| | - Maha Mamoor
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Nicola L Robertson
- Departments of, Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Hebert A Vargas
- Departments of, Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Nicole E Benfante
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Samson W Fine
- Department of, Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| | - Mototsugu Oya
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Jang TL, Kim IY, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Reply to Effectiveness of radical prostatectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy versus radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation therapy for men with advanced prostate cancer: Do we have certainties today? Cancer 2019; 125:2318-2320. [PMID: 30861093 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas L Jang
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Isaac Y Kim
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Woo S, Suh CH, Eastham JA, Zelefsky MJ, Morris MJ, Abida W, Scher HI, Sidlow R, Becker AS, Wibmer AG, Hricak H, Vargas HA. Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-stratified Clinical Pathways and Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy Pathway for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 2:605-616. [PMID: 31204311 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2019] [Revised: 05/14/2019] [Accepted: 05/23/2019] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Recent studies suggested that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by targeted biopsy ("MRI-stratified pathway") detects more clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) than the systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) pathway, but controversy persists. Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were recently published, enabling generation of higher-level evidence to evaluate this hypothesis. OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing the detection rates of csPCa in the MRI-stratified pathway and the systematic TRUS-Bx pathway in patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to March 18, 2019. RCTs reporting csPCa detection rates of both pathways in patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer were included. Relative csPCa detection rates of the MRI-stratified pathway were pooled using random-effect model. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. A comparison of detection rates of clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa) and any PCa was also performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Nine RCTs (2908 patients) were included. The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the TRUS-Bx pathway (relative detection rate 1.45 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.92] for all patients, and 1.42 [95% CI 1.02-1.97] and 1.60 [95% CI 1.01-2.54] for biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy patients, respectively). Detection rates were not significantly different between pathways for cisPCa (0.89 [95% CI 0.49-1.62]), but higher in the MRI-stratified pathway for the detection of any PCa (1.39 [95% CI 1.05-1.84]). CONCLUSIONS The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the systematic TRUS-guided biopsy pathway in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa, for both biopsy-naïve patients and those with prior negative biopsy. The detection rate of any PCa was higher in the MRI-stratified pathway, but not significantly different from that of cisPCa. PATIENT SUMMARY Our meta-analysis of clinical trials shows that the magnetic resonance imaging-stratified pathway detects more clinically significant prostate cancers than the transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy pathway in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sungmin Woo
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Chong Hyun Suh
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Morris
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wassim Abida
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Howard I Scher
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert Sidlow
- Integrative Medicine Service, Division of Survivorship and Supportive Care, Bendheim Center for Integrative Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anton S Becker
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andreas G Wibmer
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hedvig Hricak
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Carlsson SV, Eastham JA. Re: Use of Prostate Systematic and Targeted Biopsy on the Basis of Multiparametric MRI in Biopsy-naive Patients (MRI-FIRST): A Prospective, Multicentre, Paired Diagnostic Study. Eur Urol 2019; 76:534-535. [PMID: 31064692 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2019] [Accepted: 04/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Sigrid V Carlsson
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Dean LW, Tin AL, Chesnut GT, Assel M, LaDuke E, Fromkin J, Vargas HA, Ehdaie B, Coleman JA, Touijer K, Eastham JA, Laudone VP. Contemporary Management of Hemorrhage After Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy. Urology 2019; 130:120-125. [PMID: 31034916 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.04.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2019] [Revised: 04/12/2019] [Accepted: 04/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe contemporary management and outcomes of patients experiencing postoperative hemorrhage after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent minimally invasive radical prostatectomy at our institution between January 2010 and January 2017. Clinically significant hemorrhage was defined as a decrease in hemoglobin of ≥30% or 4 g/dL from preoperative to 4 or 14 hours postoperative measurement, receiving a blood transfusion within 30 days, or undergoing a secondary procedure to control bleeding. Patients were analyzed in 3 groups: (1) serially monitored only, (2) received a blood transfusion, and (3) underwent a secondary procedure. Outcomes included imaging studies performed, length of stay, emergency room visits, hospital readmissions, complication rates, and functional outcomes. RESULTS Of 3749 men, 4% (151/3749) had clinically significant hemorrhage, 1.6% (60/3749) received a transfusion; 0.32% (12/3749) underwent a secondary procedure to control bleeding. In a 30-day composite outcome, increased healthcare utilization (emergency room visit, readmission, or Grade ≥3 complications), was seen in 25% of the serial monitoring group, 65% of the transfusion group, and 100% in the secondary procedure group. This rate in 3598 men without hemorrhage was 12.5%. One-year erectile function was poorest in men who underwent a secondary procedure. Urinary functional outcomes were similar in the 3 groups. CONCLUSION Most patients experiencing clinically significant hemorrhage will stabilize without transfusion, and a very small fraction require secondary intervention. Patients experiencing milder bleeding events utilized additional healthcare resources at approximately twice the rate of those who did not, warranting appropriate counseling and postoperative monitoring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucas W Dean
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Gregory T Chesnut
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| | - Melissa Assel
- Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Emily LaDuke
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jillian Fromkin
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan A Coleman
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Karim Touijer
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Vincent P Laudone
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Ito Y, Udo K, Vertosick EA, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Al-Ahmadie HA, Chen YB, Gopalan A, Sirintrapun SJ, Tickoo SK, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Reuter VE, Fine SW. Clinical Usefulness of Prostate and Tumor Volume Related Parameters following Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2019; 201:535-540. [PMID: 30300632 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.09.060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We evaluated whether the prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy is enhanced by any of 6 parameters, including prostate volume, total tumor volume, high grade total tumor volume, the ratio of high grade total tumor volume to total tumor volume, the ratio of total tumor volume to prostate volume and/or the ratio of high grade total tumor volume to prostate volume. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 1,261 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy during a 3-year period had tumor maps constructed with the Gleason pattern denoted as low-3 or high-4 or 5 and volumetric data generated using commercially available software. Univariate Cox regression models were used to assess whether each volume related parameter was associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. A multivariable Cox regression base model (age, prostate specific antigen, Gleason score/grade group, pathological stage and margin status) was compared with 6 additional models (base model plus each volume related parameter) to evaluate enhancement in predictive accuracy. Decision curve analysis was performed to determine the clinical utility of parameters that enhanced predictive accuracy. RESULTS On univariate analysis each parameter was significantly associated with biochemical recurrence except prostate volume. Predictive accuracy of the multivariable base model was high (c-index = 0.861). Adding volume related parameters marginally enhanced discrimination. Decision curve analysis failed to show added benefit even for high grade total tumor volume/total tumor volume, which was the parameter with the highest discriminative improvement. CONCLUSIONS Tumor volume related parameters are significantly associated with radical prostatectomy but do not add important discrimination to standard clinicopathological variables for radical prostatectomy prediction or provide benefit across a range of clinically relevant decision thresholds. Volume related measurement is not warranted in routine pathological evaluation and reporting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yujiro Ito
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Kazuma Udo
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emily A Vertosick
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Hikmat A Al-Ahmadie
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ying-Bei Chen
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anuradha Gopalan
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - S Joseph Sirintrapun
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Satish K Tickoo
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Victor E Reuter
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Samson W Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Bravi CA, Tin A, Benfante N, Salonia A, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Mulhall JP, Eastham JA, Vickers AJ. Comparison of Two Methods for Assessing Erectile Function Before Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 4:323-326. [PMID: 31412005 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2019] [Accepted: 02/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome instruments for erectile function often ask respondents about their experience over the previous 4wk. This is problematic for baseline assessment of patients with prostate cancer (PC) before treatment, as the previous 4wk would probably have involved procedures such as biopsy and considerable anxiety related to their diagnosis. At San Raffaele Hospital, the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-6) was used to ask new PC patients about function in both the previous 4wk and 6mo. We compared responses to these two timeframes. IIEF-6 scores were lower for the 4-wk period (median 24 vs 26; p<0.0001) predominately because approximately one in six of patients with good function in the 6-mo time frame had very poor function in the 4wk before completing the questionnaire (adequate erectile function 60% and 51%; absolute difference 9%, 95% confidence interval 8-10%). Results were further confirmed using a comparison group of 5395 patients with PC newly diagnosed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center who had similar function in the previous 6mo. Erectile function evaluation for men presenting with PC should involve asking about typical function over a 6-mo period rather than focusing on the previous 4wk. PATIENT SUMMARY: Questionnaires to assess erectile function often ask men about function in the previous 4wk. We found that this underestimates function in new prostate cancer patients and that such men should be asked about typical function over a 6-mo period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Andrea Bravi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Amy Tin
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Andrea Salonia
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - John P Mulhall
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Dean LW, Assel M, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Al-Ahmadie HA, Chen YB, Gopalan A, Sirintrapun SJ, Tickoo SK, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Reuter VE, Ehdaie B, Fine SW. Clinical Usefulness of Total Length of Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2019; 201:77-82. [PMID: 30076908 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.07.062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To our knowledge the ideal methodology of quantifying secondary Gleason pattern 4 in men with Grade Group 2/Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 on biopsy remains unknown. We compared various methods of Gleason pattern 4 quantification and evaluated associations with adverse pathology findings at radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 457 men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer on biopsy subsequently underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution. Only patients with 12 or more reviewed cores were included in analysis. We evaluated 3 methods of quantifying Gleason pattern 4, including the maximum percent of Gleason pattern 4 in any single core, the overall percent of Gleason pattern 4 (Gleason pattern 4 mm/total cancer mm) and the total length of Gleason pattern 4 in mm across all cores. Adverse pathology features at radical prostatectomy were defined as Gleason score 4 + 3 = 7 or greater (Grade Group 3 or greater), and any extraprostatic extension, seminal vesical invasion and/or lymph node metastasis. A training/test set approach and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine whether Gleason pattern 4 quantification methods could aid in predicting adverse pathology. RESULTS On multivariable analysis all Gleason pattern 4 quantification methods were significantly associated with an increased risk of adverse pathology (p <0.0001) and an increased AUC beyond the base model. The largest AUC increase was 0.044 for the total length of Gleason pattern 4 (AUC 0.728, 95% CI 0.663-0.793). Decision curve analysis demonstrated an increased clinical net benefit with the addition of Gleason pattern 4 quantification to the base model. The total length of Gleason pattern 4 clearly provided the largest net benefit. CONCLUSIONS Our findings support the inclusion of Gleason pattern 4 quantification in the pathology reports and risk prediction models of patients with Grade Group 2/Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer. The total length of Gleason pattern 4 across all cores provided the strongest benefit to predict adverse pathology features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucas W Dean
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Melissa Assel
- Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew J Vickers
- Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Hikmat A Al-Ahmadie
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ying-Bei Chen
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Anuradha Gopalan
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - S Joseph Sirintrapun
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Satish K Tickoo
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Victor E Reuter
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Samson W Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Mohler JL, Halabi S, Ryan ST, Al-Daghmin A, Sokoloff MH, Steinberg GD, Sanford BL, Eastham JA, Walther PJ, Morris MJ, Small EJ. Management of recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy: long-term results from CALGB 9687 (Alliance), a prospective multi-institutional salvage prostatectomy series. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 22:309-316. [PMID: 30385835 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-018-0106-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2017] [Revised: 09/09/2018] [Accepted: 09/29/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To evaluate efficacy and morbidity prospectively in a contemporary multi-institutional salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) series. METHODS Forty-one men were enrolled between 1997 and 2006, who suffered biopsy-proven recurrent prostate cancer (CaP) after receiving ≥ 60c Gy radiation as primary treatment for cT1-2NXM0 disease. Surgical morbidity, quality of life, biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. RESULTS Twenty-four men had undergone external beam radiotherapy, 11 brachytherapy, and six both. Median time between radiation and SRP was 64 months. Median age at SRP was 64 years. Pathologic staging revealed 44% pT2, 54% pT3, and 3% pT4. Surgical margins were positive in 17 and 88% were pN0. Twenty-two percent required intraoperative blood transfusion. Three rectal and one obturator nerve injuries occurred. Seventeen of 38 evaluable patients (45%) had urinary incontinence ( ≥ 3 pads/day) prior to SRP; 88% reported urinary incontinence at 6 months, 85% at 12 months, 63% at 24 months after SRP. Furthermore, 37% of men reported impotence prior to SRP; 78% reported impotence at 6 months, 82% at 12 months, and 44% at 24 months after SRP. The 2-, 5- and 10-year BPFS rates were 51, 39, and 33% respectively; the 2-, 5- and 10-year OS rates were 100, 89, and 52%, respectively, at median follow-up 91 months. CONCLUSIONS Modern surgical techniques continue to be associated with significant peri-operative complication rates. Nevertheless, SRP may benefit carefully selected patients through durable oncologic control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James L Mohler
- Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, CA59518, United States.
| | - Susan Halabi
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics and Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Duke University, Durham, NC, CA33601, United States
| | - Stephen T Ryan
- University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States
| | - Ali Al-Daghmin
- Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, CA59518, United States
| | | | | | - Ben L Sanford
- Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Duke University, Durham, NC, CA33601, United States
| | - James A Eastham
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, CA77651, United States
| | - Philip J Walther
- Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, CA47577, United States
| | - Michael J Morris
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, CA77651, United States
| | - Eric J Small
- University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, CA60138, United States
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Jang TL, Patel N, Faiena I, Radadia K, Moore DF, Elsamra SE, Singer EA, Stein MN, Lin Y, Kim IY, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Lu-Yao GL. Comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy versus radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation therapy for men with advanced prostate cancer. Cancer 2018; 124:4010-4022. [PMID: 30252932 PMCID: PMC6234085 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2018] [Revised: 06/11/2018] [Accepted: 07/09/2018] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Men with locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPCa) or regionally advanced prostate cancer (RAPCa) are at high risk for death from their disease. Clinical guidelines support multimodal approaches, which include radical prostatectomy (RP) followed by radiotherapy (XRT) and XRT plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, there are limited data comparing these substantially different treatment approaches. Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, this study compared survival outcomes and adverse effects associated with RP plus XRT versus XRT plus ADT in these men. METHODS SEER-Medicare data were queried for men with cT3-T4N0M0 (LAPCa) or cT3-T4N1M0 (RAPCa) prostate cancer. Propensity score methods were used to balance cohort characteristics between the treatment arms. Survival analyses were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS From 1992 to 2009, 13,856 men (≥65 years old) were diagnosed with LAPCa or RAPCa: 6.1% received RP plus XRT, and 23.6% received XRT plus ADT. At a median follow-up of 14.6 years, there were 2189 deaths in the cohort, of which 702 were secondary to prostate cancer. Regardless of the tumor stage or the Gleason score, the adjusted 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival and 10-year overall survival favored men who underwent RP plus XRT over men who underwent XRT plus ADT. However, RP plus XRT versus XRT plus ADT was associated with higher rates of erectile dysfunction (28% vs 20%; P = .0212) and urinary incontinence (49% vs 19%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS Men with LAPCa or RAPCa treated initially with RP plus XRT had a lower risk of prostate cancer-specific death and improved overall survival in comparison with those men treated with XRT plus ADT, but they experienced higher rates of erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas L. Jang
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Neal Patel
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Izak Faiena
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Kushan Radadia
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Dirk F. Moore
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Sammy E. Elsamra
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Eric A. Singer
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Mark N. Stein
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Yong Lin
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Isaac Y. Kim
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - James A. Eastham
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Peter T. Scardino
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Grace L. Lu-Yao
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Department of Medical Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Jefferson College of Population Health, Philadelphia, PA (GLY)
| |
Collapse
|