Search

ContextManagement of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiotherapy remains controversial due to the perceived high rates of severe genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with any local salvage modality.ObjectiveTo quantitatively compare the efficacy and toxicity of salvage radical prostatectomy (RP), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy, and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy.Evidence acquisitionWe performed a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Two- and 5-yr recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and crude incidences of severe GU and GI toxicity were extracted as endpoints of interest. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted to characterize summary effect sizes and quantify heterogeneity. Estimates for each modality were then compared with RP after adjusting for individual study-level covariates using mixed-effect regression models, while allowing for differences in between-study variance across treatment modalities.Evidence synthesisA total of 150 studies were included for analysis. There was significant heterogeneity between studies within each modality, and covariates differed between modalities, necessitating adjustment. Adjusted 5-yr RFS ranged from 50% after cryotherapy to 60% after HDR brachytherapy and SBRT, with no significant differences between any modality and RP. Severe GU toxicity was significantly lower with all three forms of radiotherapeutic salvage than with RP (adjusted rates of 20% after RP vs 5.6%, 9.6%, and 9.1% after SBRT, HDR brachytherapy, and LDR brachytherapy, respectively; p ≤ 0.001 for all). Severe GI toxicity was significantly lower with HDR salvage than with RP (adjusted rates 1.8% vs 0.0%, p

The natural history of radiorecurrent high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) is not well-described. To better understand its clinical course, we evaluated rates of distant metastases (DM) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in a cohort of 978 men with radiorecurrent HRPCa who previously received either external beam radiation therapy (EBRT, n = 654, 67%) or EBRT + brachytherapy (EBRT + BT, n = 324, 33%) across 15 institutions from 1997 to 2015. In men who did not die, median follow-up after treatment was 8.9 yr and median follow-up after biochemical recurrence (BCR) was 3.7 yr. Local and systemic therapy salvage, respectively, were delivered to 21 and 390 men after EBRT, and eight and 103 men after EBRT + BT. Overall, 435 men developed DM, and 248 were detected within 1 yr of BCR. Measured from time of recurrence, 5-yr DM rates were 50% and 34% after EBRT and EBRT + BT, respectively. Measured from BCR, 5-yr PCSM rates were 27% and 29%, respectively. Interval to BCR was independently associated with DM (p

Gleason grade group (GG) 5 prostate cancer has been associated with an aggressive natural history, and retrospective data support a role for treatment intensification. However, clinical outcomes remain heterogeneous in this cohort, and intensified treatments carry an increased risk of adverse events. We sought to explore the transcriptomic heterogeneity of GG 5 tumors by querying transcriptomic data from the tumors of 2138 patients with GG 5 disease who underwent prostatectomy. Four distinct consensus clusters were identified with respect to differential transcriptional activation of hallmark pathways, with distinct molecular subtyping profiles and different average genomic risks (AGRs). One cluster, accounting for 325 tumors (15.2% of the population), was enriched for genes related to the cell cycle/proliferation, metabolic pathways, androgen response pathways, and DNA repair, and had a higher AGR than the other clusters (p

BackgroundInnovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence.ObjectiveTo present the results from the APCCC 2019.Design, setting, and participantsSimilar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process.Results and limitationsPanellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material.ConclusionsThese voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials.Patient summaryThe Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.

BackgroundThe importance of local failure (LF) after treatment of high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) with definitive radiotherapy (RT) remains unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical implications of LF after definitive RT.Design, setting, and participantsIndividual patient data meta-analysis of 992 patients (593 Gleason grade group [GG] 4 and 399 GG 5) enrolled in six randomized clinical trials.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisMultivariable Cox proportional hazard models were developed to evaluate the relationship between overall survival (OS), PCa-specific survival (PCSS), and distant metastasis (DM)-free survival (DMFS) and LF as a time-dependent covariate. Markov proportional hazard models were developed to evaluate the impact of specific transitions between disease states on these endpoints.Results and limitationsMedian follow-up was 6.4 yr overall and 7.2 yr for surviving patients. LF was significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.70 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.37-2.10]), PCSS (3.10 [95% CI 2.33-4.12]), and DMFS (HR 1.92 [95% CI 1.54-2.39]), p

BackgroundThe role of elective whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) remains controversial. Few studies have investigated it in Gleason grade group (GG) 5 prostate cancer (PCa), known to have a high risk of nodal metastases.ObjectiveTo assess the impact of WPRT on patients with GG 5 PCa treated with external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or EBRT with a brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT).Design, setting, and participantsWe identified 1170 patients with biopsy-proven GG 5 PCa from 11 centers in the United States and one in Norway treated between 2000 and 2013 (734 with EBRT and 436 with EBRT+BT).Outcome measurements and statistical analysisBiochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were compared using Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score adjustment.Results and limitationsA total of 299 EBRT patients (41%) and 320 EBRT+BT patients (73%) received WPRT. The adjusted 5-yr bRFS rates with WPRT in the EBRT and EBRT+BT groups were 66% and 88%, respectively. Without WPRT, these rates for the EBRT and EBRT+BT groups were 58% and 78%, respectively. The median follow-up was 5.6yr. WPRT was associated with improved bRFS among patients treated with EBRT+BT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.9, p=0.02), but no evidence for improvement was found in those treated with EBRT (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.2, p=0.4). WPRT was not significantly associated with improved DMFS or PCSS in the EBRT group (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7-1.7, p=0.8 for DMFS and HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p=0.1 for PCSS), or in the EBRT+BT group (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.4, p=0.2 for DMFS and HR 0.5 95% CI 0.2-1.2, p=0.1 for PCSS).ConclusionsWPRT was not associated with improved PCSS or DMFS in patients with GG 5 PCa who received either EBRT or EBRT+BT. However, WPRT was associated with a significant improvement in bRFS among patients receiving EBRT+BT. Strategies to optimize WPRT, potentially with the use of advanced imaging techniques to identify occult nodal disease, are warranted.Patient summaryWhen men with a high Gleason grade prostate cancer receive radiation with external radiation and brachytherapy, the addition of radiation to the pelvis results in a longer duration of prostate-specific antigen control. However, we did not find a difference in their survival from prostate cancer or in their survival without metastatic disease. We also did not find a benefit for radiation to the pelvis in men who received radiation without brachytherapy.

BackgroundMetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is the lethal form of the disease. Several recent studies have identified genomic alterations in mCRPC, but the clinical implications of these genomic alterations have not been fully elucidated.ObjectiveTo use whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to assess the association between key driver gene alterations and overall survival (OS), and to use whole-transcriptome RNA sequencing to identify genomic drivers of enzalutamide resistance.Design, setting, and participantsWe performed survival analyses and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) on WGS and RNA sequencing results for a cohort of 101 mCRPC patients.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisOS was the clinical endpoint for all univariate and multivariable survival analyses. Candidate drivers of enzalutamide resistance were identified in an unbiased manner, and mutations of the top candidate were further assessed for enrichment among enzalutamide-resistant patients using Fisher's exact test.Results and limitationsHarboring two DNA alterations in RB1 was independently predictive of poor OS (median 14.1 vs 42.0mo; p=0.007) for men with mCRPC. GSEA identified the Wnt/β-catenin pathway as the top differentially modulated pathway among enzalutamide-resistant patients. Furthermore, β-catenin mutations were exclusive to enzalutamide-resistant patients (p=0.01) and independently predictive of poor OS (median 13.6 vs 41.7mo; p=0.025).ConclusionsThe presence of two RB1 DNA alterations identified in our WGS analysis was independently associated with poor OS among men with mCRPC. The Wnt/β-catenin pathway plays an important role in enzalutamide resistance, with differential pathway expression and enrichment of β-catenin mutations in enzalutamide-resistant patients. Moreover, β-catenin mutations were predictive of poor OS in our cohort.Patient summaryWe observed a correlation between genomic findings for biopsy samples from metastases from men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and clinical outcomes. This work sheds new light on clinically relevant genomic alterations in mCRPC and provides a roadmap for the development of new personalized treatment regimens in mCRPC.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has transformed the management of localized prostate cancer by improving identification of clinically significant disease at diagnosis. Approximately 20% of primary prostate tumors are invisible to mpMRI, and we hypothesize that this invisibility reflects fundamental molecular properties of the tumor. We therefore profiled the genomes and transcriptomes of 40 International Society of Urological Pathology grade 2 tumors: 20 mpMRI-invisible (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2

BackgroundThe long natural history of prostate cancer (CaP) limits comparisons of efficacy between radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), since patients treated years ago received treatments considered suboptimal by modern standards (particularly with regards to androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] and radiotherapy dose-escalation]. Gleason score (GS) 9-10 CaP is particularly aggressive, and clinically-relevant endpoints occur early, facilitating meaningful comparisons.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes of patients with GS 9-10 CaP following EBRT, extremely-dose escalated radiotherapy (as exemplified by EBRT+brachytherapy [EBRT+BT]), and RP.Design, setting, participantsRetrospective analysis of 487 patients with biopsy GS 9-10 CaP treated between 2000 and 2013 (230 with EBRT, 87 with EBRT+BT, and 170 with RP). Most radiotherapy patients received ADT and dose-escalated radiotherapy.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisKaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox regression estimated and compared 5-yr and 10-yr rates of distant metastasis-free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).Results and limitationsThe median follow-up was 4.6 yr. Local salvage and systemic salvage were performed more frequently in RP patients (49.0% and 30.1%) when compared with either EBRT patients (0.9% and 19.7%) or EBRT+BT patients (1.2% and 16.1%, p

Background and Objective: Innovations have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer (PC). Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of topics that greatly impact daily practice. The 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) surveyed experts on key questions in clinical management in order to supplement evidence-based guidelines. Here we present voting results for questions from APCCC 2024., Methods: Before the conference, a panel of 120 international PC experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 183 multiple-choice consensus questions on eight different topics. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the voting panel members ("panellists")., Key Findings and Limitations: Consensus was a priori defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. The voting results show varying degrees of consensus, as discussed in this article and detailed in the Supplementary material. These findings do not include a formal literature review or meta-analysis., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The voting results can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers in prioritising areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised on the basis of patient and cancer characteristics, and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2024 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Time to testosterone recovery (TR) following androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists varies widely. We evaluate TR kinetics and the oncological impact of an effective castration period in patients receiving definitive radiotherapy and ADT for prostate cancer., Methods: We obtained individual patient data from randomized controlled trials of radiotherapy with ADT and prospectively collected serial testosterone data from the MARCAP Consortium. We estimated the times to noncastrate TR (>1.7 nmol/l) and nonhypogonadal TR (>8.0 nmol/l) were estimated for each prescribed ADT duration, and developed corresponding nomograms. The association between effective castration period and metastasis-free survival (MFS) for any given ADT duration was evaluated via multivariable Cox regression. We conducted cubic spline analyses to assess nonlinear associations., Key Findings and Limitations: We included 1444 men from five trials in the analysis, of whom 115 received 4 mo, 880 received 6 mo, 353 received 18 mo, 36 received 28 mo, and 60 received 36 mo of ADT. Times to noncastrate TR and to nonhypogonadal TR varied considerably by ADT duration. Higher baseline testosterone and lower age were associated with a higher likelihood of TR (p < 0.001 for both). Effective castration period was not linearly associated with MFS for any ADT duration on Cox regression. Cubic spline analysis revealed that the optimal effective castration period for an MFS benefit was 10.6 mo for men who received 6 mo of ADT and 18 mo for men who received 18 mo of ADT., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: Time to TR varies according to the ADT duration, baseline testosterone, and age. The relationship between effective castration period and MFS may be nonlinear, with a longer effective castration period being helpful for men receiving 6 mo of ADT., (Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: We characterized tumor prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) levels as a reflection of cancer biology and treatment sensitivities for treatment-naïve prostate cancer., Methods: We first correlated PSMA positron emission tomography (PET) maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) in primary prostate cancer with tumor FOLH1 (PSMA RNA abundance) to establish RNA as a proxy (n = 55). We then discovered and validated molecular pathways associated with PSMA RNA levels in two large primary tumor cohorts. We validated those associations in independent cohorts (18 total; 5684 tumor samples) to characterize the pathways and treatment responses associated with PSMA., Key Findings and Limitations: PSMA RNA abundance correlates moderately with SUVmax (ρ = 0.41). In independent cohorts, androgen receptor signaling is more active in tumors with high PSMA. Accordingly, patients with high PSMA tumors experienced longer cancer-specific survival when managed with androgen deprivation therapy for biochemical recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 0.54 [0.34-0.87]; n = 174). PSMA low tumors possess molecular markers of resistance to radiotherapy. Consistent with this, patients with high PSMA tumors experience longer time to recurrence following primary radiotherapy (AHR 0.50 [0.28-0.90]; n = 248). In the SAKK09/10 trial (n = 224), patients with high PSMA tumors who were managed with salvage radiotherapy experienced longer time to progression in the 64-Gy arm (restricted mean survival time [RMST] +7.60 [0.05-15.16]), but this effect was mitigated in the 70-Gy arm (RMST 3.52 [-3.30 to 10.33]). Limitations include using PSMA RNA as a surrogate for PET SUVmax., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: PSMA levels in treatment-naïve prostate cancer differentiate tumor biology and treatment susceptibilities. These results warrant validation using PET metrics to substantiate management decisions based on imaging., (Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)