Search

Purpose: Feasibility of silica-based dosimeters for IVD of HDR prostate brachytherapy., Material and Methods: Plastic dosimeter holders and a water-fillable prostate phantom were built in-house. Interstitial prostate brachytherapy and Monte Carlo simulations were performed. The treatment planning, Monte-Carlo simulation, and dosimetry results were compared., Results: The relative differences between TLD-TPS, TLD-MCNP, and TPS-MCNP were 0.2-6.9 %, 0.5-6.5 %, and 0.6-6.3 %, respectively., Conclusion: Micro-silica bead dosimeters can perform offline in situ quality assurance in HDR prostate brachytherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The Androgen receptor (AR) is known to manifest the biological actions of male sex hormones. Androgens are now known to exert a multitude of responses, sometimes contrasting, in physiological and pathological conditions. Several groups have attempted to explain the underlying mechanisms of these varying androgen responses, including the non-genomic actions of androgens. These actions lead to increased activity of pro-proliferative signal transduction pathways, resulting in rapid molecular effects that cannot be explained by the conventional model in which AR functions as a transcription factor to modulate target gene expression [1,2]. This spotlight article examines Safi et al.'s research on the androgen receptor (AR) in prostate cancer, revealing that low androgen levels drive proliferation via non-genomic mechanisms involving AR monomers, while high levels suppress growth through genomic actions with AR dimers. These findings challenge current paradigms and suggest novel therapeutic strategies targeting both AR forms, particularly focusing on the role of AR monomers in cancer progression and treatment resistance., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) parameters of pT3a prostate cancer have not been examined in large cohort studies. Therefore, we aimed to identify factors associated with up-staging of mpMRI cT3a in post-operative histopathological confirmation., Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of a single UK cancer centre. Only cT3a cases who underwent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) were included (N = 383). MRI and specimen histopathology was reviewed independently by expert uro-radiologists and uro-histopathologists, respectively. Factors included age, BMI, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, biopsy international society of urological pathology (ISUP) grade, Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS ® ) score, tumour size, tumour coverage of gland (%), gland weight and surgical margins were analysed as predictors of pT3a prostate cancer., Results: N = 383. Mean age 66 years (58-71), mean BMI 27.1 kg/m 2 (25.0-30.0). 314 (82.0%) cases down- unchanged or down-staged, and 69 (18.0%) cases upstaged. PSA level (P = 0.002), PI-RADS score (P < 0.001) and ISUP grade (P < 0.001) are positively associated with upstage categories. ISUP grade ≥3 (OR 5.45, CI 1.88, 9.29, P < 0.002), PI-RADS score ≥4 (OR 3.92, CI 1.88-9.29, P < 0.001) and tumour coverage (OR 1.06, CI 1.05-1.08, P < 0.001) significantly positively associated with upstaging disease, with concurrent decreased probability of downstaging (OR 0.55, 0.14, 0.44, respectively, P < 0.05). Tumour coverage was positively correlated with increasing positive surgical margins (P < 0.05). Capsular contact > 15 mm was very unlikely to be upstaged (OR 0.36, CI 0.21-0.62, P < 0.001), aligning with published results past the widely accepted significant level for extracapsular disease on MRI., Conclusion: The study has identified PSA level, ISUP, PI-RADS score, tumour volume and percentage coverage are key predictive factors in cT3a upstaging. This study uniquely shows tumour coverage percentage as a predictor of cT3a upstaging on mpMRI. ISUP is the strongest predictor, followed by PI-RADS score and tumour coverage of gland. Multi-institutional studies are needed to confirm our findings., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Screening is not recommended for prostate cancer in the UK. Asymptomatic men aged ≥50 years can request a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test following counselling on potential harms and benefits. There are areas of clinical uncertainty among GPs, resulting in the content and quality of counselling varying., Aim: To produce a consensus that can influence guidelines for UK primary care on the optimal use of the PSA test in asymptomatic men for early prostate cancer detection., Design and Setting: Prostate Cancer UK facilitated a RAND/UCLA consensus., Method: Statements covering five topics were developed with a subgroup of experts. A panel of 15 experts in prostate cancer scored (round one) statements on a scale of one (strongly disagree) to nine (strongly agree). Panellists met to discuss statements before rescoring (round two). A lived experience panel of seven men scored a subset of statements with outcomes fed into the main panel., Results: Of the initial 94 statements reviewed by the expert panel, a final 48/85 (56%) achieved consensus. In the absence of screening, there was consensus on proactive approaches to initiate discussions about the PSA test with men who were at higher-than-average risk., Conclusion: Improvements in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway may have reduced some of the harms associated with PSA testing; however, several areas of uncertainty remain in relation to screening, including optimal PSA thresholds for referral and intervals for retesting. There is consensus on proactive approaches to testing in higher-than-average risk groups. This should prompt a review of current guidelines., (© The Authors.)

Background: Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear., Methods: RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047., Findings: Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61-69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1-10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688-1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4-82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6-83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population., Funding: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AN reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck. ADC reports research grants for the STAMPEDE trial from Janssen, Astellas, Novartis, Sanofi, and Clovis. ACT reports research grants to their institution from Elekta, Varian, and Accuracy; honoraria for talks from Elekta, Accuracy, and Janssen; travel assistance for radiotherapy conferences from Elekta; serving on the data safety board for two academic trials; and roles as the Chair of the MR-Linac Consortium and the genitourinary lead editor for the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. AC reports receiving grants or contracts from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council (MRC) UK, Prostate Cancer UK, Bayer UK, and Elekta; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from the American Society for Radiation Oncology, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Cancer Research UK, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS). CNC reports support for the present manuscript from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer Corp, Knight Therapeutics, and AbbVie. CLG reports participating in the independent data monitoring and steering committee for the BARCODE study at the Institute of Cancer Research in London (principal investigator Prof Ros Eeles). CCP reports consulting fees from AAA, ITM Radiopharma, Myovant, and Clarity Pharmaceuticals to his institution; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Bayer to his institution. CM reports that they are employed by University College London (UCL) as Trial Manager for RADICALS. FS reports grants or contracts from Janssen, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca to his institution; consulting fees from Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen, Bayer, Myovant, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him. LCB reports their previous Institute of Cancer role was funded in part by a Biomedical Research Centre grant which was paid to the institution; the role was not connected to the RADICALS trial. MRS reports research grants and biomarker testing costs, all to their institution and all active in the past 36 months but on research outside of this research, from Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi-Aventis; consulting fees from Eli Lilly; speaker fees at a clinical trial statistics training meeting for clinicians (no discussion of particular drugs) from Lilly Oncology, Janssen, and Eisai; and is an independent member of many independent data monitoring committees but all for academic sponsors and unpaid. NWC reports honoraria for lectures, advisory boards, and symposia from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Bayer, and Pfizer; support for travel to and attendance at a European meeting from Bayer; participation on the independent data monitoring committee for the Probio trial (Karolinska), and the trial steering committee for the Capi 28 trial (AstraZeneca) and the STAMPEDE trial (MRC); and is the Joint National Clinical Lead for the National Prostate Cancer Audit. PWMC reports grants or contracts from the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology ACURA program and the Canadian Institute of Health Research; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and EMD Serono; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from TerSera, AbbVie, Tolmar, and Knight Therapeutics. PMP reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AAA Nordic, MSD, and Pfizer Denmark. SCM reports honoraria from Janssen, Astellas, Knight Therapeutics, AMGEN Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, and Bayer; and support for attending meetings or travel from TerSera and Sanofi. VK reports a Cancer Research UK grant for the CORE trial to his institution; honoraria from Accuracy, Astellas, Bayer, and Boston Scientific; meeting attendance support from Accuray, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boston Scientific, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Norvatis; is an unpaid member of the independent data monitoring committee for the EPIC trial and the advisory board for Bayer and Janssen; and is the unpaid Chair of National Cancer Research Institute Penile subgroup of the Bladder and Renal Clinical Studies Group. WRC reports consulting fees from Bayer and Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Myriad Genetics; and support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: People living with and beyond cancer (LWBC) are advised to achieve a body mass index (BMI) within the healthy range (≥ 18.5 and < 25). Not perceiving a need for weight change may be a barrier to achieving a healthy weight. This study aimed to explore factors associated with perceived need for weight change among people LWBC., Methods: Adults diagnosed with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer were recruited through National Health Service sites in Essex and London. Participants (N = 5835) completed the 'Health and Lifestyle After Cancer' survey, which included a question on perceived need to change weight. Associations between perceived need for weight change and BMI, and perceived need for weight change and health and demographic variables, were analyzed using chi-square tests and logistic regression, respectively., Results: The proportion of participants perceiving a need to lose weight differed according to BMI category: healthy weight (23%), overweight (64%), obese (85%) (P < 0.001). Having overweight or obesity but not perceiving a need to lose weight was associated with being older, male, non-white, not married or cohabiting, and having cancer that had spread, no formal qualifications, no comorbidities, and having received chemotherapy., Conclusions: Perceived need to lose weight is prevalent among people LWBC with obesity and overweight. This group may be interested in weight management support. Demographic and health factors were associated with having obesity or overweight but not perceiving a need to lose weight., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Weight loss interventions for people LWBC are needed. A subset of people LWBC with overweight and obesity may need additional information or motivators to engage with weight management., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain., Methods: RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047., Findings: Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy., Funding: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AN reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck. ADC reports research grants for the STAMPEDE trial from Janssen, Astellas, Novartis, Sanofi, and Clovis. CMH is an executive committee member for the British Uro-Oncology Group. CNC reports support for the present manuscript from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer Corp, Knight Therapeutics, and AbbVie. CLG reports that they participate in the independent data monitoring and steering committee for the BARCODE study at the Institute of Cancer Research in London (principal investigator Ros Eeles). CB reports stock or stock options from GSK; and has been an employee at GSK since August, 2023. CCP reports consulting fees from AAA, ITM Radiopharma, Myovant, and Clarity Pharmaceuticals to his institution; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Bayer to his institution. FS reports grants or contracts from Janssen, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca to his institution; consulting fees from Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen, Bayer, Myovant, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him. LCB reports that their previous Institute of Cancer role was funded in part by a Biomedical Research Centre grant which was paid to the institution; the role was not connected to the RADICALS trial. MRS reports research grants and biomarker testing costs, all to institution and all active in past 36 months but on research outside of this research, from Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi-Aventis; consulting fees from Eli Lilly; speaker fees at a clinical trial statistics training meeting for clinicians (no discussion of particular drugs) from Lilly Oncology, Janssen, and Eisai; and is an independent member of many independent data monitoring committees but all for academic sponsors and unpaid. NDJ is a Senior Investigator for the National Institute for Health and Care Research. NWC reports honoraria for lectures, advisory boards, and symposia from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Bayer, and Pfizer; support for travel to and attendance at a European meeting from Bayer; participation on an independent data monitoring committee for the Probio trial (Karolinska), and the trial steering committee for the Capi 28 Trial (AstraZeneca) and the STAMPEDE Trial (Medical Research Council [MRC]); and is the Joint National Clinical Lead for National Prostate Cancer Audit. PW reports an educational event payment from Astellas; conference and travel cost support from AstraZeneca and Aventis; and participation on the advisory board for Ferring and Roche. PWMC reports grants or contracts from CARO-ACURA and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and EMD Serono; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for TerSera, AbbVie, Tolmar, and Knight Therapeutics. PMP reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AAA Nordic, MSD, and Pfizer Denmark. SCM reports honoraria from Janssen, Astellas, Knight Therapeutics, Amgen Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, and Bayer; and support for attending meetings or travel from TerSera and Sanofi. WRC reports consulting fees from Bayer and Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Myriad Genetics; and support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To compare survival of patients who received LDR prostate brachytherapy relative to that of peers in the general population of England, UK., Patients and Methods: Net survival was estimated for 2472 cases treated between 2002 and 2016 using population-based analysis guidelines. Life tables adjusted for social deprivation in England from the Office for National Statistics were used to match patients by affluence based on their postcode., Results: The median (range) age at time of brachytherapy was 66 (55-84) years, 84% resided in Southeast England, 51% under an index of deprivation quintile 5 (most affluent), 55% were clinical stage T1 and the remainder T2. Death from any cause occurred in 270 patients at a median (range) of 7 (1-17) years postimplant. Five and 10-year estimates (95% CI) of overall survival were 96% (95-97) and 90% (89-92), and net survival 103% (102-104) and 109% (107-110) respectively. The net survival remained above 100% in all age-at-treatment and clinical stage groups., Conclusion: Net survival above 100% indicates patients survive longer than the matched general population. The study shows for the first time the net survival of patients treated with a radical therapy for localized prostate cancer in England. The impact of treatment choice on the long-term net survival advantage requires further investigation., (Copyright © 2024 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on prostate cancer incidence, prevalence, and mortality in England., Patients and Methods: With the approval of NHS England and using the OpenSAFELY-TPP dataset of 24 million patients, we undertook a cohort study of men diagnosed with prostate cancer. We visualised monthly rates in prostate cancer incidence, prevalence, and mortality per 100 000 adult men from January 2015 to July 2023. To assess the effect of the pandemic, we used generalised linear models and the pre-pandemic data to predict the expected rates from March 2020 as if the pandemic had not occurred. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the predicted values were used to estimate the significance of the difference between the predicted and observed rates., Results: In 2020, there was a drop in recorded incidence by 4772 (31%) cases (15 550 vs 20 322; 95% CI 19 241-21 403). In 2021, the incidence started to recover, and the drop was 3148 cases (18%, 17 950 vs 21 098; 95% CI 19 740-22 456). By 2022, the incidence returned to the levels that would be expected. During the pandemic, the age at diagnosis shifted towards older men. In 2020, the average age was 71.6 (95% CI 71.5-71.8) years, in 2021 it was 71.8 (95% CI 71.7-72.0) years as compared to 71.3 (95% CI 71.1-71.4) years in 2019., Conclusions: Given that our dataset represents 40% of the population, we estimate that proportionally the pandemic led to 20 000 missed prostate cancer diagnoses in England alone. The increase in incidence recorded in 2023 was not enough to account for the missed cases. The prevalence of prostate cancer remained lower throughout the pandemic than expected. As the recovery efforts continue, healthcare should focus on finding the men who were affected. The research should focus on investigating the potential harms to men diagnosed at older age., (© 2024 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to generate an objective method to describe MRI data to assess response in the vertebrae of patients with metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), treated with external beam radiation therapy and systemic therapy with Radium-223 and to correlate changes with clinical outcomes., Methods: Three sets of whole-body MRI (WBMRI) images were utilized from 25 patients from the neo-adjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy pelvic Radiotherapy and RADium-223 (ADRRAD) clinical trial: MRI1 (up to 28 days before Radium-223), MRI2, and MRI3 (2 and 6 months post completion of Radium-223). Radiological response was assessed based on post baseline MRI images. Vertebrae were semi-automatically contoured in the sagittal T1-weighted (T1w) acquisitions, MRI intensity was measured, and spinal cord was used to normalize the measurements. The relationship between MRI intensity vs time to biochemical progression and radiology response was investigated. Survival curves were generated and splitting measures for survival and biochemical progression investigated., Results: Using a splitting measure of 1.8, MRI1 was found to be a reliable quantitative indicator correlating with overall survival (P = 0.023) and biochemical progression (P = 0.014). MRI (3-1) and MRI (3-2) were found to be significant indicators for patients characterized by progressive/non-progressive disease (P = 0.021, P = 0.004) and biochemical progression within/after 12 months (P = 0.007, P = 0.001)., Conclusions: We have identified a potentially useful objective measure of response on WBMRI of vertebrae containing bone metastases in mHSPC which correlates with survival/progression (prognostic) and radiology response (predictive)., Advances in Knowledge: Measurements of T1w WBMRI normalized intensity may allow identifying potentially useful response biomarkers correlating with survival, radiological response and biochemical progression., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Institute of Radiology.)

Purpose of Review: Improvements in cancer treatment have led to more people living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis but survivors may have increased health problems as they age. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate population data exploring incidence of late effects for cancer survivors., Recent Findings: 18 studies were identified between 2013 and 2023 that explored the impact on survivors' physical and emotional health. Patients who had been treated at least 2 years previously for cancer had significant cardiovascular risk factors compared with age-matched controls. Women with breast cancer were more likely to have cardiovascular disease, including hypertension, arrythmias and congestive heart failure. This was associated with anthracyclines and/or trastuzumab as part of systemic anti-cancer therapy. Survivors of colorectal cancer were three times more likely to have acute kidney injury than age-matched controls. Stress and mood disorders were higher in survivors of testicular cancer and prostate cancer., Summary: Population studies are important to identify the 'real world' consequences of cancer and its treatment beyond clinical trials. Knowledge is critical for managing an ageing cancer population. Data to personalise cancer survivorship care, not only helps determine potential health risks, but can improve secondary prevention, emotional health, recovery, and long-term outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Isolated recurrence in remnants of the seminal vesicles (SV) after treatment of primary prostate cancer (PCa) has become a more frequent entity with the widespread use of more sensitive next-generation imaging modalities. Salvage vesiculectomy is hypothesized to be a worthwhile management option in these patients. The primary goal of this study is to describe the surgical technique of this new treatment option. Secondary outcomes are peri- and post-operative complications and early oncological outcomes., Methods: Retrospective multicenter study, including 108 patients with solitary recurrence in the SV treated between January 2009 and June 2022, was performed. Patients with local recurrences outside the SVs or with metastatic disease were excluded. Both SVs were resected using a robot-assisted or an open approach. In selected cases, a concomitant lymphadenectomy was performed., Results: Overall, 31 patients (29%) reported complications, all but one grade 1 to 3 on the Clavien-Dindo Scale. A median PSA decrease of 2.07 ng/ml (IQR: 0.80-4.33, p < 0.001), translating into a median PSA reduction of 92% (IQR: 59-98%) was observed. At a median follow-up of 14 months, freedom from secondary treatment was 54%. Lymphadenectomy had a significant influence on PSA reduction (p = 0.018)., Conclusion: Salvage vesiculectomy for PCa recurrence limited to the SV is a safe procedure with excellent PSA response and is a potential curative treatment in a subset of patients. A concomitant lymphadenectomy can best be performed in all patients that did not underwent one at primary treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The presence of inhibitory immune cells and difficulty in generating activated effector T cells remain obstacles to development of effective cancer vaccines. We designed a vaccine regimen combining human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) peptides with concomitant therapies targeting regulatory T cells (Tregs) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2)-mediated immunosuppression. This Phase 1 trial combined an hTERT-derived 7-peptide library, selected to ensure presentation by both HLA class-I and class-II in 90% of patients, with oral low-dose cyclophosphamide (to modulate Tregs) and the COX2 inhibitor celecoxib. Adjuvants were Montanide and topical TLR-7 agonist, to optimise antigen presentation. The primary objective was determination of the safety and tolerability of this combination therapy, with anti-cancer activity, immune response and detection of antigen-specific T cells as additional endpoints. Twenty-nine patients with advanced solid tumours were treated. All were multiply-pretreated, and the majority had either colorectal or prostate cancer. The most common adverse events were injection-site reactions, fatigue and nausea. Median progression-free survival was 9 weeks, with no complete or partial responses, but 24% remained progression-free for ≥6 months. Immunophenotyping showed post-vaccination expansion of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells with effector phenotypes. The in vitro re-challenge of T cells with hTERT peptides, TCR sequencing, and TCR similarity index analysis demonstrated the expansion following vaccination of oligoclonal T cells with specificity for hTERT. However, a population of exhausted PD-1 + cytotoxic T cells was also expanded in vaccinated patients. This vaccine combination regimen was safe and associated with antigen-specific immunological responses. Clinical activity could be improved in future by combination with anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibition to address the emergence of an exhausted T cell population., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Zareian, Eremin, Pandha, Baird, Kwatra, Funingana, Verma, Choy, Hargreaves, Moghimi, Shepherd, Lobo, Eremin, Farzaneh, Kordasti and Spicer.)

The transferability and clinical value of genetic risk scores (GRSs) across populations remain limited due to an imbalance in genetic studies across ancestrally diverse populations. Here we conducted a multi-ancestry genome-wide association study of 156,319 prostate cancer cases and 788,443 controls of European, African, Asian and Hispanic men, reflecting a 57% increase in the number of non-European cases over previous prostate cancer genome-wide association studies. We identified 187 novel risk variants for prostate cancer, increasing the total number of risk variants to 451. An externally replicated multi-ancestry GRS was associated with risk that ranged from 1.8 (per standard deviation) in African ancestry men to 2.2 in European ancestry men. The GRS was associated with a greater risk of aggressive versus non-aggressive disease in men of African ancestry (P = 0.03). Our study presents novel prostate cancer susceptibility loci and a GRS with effective risk stratification across ancestry groups., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Background: Prostate cancer is a major cause of cancer morbidity and mortality in men worldwide. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has proven effective in early-stage androgen-sensitive disease, but prostate cancer gradually develops into an androgen-resistant metastatic state in the vast majority of patients. According to our oncogene-induced model for cancer development, senescence is a major tumor progression barrier. However, whether senescence is implicated in the progression of early-stage androgen-sensitive to highly aggressive castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) remains poorly addressed., Methods: Androgen-dependent (LNCaP) and -independent (C4-2B and PC-3) cells were treated or not with enzalutamide, an Androgen Receptor (AR) inhibitor. RNA sequencing and pathway analyses were carried out in LNCaP cells to identify potential senescence regulators upon treatment. Assessment of the invasive potential of cells and senescence status following enzalutamide treatment and/or RNAi-mediated silencing of selected targets was performed in all cell lines, complemented by bioinformatics analyses on a wide range of in vitro and in vivo datasets. Key observations were validated in LNCaP and C4-2B mouse xenografts. Senescence induction was assessed by state-of-the-art GL13 staining by immunocytochemistry and confocal microscopy., Results: We demonstrate that enzalutamide treatment induces senescence in androgen-sensitive cells via reduction of the replication licensing factor CDC6. Mechanistically, we show that CDC6 downregulation is mediated through endogenous activation of the GATA2 transcription factor functioning as a CDC6 repressor. Intriguingly, GATA2 levels decrease in enzalutamide-resistant cells, leading to CDC6 stabilization accompanied by activation of Epithelial-To-Mesenchymal Transition (EMT) markers and absence of senescence. We show that CDC6 loss is sufficient to reverse oncogenic features and induce senescence regardless of treatment responsiveness, thereby identifying CDC6 as a critical determinant of prostate cancer progression., Conclusions: We identify a key GATA2-CDC6 signaling axis which is reciprocally regulated in enzalutamide-sensitive and -resistant prostate cancer environments. Upon acquired resistance, GATA2 repression leads to CDC6 stabilization, with detrimental effects in disease progression through exacerbation of EMT and abrogation of senescence. However, bypassing the GATA2-CDC6 axis by direct inhibition of CDC6 reverses oncogenic features and establishes senescence, thereby offering a therapeutic window even after acquiring resistance to therapy., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Genome-wide polygenic risk scores (GW-PRSs) have been reported to have better predictive ability than PRSs based on genome-wide significance thresholds across numerous traits. We compared the predictive ability of several GW-PRS approaches to a recently developed PRS of 269 established prostate cancer-risk variants from multi-ancestry GWASs and fine-mapping studies (PRS 269 ). GW-PRS models were trained with a large and diverse prostate cancer GWAS of 107,247 cases and 127,006 controls that we previously used to develop the multi-ancestry PRS 269 . Resulting models were independently tested in 1,586 cases and 1,047 controls of African ancestry from the California Uganda Study and 8,046 cases and 191,825 controls of European ancestry from the UK Biobank and further validated in 13,643 cases and 210,214 controls of European ancestry and 6,353 cases and 53,362 controls of African ancestry from the Million Veteran Program. In the testing data, the best performing GW-PRS approach had AUCs of 0.656 (95% CI = 0.635-0.677) in African and 0.844 (95% CI = 0.840-0.848) in European ancestry men and corresponding prostate cancer ORs of 1.83 (95% CI = 1.67-2.00) and 2.19 (95% CI = 2.14-2.25), respectively, for each SD unit increase in the GW-PRS. Compared to the GW-PRS, in African and European ancestry men, the PRS 269 had larger or similar AUCs (AUC = 0.679, 95% CI = 0.659-0.700 and AUC = 0.845, 95% CI = 0.841-0.849, respectively) and comparable prostate cancer ORs (OR = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.87-2.26 and OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 2.16-2.26, respectively). Findings were similar in the validation studies. This investigation suggests that current GW-PRS approaches may not improve the ability to predict prostate cancer risk compared to the PRS 269 developed from multi-ancestry GWASs and fine-mapping., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Human Genetics. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: In older patients who do not wish to undergo watchful waiting, focal therapy could be an alternative to the more morbid radical treatment. We evaluated the role of focal therapy in patients 70 years and older as an alternative management modality., Materials and Methods: A total of 649 patients across 11 UK sites receiving focal high-intensity focused ultrasound or cryotherapy between June 2006 and July 2020 reported within the UK-based HEAT (HIFU Evaluation and Assessment of Treatment) and ICE (International Cryotherapy Evaluation) registries were evaluated. Primary outcome was failure-free survival, defined by need for more than 1 focal reablation, progression to radical treatment, development of metastases, need for systemic treatment, or prostate cancer-specific death. This was compared to the failure-free survival in patients undergoing radical treatment via a propensity score weighted analysis., Results: Median age was 74 years (IQR: 72, 77) and median follow-up 24 months (IQR: 12, 41). Sixty percent had intermediate-risk disease and 35% high-risk disease. A total of 113 patients (17%) required further treatment. Sixteen had radical treatment and 44 required systemic treatment. Failure-free survival was 82% (95% CI: 76%-87%) at 5 years. Comparing patients who had radical therapy to those who had focal therapy, 5-year failure-free survival was 96% (95% CI: 93%-100%) and 82% (95% CI: 75%-91%) respectively ( P < .001). Ninety-three percent of those in the radical treatment arm had received radiotherapy as their primary treatment with its associated use of androgen deprivation therapy, thereby leading to potential overestimation of treatment success in the radical treatment arm, especially given the similar metastases-free and overall survival rates seen., Conclusions: We propose focal therapy to be an effective management option for the older or comorbid patient who is unsuitable for or not willing to undergo radical treatment.

Background: Many individuals living with and beyond cancer (LWBC) have ongoing quality of life (QoL) issues, including fatigue. The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) provides health behaviour recommendations for people LWBC, and there is some evidence linking adherence to these with improved QoL., Methods: Adults LWBC (specifically breast, colorectal or prostate cancer) completed a survey covering health behaviours (diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption and smoking), fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue Scale, version 4) and a broad measure of QoL (EQ-5D-5L descriptive scale). Participants were categorised as meeting/not meeting WCRF recommendations, using the following cut-offs classified as meeting the guidelines: ≥150 min physical activity/week, fruit and vegetables (≥5 portions/day), fibre (≥30 g fibre per day), free sugar (<5% of total calories from free sugar), fat (<33% total energy), red meat (<500 g/week), processed meat (none), alcohol consumption (<14 units/week) and not a current smoker. Logistic regression analyses explored associations between WCRF adherence and fatigue and QoL issues, controlling for demographic and clinical variables., Results: Among 5835 individuals LWBC (mean age: 67 years, 56% female, 90% white, breast 48%, prostate 32% and colorectal 21%), 22% had severe fatigue and 72% had 1+ issue/s on the EQ-5D-5L. Adhering to physical activity recommendations (odds ratio [OR] = 0.88, confidence interval [CI] = 0.77-0.99), meeting various dietary recommendations (fruit and vegetables OR = 0.79; CI = 0.68-0.91, free sugar OR = 0.85; CI = 0.76-0.96, fat OR = 0.71; CI = 0.62-0.82, red meat OR = 0.65; CI = 0.50-0.85) and not smoking (OR = 0.53, CI = 0.41-0.67) were associated with decreased odds of experiencing severe fatigue. Adhering to physical activity guidelines (OR = 0.71, CI = 0.62-0.82) was also associated with decreased odds of having 1+ QoL issue/s., Conclusions: Adherence to various WCRF recommendations, particularly the recommendation for physical activity, was associated with less fatigue and better QoL in a large UK cohort of people living with and beyond breast, colorectal or prostate cancer. Multi-component interventions designed to support people LWBC to improve health behaviours, in line with the levels recommended by the WCRF, may also improve QoL., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Objective: Oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC) encompasses a heterogenous group of clinical entities defined by the timing of the development of metastases. These include de novo oligometastatic, oligorecurrent and oligoprogressive prostate cancer (PrCa). We describe the evidence supporting the use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) to the oligometastases to improve patient outcomes in each of these settings., Methods: Published clinical trials relevant to 'OMPC' and 'SABR' where used for this narrative review., Key Content and Findings: The driving force behind this narrative review is the constantly evolving field of OMPC with an increasing number of salvage radiotherapy options changing the current treatment paradigm. We now have evidence to support that disease control can be optimised with SABR as shown in several practice changing trials including 'ORIOLE', 'STOMP' for PrCa and 'SABR-COMET' showing a survival advantage with a tumour agnostic salvage approach. We also describe the challenges with data interpretation and cost implications. Challenges include the small sample size for most reported trials, in combination with a lack of cost-efficiency analysis., Conclusions: SABR is a promising treatment approach for OMPC with a proven clinical benefit in some clinical settings and its use will expand in the future.

Lipoma is a benign mesenchymal tumour that can develop in any part of the body containing adipose tissue. Very few cases of pelvic lipomas have been reported in the literature. Due to their location and slow growth, pelvic lipomas are often asymptomatic for a prolonged time. Thus, on diagnosis, they are usually found to be of considerable size. Due to their size, pelvic lipomas can present causing bladder outlet obstruction, lymphoedema, abdominal and pelvic pain, and constipation, as well as present with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) like symptoms. Patients with cancer have a much higher risk of developing DVT. Here, we describe a case of an incidental finding of pelvic lipoma mimicking DVT in a patient with organ-confined prostate cancer. He eventually underwent simultaneous robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and lipoma excision., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: Focal therapy treats individual areas of tumour in non-metastatic prostate cancer in patients unsuitable for active surveillance. The aim of this work was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of focal therapy versus prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)., Materials and Methods: A Markov cohort health state transition model with four health states (stable disease, local recurrence, metastatic disease and death) was created, evaluating costs and utilities over a 10-year time horizon for patients diagnosed with non-metastatic prostate cancer. National Health Service (NHS) for England perspective was used, based on direct healthcare costs. Clinical transition probabilities were derived from prostate cancer registries in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, EBRT and focal therapy using cryotherapy (Boston Scientific) or high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) (Sonablate). Propensity score matching was used to ensure that at-risk populations were comparable. Variables included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group, maximum cancer core length (mm), T-stage and year of treatment., Results: Focal therapy was associated with a lower overall cost and higher quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains than either prostatectomy or EBRT, dominating both treatment strategies. Positive incremental net monetary benefit (NMB) values confirm focal therapy as cost-effective versus the alternatives at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000/QALY. One-way deterministic sensitivity analyses revealed consistent results., Limitations: Data used to calculate the transition probabilities were derived from a limited number of hospitals meaning that other potential treatment options were excluded. Limited data were available on later outcomes and none on quality of life data, therefore, literature-based estimates were used., Conclusions: Cost-effectiveness modelling demonstrates use of focal therapy (cryotherapy or HIFU) is associated with greater QALY gains at a lower overall cost than either radical prostatectomy or EBRT, representing good value for money in the NHS.

Introduction: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed most health services. As a result, many surgeries have been deferred and diagnoses delayed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre., Methods: A retrospective review was performed of clinical activity from 2017 to 2020. We compared caseload for index procedures 2017-2019 (period 1) versus 2020 (period 2) to see the effect of the COVID pandemic. We then compared the activity during the first lockdown (March 23rd) to the rest of the year when we increased our theatre access by utilising a 'clean' site., Results: The average annual number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed during period 1 was 82 and 352 respectively. This reduced to 68 (17.1% reduction) and 262 (25.6% reduction) during period 2. The number of patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy decreased from 308 to 243 (21% reduction). The number of prostate biopsies decreased from 420 to 234 (44.3% reduction). The number of radical orchidectomies decreased from 18 to 11 (39% reduction). The mean number of RARC and RARP per month during period 2 was 5.5 and 22. This decreased to 4 and 9 per month during the first national lockdown but was maintained thereafter despite two further lockdowns., Conclusion: There has been a substantial decrease in urological oncology caseload during the COVID pandemic. The use of alternate pathways such as 'clean' sites can ensure continuity of care for cancer surgery and training needs.

Purpose: The Hemi-Ablative Prostate Brachytherapy (HAPpy) trial evaluated hemi-gland (HG) low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR-PB) as a focal approach to control unilateral localized prostate cancer and reduce treatment-related toxicity at 2-years postimplant. Herewith we present further outcomes with a minimum of 5 years post-implant follow-up., Methods and Materials: Outcomes of 30 HG implants and 362 whole-gland (WG) brachytherapy controls were monitored with IPSS, urinary Quality-of-Life (QoLU), GI component of EORTC-PR25 (QoLB), and IIEF-5 instruments, and PSA values. The median (range) follow-up for HG and WG cases was 72 (60-96) months and 84 (24-144) months respectively., Results: The IPSS was significantly reduced in HG relative to WG patients and trends indicating improved bowel QoL and erectile function were observed. The mean of change in PSA from baseline to last follow-up was -5.6 and -6.5 in HG and WG respectively (p = 0.1). The mean time to nadir was 4.2 and 4.8 years in HG and WG respectively (p = 0.06). Over time PSA in HG patients mirrored the sustained decline observed in WG cases but levels were higher by an average 0.5 ng/ml over WG controls (p < 0.001). Treatment failure occurred in 2 (6.7%) HG patients and in 20 (5.5%) WG cases. Five-year relapse-free survival was 97% in both groups (p = 0.7)., Conclusions: At 5 years postimplant HG LDR-PB was as effective as WG treatment for control of unilateral localized prostate cancer with moderate improvement in treatment-related symptoms. Importantly, PSA is a valuable marker to assess disease control in this form of focal therapy., (Copyright © 2022 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The study aim was to report the results of Retzius-Sparing robot-assisted radical Prostatectomy (RSP) in high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa) patients in a multicentric setting of expert surgeons and to analyze predictors of positive surgical margins (PSMs) and urinary continence recovery., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated all consecutive HR-PCa patients who underwent RSP by expert surgeons in 7 centers. Pre-, peri- and postoperative features were collected. Minimum surgical experience required was 100 RSP cases. The oncological outcomes evaluated were PSMs and biochemical relapse (BCR). Urinary continence was defined as no pad or safety pad. Erectile function was defined as erections sufficient for intercourse., Results: We collected 579 patients operated by 9 surgeons. Median age was 66, median PSA was 9,6 ng/mL. ISUP biopsy was 1 in 3.8%, 2 in 23%, 3 in 32,6%, 4 in 19,9%, 5 in 20,7; median surgical time was 195 minutes. Pathological stage was pT2 in 40,1%, pT3a in 35,9%, pT3b in 23,1%, and pT4 in 0,9% of cases. PSMs were present in 31,3% of cases. Urinary continence was achieved in 66,8% of cases one week after catheter removal. At 22 months (median follow-up), 89,1% patients were continent, BCR occurred in 27,5% patients. In multivariate analysis, PSA, prostate volume, surgical time were independent predictors of PSMs; ASA score and PSMs predicted urinary continence., Conclusions: We report the first multicentric experience of RSP for HR-PCa. Considering HR cases as those with the worst functional results, 89% of continent patients confirms that RSP helps achieve good functional results.

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (AAP) previously demonstrated improved survival in STAMPEDE, a multiarm, multistage platform trial in men starting long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer. This long-term analysis in metastatic patients was planned for 3 years after the first results. Standard-of-care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy. The comparison randomised patients 1:1 to SOC-alone with or without daily abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + prednisolone 5 mg (SOC + AAP), continued until disease progression. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Metastatic disease risk group was classified retrospectively using baseline CT and bone scans by central radiological review and pathology reports. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, accounting for baseline stratification factors. One thousand and three patients were contemporaneously randomised (November 2011 to January 2014): median age 67 years; 94% newly-diagnosed; metastatic disease risk group: 48% high, 44% low, 8% unassessable; median PSA 97 ng/mL. At 6.1 years median follow-up, 329 SOC-alone deaths (118 low-risk, 178 high-risk) and 244 SOC + AAP deaths (75 low-risk, 145 high-risk) were reported. Adjusted HR = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.71; P = 0.31 × 10 -9 ) favoured SOC + AAP, with 5-years survival improved from 41% SOC-alone to 60% SOC + AAP. This was similar in low-risk (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.76) and high-risk (HR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.43-0.69) patients. Median and current maximum time on SOC + AAP was 2.4 and 8.1 years. Toxicity at 4 years postrandomisation was similar, with 16% patients in each group reporting grade 3 or higher toxicity. A sustained and substantial improvement in overall survival of all metastatic prostate cancer patients was achieved with SOC + abiraterone acetate + prednisolone, irrespective of metastatic disease risk group., (© 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Objectives: To test the feasibility of randomisation to radical prostatectomy (RP) plus pelvic lymphadenectomy in addition to standard-of-care (SOC) systemic therapy in men with newly diagnosed oligo-metastatic prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: A prospective, randomised, non-blinded, feasibility clinical trial with an embedded QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to optimise recruitment was conducted in nine nationwide tertiary care centres undertaking high-volume robotic surgery. We aimed to randomise 50 men with synchronous oligo-metastatic prostate cancer within an 18-month recruitment period to SOC systemic therapy vs SOC plus RP (intervention arm). The main outcome measures were: ability to randomise patients, optimised by a QRI; EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires to capture quality-of-life (QoL) data at baseline and 3 months post-randomisation; routine clinicopathological assessment to capture adverse events and prostate-specific antigen in both arms, plus standard perioperative parameters in the surgical arm., Results: A total of 51 men were randomised within 14 months (one was subsequently deemed ineligible), with 60-83% accrual rate in centres that recruited at least two patients. All patients completed the trial follow-up; one patient in the intervention arm subsequently did not undergo the surgical intervention and one in the SOC arm refused all therapies. The QRI positively impacted recruitment. QoL data showed similarly high functioning in both study arms. Surgery for men with oligo-metastatic prostate cancer was found to be safe and had similar impact on early functional outcomes as surgery for standard indication., Conclusion: It is feasible to randomise men with synchronous oligo-metastatic prostate cancer to a surgical intervention in addition to standard systemic therapies. While surgery appeared safe with no substantial impact on QoL in this feasibility study, a large randomised controlled trial is now warranted to examine treatment effectiveness of this additional component in the multimodality management of oligo-metastatic prostate cancer., (© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International.)

Background: STAMPEDE previously reported adding upfront docetaxel improved overall survival for prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report long-term results for non-metastatic patients using, as primary outcome, metastatic progression-free survival (mPFS), an externally demonstrated surrogate for overall survival., Methods: Standard of care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy with or without radical prostate radiotherapy. A total of 460 SOC and 230 SOC plus docetaxel were randomly assigned 2:1. Standard survival methods and intention to treat were used. Treatment effect estimates were summarized from adjusted Cox regression models, switching to restricted mean survival time if non-proportional hazards. mPFS (new metastases, skeletal-related events, or prostate cancer death) had 70% power (α = 0.05) for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.70. Secondary outcome measures included overall survival, failure-free survival (FFS), and progression-free survival (PFS: mPFS, locoregional progression)., Results: Median follow-up was 6.5 years with 142 mPFS events on SOC (3 year and 54% increases over previous report). There was no good evidence of an advantage to SOC plus docetaxel on mPFS (HR = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.19; P = .43); with 5-year mPFS 82% (95% CI = 78% to 87%) SOC plus docetaxel vs 77% (95% CI = 73% to 81%) SOC. Secondary outcomes showed evidence SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.88; P = .002) and PFS (nonproportional P = .03, restricted mean survival time difference = 5.8 months, 95% CI = 0.5 to 11.2; P = .03) but no good evidence of overall survival benefit (125 SOC deaths; HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.21; P = .44). There was no evidence SOC plus docetaxel increased late toxicity: post 1 year, 29% SOC and 30% SOC plus docetaxel grade 3-5 toxicity., Conclusions: There is robust evidence that SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS and PFS (previously shown to increase quality-adjusted life-years), without excess late toxicity, which did not translate into benefit for longer-term outcomes. This may influence patient management in individual cases., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Objectives: To report clinical and functional outcomes for patients who have undergone salvage robot-assisted seminal vesicle excision (RA-SVE) for the focal treatment of isolated seminal vesical (SV) recurrence after treatment for prostate cancer by low-dose-rate brachytherapy., Patients and Methods: Patients with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR-PB) underwent multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) of the prostate and 11 C-Choline or 68 Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen ( 68 Ga-PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan, followed by targeted transperineal biopsy of the prostate and SVs. Isolated SV recurrence were identified in 17 (0.38%) LDR-PB patients. These 17 patients were offered RA-SVE., Results: The median total operative time was 90 min and blood loss 50 mL with no postoperative transfusions required. The median hospital stay was 1 day. No intra- or postoperative complications were documented. Continence status was unaffected, no patient required urinary pads. Postoperative pathology confirmed SV invasion in all specimens. Surgical margins were positive in seven (41%) patients. All patients had at least one positive imaging study, although three (18%) mp-MRI and five (29%) PET/CT assessments were negative. One (6%) pre-SVE biopsy was also negative but with positive imaging. Salvage SVE failure, defined as three consecutive PSA rises or the need for further treatment, occurred in six patients of whom three had a positive margin. Overall failure-free survival rates were 86%, 67%, and 53% at 1, 2, and 3 years after SVE, respectively., Conclusions: Salvage RA-SVE appears to be a safe focal treatment, with very low morbidity, for patients with localised SV recurrence after LDR-PB. It permits deferral of androgen deprivation therapy in selected patients. Bilateral SVE is mandatory. This surgical option should be considered in patients with isolated prostate cancer recurrence to the SV., (© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International.)

Objectives: To assess the long-term treatment efficacy of low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: Cause-of-death annotation in our prospective database was supplemented with death certificate information obtained via an internal audit of patients treated from 1999 to 2017 with LDR prostate brachytherapy as monotherapy or as combination with androgen deprivation therapy and/or external beam radiotherapy. Overall and disease-specific survival were the primary outcomes, estimated with Kaplan-Meier and competing risks multi-state models. Clinical variables influencing mortality were assessed with Cox proportional hazards regression in a sub-analysis of men to assess the predictive value of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at 48 months post implant., Results: The audit process began in October 2017 and culminated in June 2020 with a curated series of 2936 patients. All-cause and prostate cancer-specific death prevalence were 11% and 2.9%, respectively. The median (range) follow-up time was 10 (3-21) years and the median (range) time to death from any cause was 9 (3-21) years. At 15 years post implant the overall and prostate cancer-specific survival probability were 81% and 95%, respectively. The 15-year cumulative incidence rates of death not due and due to prostate cancer were 14% and 5%, respectively. A greater risk of death due to prostate cancer was conferred by increasing age at therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1, P < 0.001), advanced clinical stages relative to T1a-T2a (HR 1.9, P = 0.048 for T2b; HR 2.7, P = 0.023 for T2c-T3b) and a 48-month PSA level >1.0 ng/mL (HR 6.8, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: This study constitutes the largest retrospective analyses of long-term mortality outcomes from prospectively collected prostate brachytherapy data and confirms the excellent treatment efficacy of LDR prostate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. T2 clinical stage subdivisions and 48-month PSA level >1.0 ng/mL appear to be strong indicators of prostate cancer-related survival., (© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International.)

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is currently used as a salvage intervention for men with oligometastatic prostate cancer (PC), and increasingly so since the results of the Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Cancers (SABR-COMET) trial reported a significant improvement in overall survival with SABR. The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to localised prostate radiotherapy improves survival as it sensitises PC to radiotherapy-induced cell death. The importance of the androgen receptor (AR) gene pathway in the development of resistance to radiotherapy is well established. In this review paper, we will examine the data to determine how we can overcome the upregulation of the AR pathway and suggest a strategy for improving outcomes in men with oligometastatic hormone-sensitive PC.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of the symptom management after radiotherapy (SMaRT) group intervention to improve urinary symptoms in men with prostate cancer., Methods: The randomised controlled trial (RCT) recruited men from one radiotherapy centre in the UK after curative radiotherapy or brachytherapy and with moderate to severe urinary symptoms defined as scores ≥ 8 on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire. Sixty-three men were randomised either; to SMaRT, a 10-week symptom-management intervention including group support, education, pelvic floor muscle exercises, or a care-as-usual group. The primary outcome was the IPSS at 6 months from baseline assessment. Secondary outcomes were IPSS at 3 months, and International Continence Society Male Short Form (ICS), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life prostate scale (EORTC QLQ-PR25), EORTC QLQ-30 and Self-Efficacy for Symptom Control Inventory (SESCI) at 3 and 6 months from baseline. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyse the effect of the intervention., Results: SMaRT group intervention did not improve urinary symptoms as measured by IPSS at 6-months. The adjusted difference was - 2.5 [95%CI - 5.0 to 0.0], p = 0.054. Significant differences were detected at 3 months in ICS voiding symptoms (- 1.1 [- 2.0 to - 0.2], p = 0.017), ICS urinary incontinence (- 1.0 [- 1.8 to - 0.1], p = 0.029) and SESCI managing symptoms domain (13.5 [2.5 to 24.4], p = 0.017). No differences were observed at 6 months., Conclusions: SMaRT group intervention provided short-term benefit in urinary voiding and continence and helped men manage symptoms but was not effective long term., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Focal therapy aims to treat areas of cancer to confer oncological control whilst reducing treatment-related functional detriment., Objective: To report oncological outcomes and adverse events following focal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for treating nonmetastatic prostate cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: An analysis of 1379 patients with ≥6 mo of follow-up prospectively recorded in the HIFU Evaluation and Assessment of Treatment (HEAT) registry from 13 UK centres (2005-2020) was conducted. Five or more years of follow-up was available for 325 (24%) patients. Focal HIFU therapy used a transrectal ultrasound-guided device (Sonablate; Sonacare Inc., Charlotte, NC, USA)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Failure-free survival (FFS) was primarily defined as avoidance of no evidence of disease to require salvage whole-gland or systemic treatment, or metastases or prostate cancer-specific mortality. Differences in FFS between D'Amico risk groups were determined using a log-rank analysis. Adverse events were reported using Clavien-Dindo classification., Results and Limitations: The median (interquartile range) age was 66 (60-71) yr and prostate-specific antigen was 6.9 (4.9-9.4) ng/ml with D'Amico intermediate risk in 65% (896/1379) and high risk in 28% (386/1379). The overall median follow-up was 32 (17-58) mo; for those with ≥5 yr of follow-up, it was 82 (72-94). A total of 252 patients had repeat focal treatment due to residual or recurrent cancer; overall 92 patients required salvage whole-gland treatment. Kaplan-Meier 7-yr FFS was 69% (64-74%). Seven-year FFS in intermediate- and high-risk cancers was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI] 62-75%) and 65% (95% CI 56-74%; p = 0.3). Clavien-Dindo >2 adverse events occurred in 0.5% (7/1379). The median 10-yr follow-up is lacking., Conclusions: Focal HIFU in carefully selected patients with clinically significant prostate cancer, with six and three of ten patients having, respectively, intermediate- and high-risk cancer, has good cancer control in the medium term., Patient Summary: Focal high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment to areas of prostate with cancer can provide an alternative to treating the whole prostate. This treatment modality has good medium-term cancer control over 7 yr, although 10-yr data are not yet available., (Copyright © 2022 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prostate cancer risk stratification using single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) demonstrates considerable promise in men of European, Asian, and African genetic ancestries, but there is still need for increased accuracy. We evaluated whether including additional SNPs in a prostate cancer polygenic hazard score (PHS) would improve associations with clinically significant prostate cancer in multi-ancestry datasets., Methods: In total, 299 SNPs previously associated with prostate cancer were evaluated for inclusion in a new PHS, using a LASSO-regularized Cox proportional hazards model in a training dataset of 72,181 men from the PRACTICAL Consortium. The PHS model was evaluated in four testing datasets: African ancestry, Asian ancestry, and two of European Ancestry-the Cohort of Swedish Men (COSM) and the ProtecT study. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare men with high versus low PHS for association with clinically significant, with any, and with fatal prostate cancer. The impact of genetic risk stratification on the positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was also measured., Results: The final model (PHS290) had 290 SNPs with non-zero coefficients. Comparing, for example, the highest and lowest quintiles of PHS290, the hazard ratios (HRs) for clinically significant prostate cancer were 13.73 [95% CI: 12.43-15.16] in ProtecT, 7.07 [6.58-7.60] in African ancestry, 10.31 [9.58-11.11] in Asian ancestry, and 11.18 [10.34-12.09] in COSM. Similar results were seen for association with any and fatal prostate cancer. Without PHS stratification, the PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer in ProtecT was 0.12 (0.11-0.14). For the top 20% and top 5% of PHS290, the PPV of PSA testing was 0.19 (0.15-0.22) and 0.26 (0.19-0.33), respectively., Conclusions: We demonstrate better genetic risk stratification for clinically significant prostate cancer than prior versions of PHS in multi-ancestry datasets. This is promising for implementing precision-medicine approaches to prostate cancer screening decisions in diverse populations., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The androgen receptor (AR) signalling pathway is the key driver in most prostate cancers (PCa), and is underpinned by several kinases both upstream and downstream of the AR. Many popular therapies for PCa that target the AR directly, however, have been circumvented by AR mutation, such as androgen receptor variants. Some upstream kinases promote AR signalling, including those which phosphorylate the AR and others that are AR-regulated, and androgen regulated kinase that can also form feed-forward activation circuits to promotes AR function. All of these kinases represent potentially druggable targets for PCa. There has generally been a divide in reviews reporting on pathways upstream of the AR and those reporting on AR-regulated genes despite the overlap that constitutes the promotion of AR signalling and PCa progression. In this review, we aim to elucidate which kinases-both upstream and AR-regulated-may be therapeutic targets and require future investigation and ongoing trials in developing kinase inhibitors for PCa.

Purpose: Docetaxel and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or prednisolone (AAP) both improve survival when commenced alongside standard of care (SOC) androgen deprivation therapy in locally advanced or metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Thus, patient-reported quality of life (QOL) data may guide treatment choices., Methods: A group of patients within the STAMPEDE trial were contemporaneously enrolled with the possibility of being randomly allocated to receive either docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC. A mixed-model assessed QOL in those who had completed at least one QLQ-C30 + PR25 questionnaire. The primary outcome measure was difference in global-QOL (QLQ-C30 Q29&30) between patients allocated to docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC over the 2 years after random assignment, with a predefined criterion for clinically meaningful difference of > 4.0 points. Secondary outcome measures included longitudinal comparison of functional domains, pain, and fatigue, plus global-QOL at defined timepoints., Results: Five hundred fifteen patients (173 docetaxel + SOC and 342 AAP + SOC) were included. Baseline characteristics, proportion of missing data, and mean baseline global-QOL scores (docetaxel + SOC 77.8 and AAP + SOC 78.0) were similar. Over the 2 years following random assignment, the mean modeled global-QOL score was +3.9 points (95% CI, +0.5 to +7.2; P = .022) higher in patients allocated to AAP + SOC. Global-QOL was higher for patients allocated to AAP + SOC over the first year (+5.7 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +8.5; P < .001), particularly at 12 (+7.0 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +11.0; P = .001) and 24 weeks (+8.3 points, 95% CI, +4.0 to +12.6; P < .001)., Conclusion: Patient-reported QOL was superior for patients allocated to receive AAP + SOC, compared with docetaxel + SOC over a 2-year period, narrowly missing the predefined value for clinical significance. Patients receiving AAP + SOC reported clinically meaningful higher global-QOL scores throughout the first year following random assignment., Competing Interests: Alicia K. MorgansHonoraria: Genentech, Janssen, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Astellas Scientific and Medical Affairs Inc, Astellas Pharma, Janssen Oncology, Bayer, Janssen, Clovis Oncology, Myovant Sciences, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Exelixis, Pfizer, MerckConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Myovant Sciences, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Myovant Sciences, Exelixis, Novartis, Myriad Genetics, Lantheus Medical Imaging, MerckResearch Funding: Bayer, Seattle Genetics/Astellas, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Astellas Scientific and Medical Affairs Inc, Dendreon, Sanofi, Myovant SciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi Noel W. ClarkeHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Ferring, IpsenConsulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, Janssen-Cilag, Ferring, Bayer, SanofiSpeakers' Bureau: Janssen-Cilag, Astellas PharmaResearch Funding: AstrazenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Ferring, Ipsen Gerhardt AttardHonoraria: Astellas Pharma, Janssen (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Veridex, Ventana Medical Systems, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Novartis, Millennium, Abbott Laboratories, ESSA, Bayer, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, FerringSpeakers' Bureau: Janssen, Astellas Pharma, Takeda, Sanofi, Ventana Medical Systems, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, FerringResearch Funding: Janssen, Arno Therapeutics, Innocrin PharmaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I am on The ICR rewards to inventors list of abiraterone acetateTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Ventana Medical Systems, Abbott Laboratories, Bayer, ESSA, Janssen (I), Astellas Pharma (I), Pfizer (I), FerringOther Relationship: Institute of Cancer Research David P. DearnaleyPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Abiraterone acetate was developed at The Institute of Cancer Research, which therefore has a commercial interest in the development of this agent. Professor Dearnaley is on the Institute’s Rewards to Inventors list for abiraterone acetate, patent issued EP1933709B1 (location and stabilization device)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology Christopher C. ParkerHonoraria: Bayer, JanssenConsulting or Advisory Role: Clarity Pharmaceuticals, Myovant Sciences, ITM Oncologics Silke GillessenConsulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Orion Pharma GmbH, Tolero Pharmaceuticals (Inst), MSD Oncology (Inst), Roche (Inst), Amgen, Pfizer (Inst), BMS (Inst), Telix Pharma (Inst), MSD Oncology, AAA HealthCare (Inst), Orion Corporation (Inst), Amgen (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Method for biomarker (WO 3752009138392 A1)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: ProteoMedixOther Relationship: ProteoMedix, Aranda Pharma (Inst), Menarini Silicon Biosystems (Inst) Christopher D. BrawleyResearch Funding: Astellas Pharma, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Sanofi/Aventis, Pfizer, Novartis, Jacob S. TanguayConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, BayerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Roche, Bayer Robert J. JonesHonoraria: Astellas Pharma, Janssen, AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Novartis, Ipsen, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi, Bayer, Roche/Genentech, EUSA Pharma, Pharmacyclics, Clovis OncologyResearch Funding: Roche, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Exelixis, Clovis Oncology, BayerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ipsen, Bayer, Janssen, Astellas Pharma, MSD John WagstaffHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd., PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Pierre FabreSpeakers' Bureau: Bristol Myers Squibb Sarah RudmanHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, EUSA Pharma, Ipsen, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Ipsen, Pfizer, EUSA Pharma Joe M. O'SullivanConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, Janssen, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Bayer, Janssen, NovartisResearch Funding: Bayer Alison BirtleHonoraria: Janssen-CilagConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Astellas Medivation, Janssen Oncology, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Bayer Schering Pharma, Bristol Myers Squib, Merck Serono, PfizerSpeakers' Bureau: Bayer, Janssen Oncology, PfizerResearch Funding: Genzyme Andrew ProtheroeEmployment: Genesis Cancer CareHonoraria: Astellas Pharma, MSD Oncology, Ipsen, Astellas Pharma, Merck Serono, Eisai, MerckTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bayer, EUSA Pharma Emma GrayEmployment: Genesis Cancer CareHonoraria: Astellas Pharma, MSD Oncology, Ipsen, Astellas Pharma, Merck Serono, Eisai, MerckTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bayer, EUSA Pharma Neil McPhailConsulting or Advisory Role: Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, IpsenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ipsen Zaf I. MalikConsulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi/Aventis Salil VengalilHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck/PfizerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ipsen Peter HoskinResearch Funding: Varian Medical Systems, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Roche, Pfizer, Elekta Matthew R. SydesHonoraria: Lilly, Sanofi, JanssenResearch Funding: Astellas Pharma, Janssen-Cilag, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi, Clovis Oncology Simon ChowdhuryHonoraria: Clovis Oncology, NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: Clovis Oncology, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, BeiGene, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Pfizer, Janssen-CilagResearch Funding: Sanofi/Aventis Mahesh K. B. ParmarResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Clovis Oncology Nicholas D. JamesHonoraria: Sanofi, Bayer, Janssen, Astellas PharmaConsulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Clovis Oncology, EUSA pharma, pfizerSpeakers' Bureau: Pierre Fabre, Ferring, Sanofi, Astellas Pharma, Janssen Oncology, MerckResearch Funding: Janssen, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, Novartis, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, Janssen Ruth E. LangleyConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer Schering PharmaResearch Funding: Bayer Schering PharmaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: To report patient activation, which is the knowledge, skills, and confidence in self-managing health conditions, and patient-reported outcomes of men after prostate cancer treatment from a community pharmacy lifestyle intervention., Methods: The 3-month lifestyle intervention was delivered to 116 men in nine community pharmacies in the UK. Patient Activation Measure (PAM) was assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Prostate cancer-related function and quality of life were assessed using the European Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) and EuroQOL 5-dimension 5-level (EQ5D-5L) questionnaires at baseline and 6 months. Lifestyle assessments included Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS) at baseline, 3 and 6 months and Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ) at baseline and 3 months., Results: PAM score increased from 62 [95% CI 59-65] at baseline to 66 [64-69] after the intervention (p = 0.001) and remained higher at 6 months (p = 0.008). Scores for all the EPIC-26 domains (urinary, bowel and hormonal) were high at both assessments, indicating good function (between 74 [70-78] and 89 [86-91]), except sexual domain, where scores were much lower (21 [17-25] at baseline, increasing to 24 [20-28] at 6 months (p = 0.012)). In EQ5D-5L, 3% of men [1-9] reported self-care problems, while 50% [41-60] reported pain and discomfort, and no significant changes over time. Men who received androgen deprivation therapy, compared with those who did not, reported higher (better) urinary incontinence scores (p < 0.001), but lower (worse) scores in the urinary irritative/obstructive (p = 0.003), bowel (p < 0.001) and hormonal (p < 0.001) domains. Poor sexual function was common across all age groups irrespective of prostate cancer treatment., Conclusions: The intervention led to significant improvements in patient activation, exercise and diet. Community pharmacy could deliver effective services to address sexual dysfunction, pain and discomfort which are common after prostate cancer., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: For localised prostate cancer, focal therapy offers an organ-sparing alternative to radical treatments (radiotherapy or prostatectomy). Currently, there is no randomised comparative effectiveness data evaluating cancer control of both strategies., Methods: Following the eligibility criteria PSA < 20 ng/mL, Gleason score ≤ 7 and T-stage ≤ T2c, we included 830 radical (440 radiotherapy, 390 prostatectomy) and 530 focal therapy (cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound or high-dose-rate brachytherapy) patients treated between 2005 and 2018 from multicentre registries in the Netherlands and the UK. A propensity score weighted (PSW) analysis was performed to compare failure-free survival (FFS), with failure defined as salvage treatment, metastatic disease, systemic treatment (androgen deprivation therapy or chemotherapy), or progression to watchful waiting. The secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Median (IQR) follow-up in each cohort was 55 (28-83) and 62 (42-83) months, respectively., Results: At baseline, radical patients had higher PSA (10.3 versus 7.9) and higher-grade disease (31% ISUP 3 versus 11%) compared to focal patients. After PSW, all covariates were balanced (SMD < 0.1). 6-year weighted FFS was higher after radical therapy (80.3%, 95% CI 73.9-87.3) than after focal therapy (72.8%, 95% CI 66.8-79.8) although not statistically significant (p = 0.1). 6-year weighted OS was significantly lower after radical therapy (93.4%, 95% CI 90.1-95.2 versus 97.5%, 95% CI 94-99.9; p = 0.02). When compared in a three-way analysis, focal and LRP patients had a higher risk of treatment failure than EBRT patients (p < 0.001), but EBRT patients had a higher risk of mortality than focal patients (p = 0.008)., Conclusions: Within the limitations of a cohort-based analysis in which residual confounders are likely to exist, we found no clinically relevant difference in cancer control conferred by focal therapy compared to radical therapy at 6 years., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Lynch syndrome is a rare familial cancer syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2, that cause predisposition to various cancers, predominantly colorectal and endometrial cancer. Data are emerging that pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes increase the risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer. The IMPACT study is prospectively assessing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in men with germline mismatch repair pathogenic variants. Here, we report the usefulness of PSA screening, prostate cancer incidence, and tumour characteristics after the first screening round in men with and without these germline pathogenic variants., Methods: The IMPACT study is an international, prospective study. Men aged 40-69 years without a previous prostate cancer diagnosis and with a known germline pathogenic variant in the MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 gene, and age-matched male controls who tested negative for a familial pathogenic variant in these genes were recruited from 34 genetic and urology clinics in eight countries, and underwent a baseline PSA screening. Men who had a PSA level higher than 3·0 ng/mL were offered a transrectal, ultrasound-guided, prostate biopsy and a histopathological analysis was done. All participants are undergoing a minimum of 5 years' annual screening. The primary endpoint was to determine the incidence, stage, and pathology of screening-detected prostate cancer in carriers of pathogenic variants compared with non-carrier controls. We used Fisher's exact test to compare the number of cases, cancer incidence, and positive predictive values of the PSA cutoff and biopsy between carriers and non-carriers and the differences between disease types (ie, cancer vs no cancer, clinically significant cancer vs no cancer). We assessed screening outcomes and tumour characteristics by pathogenic variant status. Here we present results from the first round of PSA screening in the IMPACT study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00261456, and is now closed to accrual., Findings: Between Sept 28, 2012, and March 1, 2020, 828 men were recruited (644 carriers of mismatch repair pathogenic variants [204 carriers of MLH1, 305 carriers of MSH2, and 135 carriers of MSH6] and 184 non-carrier controls [65 non-carriers of MLH1, 76 non-carriers of MSH2, and 43 non-carriers of MSH6]), and in order to boost the sample size for the non-carrier control groups, we randomly selected 134 non-carriers from the BRCA1 and BRCA2 cohort of the IMPACT study, who were included in all three non-carrier cohorts. Men were predominantly of European ancestry (899 [93%] of 953 with available data), with a mean age of 52·8 years (SD 8·3). Within the first screening round, 56 (6%) men had a PSA concentration of more than 3·0 ng/mL and 35 (4%) biopsies were done. The overall incidence of prostate cancer was 1·9% (18 of 962; 95% CI 1·1-2·9). The incidence among MSH2 carriers was 4·3% (13 of 305; 95% CI 2·3-7·2), MSH2 non-carrier controls was 0·5% (one of 210; 0·0-2·6), MSH6 carriers was 3·0% (four of 135; 0·8-7·4), and none were detected among the MLH1 carriers, MLH1 non-carrier controls, and MSH6 non-carrier controls. Prostate cancer incidence, using a PSA threshold of higher than 3·0 ng/mL, was higher in MSH2 carriers than in MSH2 non-carrier controls (4·3% vs 0·5%; p=0·011) and MSH6 carriers than MSH6 non-carrier controls (3·0% vs 0%; p=0·034). The overall positive predictive value of biopsy using a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 51·4% (95% CI 34·0-68·6), and the overall positive predictive value of a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 32·1% (20·3-46·0)., Interpretation: After the first screening round, carriers of MSH2 and MSH6 pathogenic variants had a higher incidence of prostate cancer compared with age-matched non-carrier controls. These findings support the use of targeted PSA screening in these men to identify those with clinically significant prostate cancer. Further annual screening rounds will need to confirm these findings., Funding: Cancer Research UK, The Ronald and Rita McAulay Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research support to Biomedical Research Centres (The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; Oxford; Manchester and the Cambridge Clinical Research Centre), Mr and Mrs Jack Baker, the Cancer Council of Tasmania, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Cancer Council of Victoria, Cancer Council of South Australia, the Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), the Institut Català de la Salut, Autonomous Government of Catalonia, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute, Swedish Cancer Society, General Hospital in Malmö Foundation for Combating Cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HL holds patents on intact PSA assays and is named on a patent for a statistical method to detect prostate cancer licensed to Arctic Partners and commercialised by OPKO Health, and has stock in Arctic Partners and OPKO Health and receives royalties from sales of the 4Kscore test. RAE has received speaker honoraria from Genitourinary-American Society of Clinical Oncology, The University of Chicago, European Society for Medical Oncology (paid by Bayer and Ipsen), and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (with support from Janssen), and is a member of the AstraZeneca UK Limited Prostate Dx Advisory Panel external expert committee. No organisation had any role in the decision to publish or in the writing of the manuscript. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this study was to compare fitness parameters and cardiovascular disease risk of older and younger men with prostate cancer (PCa) and explore how men's fitness scores compared to normative age values. 83 men were recruited post-treatment and undertook a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET), sit-to-stand, step-and-grip strength tests and provided blood samples for serum lipids and HbA1c. We calculated waist-to-hip ratio, cardiovascular risk (QRISK2), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and Godin leisure-time exercise questionnaire [GLTEQ]. Age-group comparisons were made using normative data. Men > 75 years, had lower cardiopulmonary fitness, as measured by VO 2 Peak (ml/kg/min) 15.8 + 3.8 p < 0.001, and lower grip strength(28.6+5.2 kg p < 0.001) than younger men. BMI ≥30kg/m 2 and higher blood pressure all contributed to a QRisk2 score indicative of 20% chance of cardiovascular risk within 10 years (mean: 36.9-6.1) p < 0.001. Age, BMI and perceived physical activity were significantly associated with lower cardiopulmonary fitness. Men with PCa > 75 years had more cardiovascular risk factors compared to normative standards for men of their age. Although ADT was more frequent in older men, this was not found to be associated with cardiopulmonary fitness, but obesity and low levels of physical activity were. Secondary prevention should be addressed in men with PCa to improve men's overall health., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Cancer Care published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This study has sought to evaluate patient exposures during the course of particular diagnostic positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) techniques. A total of 73 patients were examined using two types of radiopharmaceutical: 18F-fluorocholine (FCH, 48 patients) and 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA, 25 patients). The mean and range of administered activity (AA) in MBq, and effective dose (mSv) for FCH were 314.4 ± 61.6 (462.5-216.8) and 5.9 ± 1.2 (8.8-4.11), respectively. Quoted in the same set of units, the mean and range of AA and effective dose for 68Ga-PSMA were 179.3 ± 92.3 (603.1-115.1) and 17.9 ± 9.2 (60.3-11.5). Patient effective doses from 18F-FCH being a factor of two greater than the dose resulting from 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT procedures. CT accounts for some 84 and 23% for 18F-FCH and 68Ga-PSMA procedures, accordingly CT acquisition parameter optimization is recommended. Patient doses have been found to be slightly greater than previous studies., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

A common practice during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is to dissect the anterior prostate space and send this anterior fat sample for histological analysis to assess for the presence of any malignant tissue. Theoretically, this may help with prognostication and oncological control, however, is this a futile process? To determine the incidence of malignant tissue found in the anterior prostate (APF) samples sent for histological review. All RARP patients within a single urology centre over a 2-year period were included. The pathology results of these patients were reviewed and the proportion of patients with APF sent were analysed for presence of lymph nodes and malignant tissue. 657 patients were identified. 358 patients had APF samples reviewed by the histopathologists. 38 (10.6%) samples had lymph nodes identified within the sample. Malignant lymph node tissue was found in one patient (0.3%). Given the yield of malignancy found in APF samples is so small and the financial and time burden on pathology services, this process is not worthwhile., (© 2020. Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

We begin by arguing that the often used algorithm for the discovery and use of disease risk factors, stepwise logistic regression, is unstable. We then argue that there are other algorithms available that are much more stable and reliable (e.g. the lasso and gradient boosting). We then propose a protocol for the discovery and use of risk factors using lasso or boosting variable selection. We then illustrate the use of the protocol with a set of prostate cancer data and show that it recovers known risk factors. Finally, we use the protocol to identify new and important SNP based risk factors for prostate cancer and further seek evidence for or against the hypothesis of an anticancer function for Selenium in prostate cancer. We find that the anticancer effect may depend on the SNP-SNP interaction and, in particular, which alleles are present., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Distal-less homeobox-1 (DLX1) is a well-established non-invasive biomarker for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, however, its mechanistic underpinnings in disease pathobiology are not known. Here, we reveal the oncogenic role of DLX1 and show that abrogating its function leads to reduced tumorigenesis and metastases. We observed that ~60% of advanced-stage and metastatic patients display higher DLX1 levels. Moreover, ~96% of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion-positive and ~70% of androgen receptor (AR)-positive patients show elevated DLX1, associated with aggressive disease and poor survival. Mechanistically, ERG coordinates with enhancer-bound AR and FOXA1 to drive transcriptional upregulation of DLX1 in ERG-positive background. However, in ERG-negative context, AR/AR-V7 and FOXA1 suffice to upregulate DLX1. Notably, inhibiting ERG/AR-mediated DLX1 transcription using BET inhibitor (BETi) or/and anti-androgen drugs reduce its expression and downstream oncogenic effects. Conclusively, this study establishes DLX1 as a direct-target of ERG/AR with an oncogenic role and demonstrates the clinical significance of BETi and anti-androgens for DLX1-positive patients., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Metastatic neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is a highly aggressive disease, whose incidence is rising. Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) represent a large family of disease- and tissue-specific transcripts, most of which are still functionally uncharacterized. Thus, we set out to identify the highly conserved lncRNAs that play a central role in NEPC pathogenesis. To this end, we performed transcriptomic analyses of donor-matched patient-derived xenograft models (PDXs) with immunohistologic features of prostate adenocarcinoma (AR + /PSA + ) or NEPC (AR - /SYN + /CHGA + ) and through differential expression analyses identified lncRNAs that were upregulated upon neuroendocrine transdifferentiation. These genes were prioritized for functional assessment based on the level of conservation in vertebrates. Here, LINC00261 emerged as the top gene with over 3229-fold upregulation in NEPC. Consistently, LINC00261 expression was significantly upregulated in NEPC specimens in multiple patient cohorts. Knockdown of LINC00261 in PC-3 cells dramatically attenuated its proliferative and metastatic abilities, which are explained by parallel downregulation of CBX2 and FOXA2 through distinct molecular mechanisms. In the cell cytoplasm, LINC00261 binds to and sequesters miR-8485 from targeting the CBX2 mRNA, while inside the nucleus, LINC00261 functions as a transcriptional scaffold to induce SMAD-driven expression of the FOXA2 gene. For the first time, these results demonstrate hyperactivation of the LINC00261-CBX2-FOXA2 axes in NEPC to drive proliferation and metastasis, and that LINC00261 may be utilized as a therapeutic target and a biomarker for this incurable disease., (© 2021 The Authors. Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)

Introduction: Focal therapy (FT) ablates areas of prostate cancer rather than treating the whole gland. We compared oncological outcomes of FT to radical prostatectomy (RP)., Methods: Using prospective multicentre databases of 761 FT and 572 RP cases (November/2005-September/2018), patients with PSA < 20 ng/ml, Gleason 

Risk classification for prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness and underlying mechanisms remain inadequate. Interactions between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) may provide a solution to fill these gaps. To identify SNP-SNP interactions in the four pathways (the angiogenesis-, mitochondria-, miRNA-, and androgen metabolism-related pathways) associated with PCa aggressiveness, we tested 8587 SNPs for 20,729 cases from the PCa consortium. We identified 3 KLK3 SNPs, and 1083 (P < 3.5 × 10 -9 ) and 3145 (P < 1 × 10 -5 ) SNP-SNP interaction pairs significantly associated with PCa aggressiveness. These SNP pairs associated with PCa aggressiveness were more significant than each of their constituent SNP individual effects. The majority (98.6%) of the 3145 pairs involved KLK3. The 3 most common gene-gene interactions were KLK3-COL4A1:COL4A2, KLK3-CDH13, and KLK3-TGFBR3. Predictions from the SNP interaction-based polygenic risk score based on 24 SNP pairs are promising. The prevalence of PCa aggressiveness was 49.8%, 21.9%, and 7.0% for the PCa cases from our cohort with the top 1%, middle 50%, and bottom 1% risk profiles. Potential biological functions of the identified KLK3 SNP-SNP interactions were supported by gene expression and protein-protein interaction results. Our findings suggest KLK3 SNP interactions may play an important role in PCa aggressiveness.

Objective: To assess the effect of surgical experience on peri-operative, functional and oncological outcomes during the first 50 Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RsRARP) cases performed by surgeons naïve to this novel approach., Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the initial cases operated by 14 surgeons in 12 different international centres. Pre-, peri- and postoperative features of the first 50 patients operated by each surgeon in all the participating centres were collected. The effect of surgical experience on peri-operative, functional and oncological outcomes was firstly evaluated after stratification by level of surgical experience (initial [≤25 cases] and expert [>25 cases]) and after using locally weighted scatterplot smoothing to graphically explore the relationship between surgical experience and the outcomes of interest., Results: We evaluated 626 patients. The median follow-up was 13 months in the initial group and 9 months in the expert group (P = 0.002). Preoperative features overlapped between the two groups. Shorter console time (140 vs 120 min; P = 0.001) and a trend towards lower complications rates (13 vs 5.5%; P = 0.038) were observed in the expert group. The relationship between surgical experience and console time, immediate urinary continence recovery and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2 complications was linear, without reaching a plateau, after 50 cases. Conversely, a non-linear relationship was observed between surgical experience and positive surgical margins (PSMs)., Conclusions: In this first report of a multicentre experience of RsRARP during the learning curve, we found that console time, immediate urinary continence recovery and postoperative complications are optimal from the beginning and further quickly improve during the learning process, while PSM rates did not clearly improve over the first 50 cases., (© 2020 The Authors BJU International © 2020 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To compare cancer control in anterior compared to posterior prostate cancer lesions treated with a focal HIFU therapy approach., Materials and Methods: In a prospectively maintained national database, 598 patients underwent focal HIFU (Sonablate ® 500) (March/2007-November/2016). Follow-up occurred with 3-monthly clinic visits and PSA testing in the first year with PSA, every 6-12 months with mpMRI with biopsy for MRI-suspicion of recurrence. Treatment failure was any secondary treatment (ADT/chemotherapy, cryotherapy, EBRT, RRP, or re-HIFU), tumour recurrence with Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 on prostate biopsy without further treatment or metastases/prostate cancer-related mortality. Cases with anterior cancer were compared to those with posterior disease., Results: 267 patients were analysed following eligibility criteria. 45 had an anterior focal-HIFU and 222 had a posterior focal-HIFU. Median age was 64 years and 66 years, respectively, with similar PSA level of 7.5 ng/ml and 6.92 ng/ml. 84% and 82%, respectively, had Gleason 3 + 4, 16% in both groups had Gleason 4 + 3, 0% and 2% had Gleason 4 + 4. Prostate volume was similar (33 ml vs. 36 ml, p = 0.315); median number of positive cores in biopsies was different in anterior and posterior tumours (7 vs. 5, p = 0.009), while medium cancer core length, and maximal cancer percentage of core were comparable. 17/45 (37.8%) anterior focal-HIFU patients compared to 45/222 (20.3%) posterior focal-HIFU patients required further treatment (p = 0.019)., Conclusion: Treating anterior prostate cancer lesions with focal HIFU may be less effective compared to posterior tumours.

Objective: To assess treatment satisfaction and decision regret post robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and correlate these with clinical, demographic and quality of life indicators. Our study took place at a high-volume United Kingdom center and patients were assessed at a minimum of 18 months postsurgery., Methods: Patients who underwent RARP between June 2011 and May 2016 were invited to participate through mailed questionnaires. A total of 207 patients formed our cohort. The questionnaires included European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life of Cancer patients 30 and PR25 modules, sexual health inventory in men and Likert decisional regret scale. A Decisional Regret Scale score of >15 was used to define an outcome of high decision regret., Results: The mean patient age was 63 years and the mean duration of follow up was 36 months. Of the 106 responders, 51 (48%) were fully satisfied with the decision to undergo RARP and 32 (30%) recorded high regret. The mean Decisional Regret Scale score was 11.3. High decision regret associated with the length of time from RARP to questionnaire administration, higher prostate specific quality of life symptom scores and lower sexual and erectile function scores., Conclusion: Our study represents the first contemporary United Kingdom series assessing decision regret following the management of localised prostate cancer with RARP. Higher regret was seen in one third of patients and was associated with worse disease-specific quality of life, sexual and erectile function measures. To minimize regret, collaborative and detailed discussion should take place pre-operatively when counselling patients about RARP. The potential longevity and impact on quality of life of these side effects should be made clear., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared for any of the authors, (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Genetic models for cancer have been evaluated using almost exclusively European data, which could exacerbate health disparities. A polygenic hazard score (PHS 1 ) is associated with age at prostate cancer diagnosis and improves screening accuracy in Europeans. Here, we evaluate performance of PHS 2 (PHS 1 , adapted for OncoArray) in a multi-ethnic dataset of 80,491 men (49,916 cases, 30,575 controls). PHS 2 is associated with age at diagnosis of any and aggressive (Gleason score ≥ 7, stage T3-T4, PSA ≥ 10 ng/mL, or nodal/distant metastasis) cancer and prostate-cancer-specific death. Associations with cancer are significant within European (n = 71,856), Asian (n = 2,382), and African (n = 6,253) genetic ancestries (p < 10 -180 ). Comparing the 80 th /20 th PHS 2 percentiles, hazard ratios for prostate cancer, aggressive cancer, and prostate-cancer-specific death are 5.32, 5.88, and 5.68, respectively. Within European, Asian, and African ancestries, hazard ratios for prostate cancer are: 5.54, 4.49, and 2.54, respectively. PHS 2 risk-stratifies men for any, aggressive, and fatal prostate cancer in a multi-ethnic dataset.