Delphi consensus on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma-a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology study endorsed by the European Association of Urology.

The purpose of this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) project, endorsed by the European Association of Urology, is to explore expert opinion on the management of patients with oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma by means of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) on extracranial metastases, with the aim of developing consensus recommendations for patient selection, treatment doses, and concurrent systemic therapy. A questionnaire on SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma was prepared by a core group and reviewed by a panel of ten prominent experts in the field. The Delphi consensus methodology was applied, sending three rounds of questionnaires to clinicians identified as key opinion leaders in the field. At the end of the third round, participants were able to find consensus on eight of the 37 questions. Specifically, panellists agreed to apply no restrictions regarding age (25 [100%) of 25) and primary renal cell carcinoma histology (23 [92%] of 25) for SABR candidates, on the upper threshold of three lesions to offer ablative treatment in patients with oligoprogression, and on the concomitant administration of immune checkpoint inhibitor. SABR was indicated as the treatment modality of choice for renal cell carcinoma bone oligometatasis (20 [80%] of 25) and for adrenal oligometastases 22 (88%). No consensus or major agreement was reached regarding the appropriate schedule, but the majority of the poll (54%-58%) retained the every-other-day schedule as the optimal choice for all the investigated sites. The current ESTRO Delphi consensus might provide useful direction for the application of SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma and highlight the key areas of ongoing debate, perhaps directing future research efforts to close knowledge gaps.

TP53 structure-function relationships in metastatic castrate-sensitive prostate cancer and the impact of APR-246 treatment.

PURPOSE: Despite well-informed work in several malignancies, the phenotypic effects of TP53 mutations in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) progression and metastasis are not clear. We characterized the structure-function and clinical impact of TP53 mutations in mCSPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed an international retrospective review of men with mCSPC who underwent next-generation sequencing and were stratified according to TP53 mutational status and metastatic burden. Clinical outcomes included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression. We also utilized isogenic cancer cell lines to assess the effect of TP53 mutations and APR-246 treatment on migration, invasion, colony formation in vitro, and tumor growth in vivo. Preclinical experimental observations were compared using t-tests and ANOVA. RESULTS: Dominant-negative (DN) TP53 mutations were enriched in patients with synchronous (vs. metachronous) (20.7% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.01) and polymetastatic (vs. oligometastatic) (14.4% vs. 7.9%, p < 0.01) disease. On multivariable analysis, DN mutations were associated with worse rPFS (hazards ratio [HR] = 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.31-2.98) and overall survival [OS] (HR = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.14-3.68) compared to TP53 wild type (WT). In vitro, 22Rv1 TP53 R175H cells possessed stronger migration, invasion, colony formation ability, and cellular movement pathway enrichment in RNA sequencing analysis compared to 22Rv1 TP53 WT cells. Treatment with APR-246 reversed the effects of TP53 mutations in vitro and inhibited 22Rv1 TP53 R175H tumor growth in vivo in a dosage-dependent manner. CONCLUSIONS: DN TP53 mutations correlated with worse prognosis in prostate cancer patients and higher metastatic potential, which could be counteracted by APR-246 treatment suggesting a potential future therapeutic avenue.

Metastases-directed stereotactic body radiotherapy in combination with targeted therapy or immunotherapy: systematic review and consensus recommendations by the EORTC-ESTRO OligoCare consortium.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with metastatic cancer, especially when characterised by a low tumour burden (ie, oligometastatic disease), receiving targeted therapy or immunotherapy has become a frequently practised and guideline-supported treatment strategy. Despite the increasing use in routine clinical practice, there is little information on the safety of combining SBRT with modern targeted therapy or immunotherapy and a paucity of high-level evidence to guide clinical management. A systematic literature review was performed to identify the toxicity profiles of combined metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy. These results served as the basis for an international Delphi consensus process among 28 interdisciplinary experts who are members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) OligoCare consortium. Consensus was sought about risk mitigation strategies of metastases-directed SBRT combined with targeted therapy or immunotherapy; a potential need for and length of interruption to targeted therapy or immunotherapy around SBRT delivery; and potential adaptations of radiation dose and fractionation. Results of this systematic review and consensus process compile the best available evidence for safe combination of metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy for patients with metastatic or oligometastatic cancer and aim to guide today's clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: current status and future directions.

PURPOSE: Around 40% of men with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer will experience a biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). The aim of this review is to describe both toxicity and oncological outcomes following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivered to the prostate bed (PB). METHOD: In april 2023, we performed a systematic review of studies published in MEDLINE or ClinicalTrials.gov according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, using the keywords "stereotactic radiotherapy" AND "postoperative" AND "prostate cancer". RESULTS: A total of 14 studies assessing either adjuvant or salvage SBRT to the whole PB or macroscopic local recurrence (MLR) within the PB, and SBRT on radiorecurrent MLR within the PB were included. Doses delivered to either whole PB or MLR between 30 to 40 Gy are associated with a low rate of late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity, ranging from 2.2 to 15.1%. Doses above 40 Gy are associated with increased rate of late GU toxicity, raising up to 38%. Oncological outcomes should be interpreted with caution, due to both short follow-up, heterogeneous populations and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) use. CONCLUSION: PB or MLR SBRT delivered at doses up to 40 Gy appears safe with relatively low late severe GU toxicity rates. Caution is needed with dose-escalated RT schedules above 40 Gy. Further prospective trials are eagerly awaited in this disease setting.

Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The currently available treatment planning systems (TPSs) are neither designed nor intended for accurate dose calculations in nontarget regions. The aim of this work is to quantify the accuracy and reliability of nontarget doses calculated by a commercially available TPS. METHODS: Nontarget doses calculated by the collapsed cone (CC) (v5.2) algorithm implemented in the RayStation (v6) TPS were compared to measured values. Different scenarios were investigated, from simple static fields to intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans. Deviations and confidence limits (CLs) were calculated between results of calculations and measurements-applying both local (δ) and global (Δ) normalization-for various points of interest (POIs). Results were based on a single-institution experience for one clinical test case (prostate) and evaluated against internationally accepted criteria. RESULTS: Overall, the TPS underestimated the nontarget dose by an average of -17.7% ± 25.3% for IMRT. Quantitatively similar results were obtained for VMAT (-17.6% ± 21.2%). POIs receiving < 5% of the prescription dose were significantly underestimated by the TPS (p-value < 0.05 for both IMRT and VMAT). Dose calculation accuracy was also determined by the contribution of secondary radiation, with measured doses for out-of-field POIs being significantly different from calculated values (p-value < 0.01 for both IMRT and VMAT). Although the CLδ in nontarget regions failed the proposed tolerance criteria (40%) for both IMRT (68.8%) and VMAT (52.6%), the CLΔ was within the tolerance limit (4%) for both treatment techniques (1.9% for IMRT and 1.3% for VMAT). No action levels (7%) were exceeded. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available benchmarks our TPS is considered acceptable for clinical use, although the dose in some POIs was poorly predicted by the CC algorithm. Some areas were pointed out where TPSs and linear accelerator control systems can be improved.

Genomic biomarkers to guide precision radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Our ability to prognosticate the clinical course of patients with cancer has historically been limited to clinical, histopathological, and radiographic features. It has long been clear however, that these data alone do not adequately capture the heterogeneity and breadth of disease trajectories experienced by patients. The advent of efficient genomic sequencing has led to a revolution in cancer care as we try to understand and personalize treatment specific to patient clinico-genomic phenotypes. Within prostate cancer, emerging evidence suggests that tumor genomics (e.g., DNA, RNA, and epigenetics) can be utilized to inform clinical decision making. In addition to providing discriminatory information about prognosis, it is likely tumor genomics also hold a key in predicting response to oncologic therapies which could be used to further tailor treatment recommendations. Herein we review select literature surrounding the use of tumor genomics within the management of prostate cancer, specifically leaning toward analytically validated and clinically tested genomic biomarkers utilized in radiotherapy and/or adjunctive therapies given with radiotherapy.

Multicentre, prospective study on local treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (LoMP study).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in addition to standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicentre, prospective study included asymptomatic patients from 2014 to 2018 (NCT02138721). Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy was offered to all fit patients with resectable tumours, resulting in 40 patients. Standard of care was administered to 40 patients who were ineligible or unwilling to undergo surgery. The primary endpoint was castration resistant cancer-free survival at the time point of ≥50% events. The secondary endpoint was local event-free survival. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses with propensity-score analysis were applied. RESULTS: After a median (quartiles) follow-up of 35 (24-47) months, 42 patients became castration-resistant or died. The median castration resistant cancer-free survival was 53 (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-92) vs 21 (95% CI 15-27) months for cytoreductive radical prostatectomy compared to standard of care (P = 0.017). The 3-year estimates for local event-free survival were 83% (95% CI 71-95) vs 59% (95% CI 51-67) for cytoreductive radical prostatectomy compared to standard of care (P = 0.012). However, treatment group showed no significance in the multivariable models for castration resistant cancer-free survival (P = 0.5) or local event-free survival (P = 0.3), adjusted for propensity-score analysis. Complications were similar to the non-metastatic setting. Patients undergoing surgery were younger, with lower baseline prostate-specific antigen levels, alkaline phosphatase levels and metastatic burden. CONCLUSION: The present LoMP study was unable to show a difference between the two inclusion groups regarding castration resistant cancer-free survival for asymptomatic patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. These results validate previous evidence that, in well-selected and informed patients, cytoreductive radical prostatectomy is feasible and safe, with corresponding continence rates compared to the non-metastatic, high-risk setting. Whether cytoreductive radical prostatectomy could be a valuable option to achieve good local palliation needs to be further researched. Overall, the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy needs to be further explored in randomized studies to correct for potential bias.

Evaluating the impact of 18F-FDG-PET-CT on risk stratification and treatment adaptation for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (EFFORT-MIBC): a phase II prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains poor, despite aggressive treatments. Inadequate primary staging, classically performed by computed tomography (CT)-imaging, could lead to inappropriate treatment and might contribute to these poor results. Although not (yet) adapted by international guidelines, several reports have indicated the superiority of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-CT (18F-FDG-PET-CT) compared to CT in the detection of lymph node and distant metastases. Thereby the presence of extra-vesical disease on 18F-FDG-PET-CT has been correlated with a worse overall survival. This supports the hypothesis that 18F-FDG-PET-CT is useful in stratifying MIBC patients and that adapting the treatment plan accordingly might result in improved outcome. METHODS: EFFORT-MIBC is a multicentric prospective phase II trial aiming to include 156 patients. Eligible patients are patients with histopathology-proven MIBC or ≥ T3 on conventional imaging treated with MIBC radical treatment, without extra-pelvic metastases on conventional imaging (thoracic CT and abdominopelvic CT/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)). All patients will undergo radical local therapy and if eligible neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. An 18F-FDG-PET-CT will be performed in addition to and at the timing of the conventional imaging. In case of presence of extra-pelvic metastasis on 18F-FDG-PET-CT, appropriate intensification of treatment with metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) (in case of ≤3 metastases) or systemic immunotherapy (> 3 metastases) will be provided. The primary outcome is the 2-year overall survival rate. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, disease-specific survival and quality of life. Furthermore, the added diagnostic value of 18F-FDG-PET-CT compared to conventional imaging will be evaluated and biomarkers in tumor specimen, urine and blood will be correlated with primary and secondary endpoints. DISCUSSION: This is a prospective phase II trial evaluating the impact of 18F-FDG-PET-CT in stratifying patients with primary MIBC and tailoring the treatment accordingly. We hypothesize that the information on the pelvic nodes can be used to guide local treatment and that the presence of extra-pelvic metastases enables MDT or necessitates the early initiation of immunotherapy leading to an improved outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Ethics Committee of the Ghent University Hospital (BC-07456) approved this study on 11/5/2020. The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04724928) on 21/1/2021.

Checkpoint inhibition in combination with an immunoboost of external beam radiotherapy in solid tumors (CHEERS): study protocol for a phase 2, open-label, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While the introduction of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) as standard of care treatment for various tumor types has led to considerable improvements in clinical outcome, the majority of patients still fail to respond. Preclinical data suggest that stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) could work synergistically with CPIs by acting as an in situ cancer vaccine, thus potentially increasing response rates and prolonging disease control. Though SBRT administered concurrently with CPIs has been shown to be safe, evidence of its efficacy from large randomized trials is still lacking. The aim of this multicenter randomized phase II trial is to assess whether SBRT administered concurrently with CPIs could prolong progression-free survival as compared to standard of care in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS/DESIGN: Ninety-eight patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive CPI treatment combined with SBRT (Arm A) or CPI monotherapy (Arm B). Randomization will be stratified according to tumor histology (melanoma, renal, urothelial, head and neck squamous cell or non-small cell lung carcinoma) and disease burden (≤ or > 3 cancer lesions). The recommended SBRT dose is 24Gy in 3 fractions, which will be administered to a maximum of 3 lesions and is to be completed prior to the second or third CPI cycle (depending on CPI treatment schedule). The study's primary endpoint is progression-free survival as per iRECIST. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, objective response, local control, quality of life and toxicity. Translational analyses will be performed using blood, fecal and tissue samples. DISCUSSION: The CHEERS trial will provide further insights into the clinical and immunological impact of SBRT when combined with CPIs in patients with advanced solid tumors. Furthermore, study results will inform the design of future immuno-radiotherapy trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03511391 . Registered 17 April 2018.

Clinical perspectives from ongoing trials in oligometastatic or oligorecurrent prostate cancer: an analysis of clinical trials registries.

PURPOSE: Thanks to the introduction of more sensitive/specific imaging and minimally invasive treatment techniques, the oligometastatic state in prostate cancer (PCa) has attracted the interest of the uro-oncological community. We aim to identify and analyze trials across five registries to gain insights into the directions this field is moving. METHODS: A systematic review of trials on oligometastatic PCa registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, ANZCTR, ISRCTN, Netherlands and UMIN Clinical Trials Registries was performed using the following keywords: 'prostate cancer' and 'oligo'. Data were extracted from ongoing/completed trials, with an unreported primary endpoint in a peer-reviewed journal, as of May until August, 2018. RESULTS: We identified 41 trials on oligometastatic PCa. Twenty-four trials are conducted in North America and 14 in Europe. Up to 70% are phase I or II trials and < 10% (n = 4) are in phase III. Less than 50% (n = 17) are randomized controlled trials. Oligometastases are PET detected in 25 trials. Studies on synchronous oligometastatic (n = 12; 29%) or oligorecurrent (n = 14; 34%) PCa are equally represented, the remainder focus on mixed states (n = 15; 37%). The majority (n = 39; 95%) of trials investigate local treatment options (RP: 5; RT: 9; RP ± RT: 7; metastasis-directed therapy: 28) with (72%) or without (28%) systemic treatment. The remaining two are imaging studies. Progression-free (PFS; 17/41; 41%) or overall survival (OS; 3/41; 7%) is defined as primary endpoint in half of all trials, others are 'safety/toxicity' or 'PSA response'. CONCLUSIONS: With 41 ongoing trials, there is great interest in oligometastatic PCa. Most trials address local ablative treatments both for prostate and/or metastases, typically by radiotherapy, and several attempts to determine the benefit of adding systemic therapy. The field will hopefully have definitive answers after completion of four ongoing phase III trials.

Exercise prescription dose for castrate-resistant prostate cancer patients: a phase I prescription dose escalation trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the start exercise prescription dose in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving second-line hormone treatment and recommended phase II exercise prescription. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose escalation phase I trial of aerobic, resistance, and flexibility exercises to evaluate dose-limiting tolerance and safety. Tolerance was defined as Borg score ≤ 16 and safety (pain) as a visual analogue scale score (VAS) ≤ 3 and CTCAE grade < 2. Dose level 1 (escalation start dose) was set at 15 min. Aerobic training (50-80% HRmax warm-up and cooling-down; and 65-80% HRmax. core), 1 set with 8-10 repetitions (reps.) resistance training (50-60% 1-RM, 8 exercises), and 1 set (30s) with 2 reps flexibility training (5 exercises). The prescription dose escalation was designed in four levels (from dose -1 to 3), with a dose escalation in volume and intensity of the exercises. RESULTS: Nine patients were included in two dosing cohorts and were under active treatment (n = 4 abiraterone acetate and n = 5 enzalutamide). Dose limiting safety concerns were observed in 2 out of 3 patients in dose level 2 and 1 patient out of 6 in dose level 1 due to VAS > 3 during resistance training and/or flexibility training. No tolerance issues were observed in the two dosing cohorts. The optimal start exercise prescription dose was set at dose level 1 due to safety issues at dose level 2. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that exercise is perceived tolerable in mCRPC patients receiving second-line hormone therapy. Caution is indicated on safety during performance of the exercises.

A modified Delphi study to develop a practical guide for selecting patients with prostate cancer for active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is a management option for men diagnosed with lower risk prostate cancer. There is wide variation in all aspects of AS internationally, from patient selection to investigations and follow-up intervals, and a lack of clear evidence on the optimal approach to AS. This study aimed to provide guidance for clinicians from an international panel of prostate cancer experts. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was undertaken, utilising two rounds of online questionnaires followed by a face-to-face workshop. Participants indicated their level of agreement with statements relating to patient selection for AS via online questionnaires on a 7-point Likert scale. Factors not achieving agreement were iteratively developed between the two rounds of questionnaires. Draft statements were presented at the face-to-face workshop for discussion and consensus building. RESULTS: 12 prostate cancer experts (9 urologists, 2 academics, 1 radiation oncologist) participated in this study from a range of geographical regions (4 USA, 4 Europe, 4 Australia). Complete agreement on statements presented to the participants was 29.4% after Round One and 69.0% after Round Two. Following robust discussions at the face-to-face workshop, agreement was reached on the remaining statements. PSA, PSA density, Multiparametric MRI, and systematic biopsy (with or without targeted biopsy) were identified as minimum diagnostic tests required upon which to select patients to recommend AS as a treatment option for prostate cancer. Patient factors and clinical parameters that identified patients appropriate to potentially receive AS were agreed. Genetic and genomic testing was not recommended for use in clinical decision-making regarding AS. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of consistency in the practice of AS for men with lower risk prostate cancer between and within countries was reflected in this modified Delphi study. There are, however, areas of common practice and agreement from which clinicians practicing in the current environment can use to inform their clinical practice to achieve the best outcomes for patients.

Characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease: a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer consensus recommendation.

Oligometastatic disease has been proposed as an intermediate state between localised and systemically metastasised disease. In the absence of randomised phase 3 trials, early clinical studies show improved survival when radical local therapy is added to standard systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease. However, since no biomarker for the identification of patients with true oligometastatic disease is clinically available, the diagnosis of oligometastatic disease is based solely on imaging findings. A small number of metastases on imaging could represent different clinical scenarios, which are associated with different prognoses and might require different treatment strategies. 20 international experts including 19 members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer OligoCare project developed a comprehensive system for characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease. We first did a systematic review of the literature to identify inclusion and exclusion criteria of prospective interventional oligometastatic disease clinical trials. Next, we used a Delphi consensus process to select a total of 17 oligometastatic disease characterisation factors that should be assessed in all patients treated with radical local therapy for oligometastatic disease, both within and outside of clinical trials. Using a second round of the Delphi method, we established a decision tree for oligometastatic disease classification together with a nomenclature. We agreed oligometastatic disease as the overall umbrella term. A history of polymetastatic disease before diagnosis of oligometastatic disease was used as the criterion to differentiate between induced oligometastatic disease (previous history of polymetastatic disease) and genuine oligometastatic disease (no history of polymetastatic disease). We further subclassified genuine oligometastatic disease into repeat oligometastatic disease (previous history of oligometastatic disease) and de-novo oligometastatic disease (first time diagnosis of oligometastatic disease). In de-novo oligometastatic disease, we differentiated between synchronous and metachronous oligometastatic disease. We did a final subclassification into oligorecurrence, oligoprogression, and oligopersistence, considering whether oligometastatic disease is diagnosed during a treatment-free interval or during active systemic therapy and whether or not an oligometastatic lesion is progressing on current imaging. This oligometastatic disease classification and nomenclature needs to be prospectively evaluated by the OligoCare study.

Effect of Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with D'Amico Intermediate and High Risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Radical Prostatectomy: A Multi-Institutional Study.

PURPOSE: Pelvic lymph node dissection represents the gold standard of lymph node staging in patients with prostate cancer. We sought to assess the effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection on oncologic outcomes in patients with characteristics of D'Amico intermediate or high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multi-institutional database of 4 centers we identified 9,742 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy from 2000 to 2017 with or without pelvic lymph node dissection. Only patients with a greater than 5% probability of lymph node invasion according to the Briganti nomogram were included in study. We performed 2:1 propensity score matching to account for potential differences between the 2 cohorts. Cox regression models were used to test the effect of pelvic lymph node dissection on biochemical recurrence, metastasis and cancer specific mortality. RESULTS: Overall 707 patients (7.3%) did not undergo pelvic lymph node dissection, of whom 520 and 187 harbored D'Amico intermediate and high risk characteristics, respectively. A median of 14 lymph nodes (IQR 8-21) were removed in the pelvic lymph node dissection cohort and 1,714 of these cases (19.0%) harbored lymph node metastasis. After propensity score matching the biochemical recurrence-free, metastasis-free and cancer specific mortality-free survival rates were 60.4% vs 65.6% (p=0.07), 87.0% vs 90.0% (p=0.06) and 95.2% vs 96.4% (p=0.2) for pelvic lymph node dissection vs no pelvic lymph node dissection 120 months after radical prostatectomy. Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for postoperative and preoperative tumor characteristics revealed that pelvic lymph node dissection performed at radical prostatectomy was no independent predictor of biochemical recurrence, metastasis or cancer specific mortality (all p ≥0.1). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in oncologic outcomes in patients with D'Amico high or intermediate risk prostate cancer in whom pelvic lymph node dissection was or was not performed at radical prostatectomy. The therapeutic value of pelvic lymph node dissection remains unclear.

Correction to: Metastasectomy for visceral and skeletal oligorecurrent prostate cancer.

The authors have requested the removal of the Excel file in Electronic Supplementary Material to protect patient's privacy.

Radiotherapy treatment volumes for oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is an emerging treatment strategy for nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, large heterogeneities exist in the RT regimens used, with series reporting the use of elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) strategies and others the delivery of focal treatments to the relapsing nodes with Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT). In this systematic review of the literature we compared the oncological outcomes and toxicity of the different RT regimens for nodal oligorecurrent PCa patients, with the aim of defining the optimal RT target volume in this setting. METHODS: We performed a systemic search on the Pubmed database to identify articles reporting on the use of ENRT or SBRT for oligometastatic PCa with nodal recurrence. RESULTS: Twenty-two articles were analyzed, including four prospective phase II trials (3 with SBRT and 1 with ENRT). Focal SBRT, delivered with an involved node, involved site, and involved field modality, was the most commonly used strategy with 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates ranging from 16 to 58% and a very low toxicity profile. Improved PFS rates were observed with ENRT strategies (52-80% at 3 years) compared to focal SBRT, despite a slightly higher toxicity rate. One ongoing randomized phase II trial is comparing both modalities in patients with nodal oligorecurrent PCa. CONCLUSIONS: With a large variability in patterns of practice, the optimal RT strategy remains to be determined in the setting of nodal oligorecurrent PCa. Ongoing randomized trials and advances in translational research will help to shed light on the best management for these patients. .

Phase II open-label study investigating apalutamide in patients with biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy.

Apalutamide, a competent inhibitor of the androgen receptor, has shown promising clinical efficacy results for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Here, we describe the rationale and design for the SAVE trial, a multi-center, Phase II study, wherein 202 men with biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy are randomly assigned 1:1 to apalutamide plus salvage radiotherapy (SRT) or androgen-deprivation therapy with an luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist plus SRT. The primary objective is to compare sexual function between the two treatment arms based on the expanded prostate cancer index-26 sexual domain score at nine months after start of hormonal treatment. The key secondary objectives are to assess quality of life, to evaluate the safety profile and the short-term efficacy of apalutamide in combination with SRT. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03899077.

Health-related quality of life overview after different curative treatment options in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: an umbrella review.

PURPOSE: This umbrella review aims to evaluate the quality, summarize and compare the conclusions of systematic reviews investigating the impact of curative treatment options on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched independently by two authors from inception until 06 January 2020. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses assessing the impact of any curative treatment option on HRQol in MIBC patients were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirty-two reviews were included. Robot-assisted RC with extracorporeal urinary diversion and open RC have similar HRQoL (n = 10). Evidence for pelvic organ-sparing RC was too limited (n = 2). Patients with a neobladder showed better overall and physical HRQoL outcomes, but worse urinary function in comparison with ileal conduit (n = 17). Bladder-preserving radiochemotherapy showed slightly better urinary and sexual but worse gastro-intestinal HRQoL outcomes in comparison with RC patients (n = 6). Quality of the reviews was low in more than 50% of the available reviews and most of the studies included in the reviews were nonrandomized studies. CONCLUSION: This umbrella review gives a comprehensive overview of the available evidence to date.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for radiation cystitis after pelvic radiotherapy: Systematic review of the recent literature.

The present study assessed the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in reducing symptoms of radiation cystitis, a specific type of iatrogenic injury to the bladder, by systematic review of recent literature. The MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases were searched using combinations of the terms "radiation," "cystitis" and "hyperbaric oxygen" to identify articles evaluating patients with radiation cystitis, treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Only recent (≤10 years) original studies were included. Data were extracted and pooled in order to calculate descriptive weighted averages. Articles were evaluated on their level of evidence. A total of 20 papers were obtained, resulting in a cohort of 815 patients who were treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy for radiation cystitis. Overall and complete response rates varied from 64.8% to 100% and 20% to 100%, respectively. The weighted average overall and complete response rates were 87.3% and 65.3%, respectively. Adverse events were observed in 9.6% of the patients, but permanent side-effects were rare. The most prominent limitations were high cost and low availability. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is effective in the treatment of radiation-induced cystitis, with minimal adverse events, but low availability and high cost. At present, evidence is low; therefore, more prospective studies are required.

Immune checkpoint blockade for organ transplant patients with advanced cancer: how far can we go?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) provide impressive response rates among immunocompetent patients with various solid tumors. So far, organ transplant recipients have been excluded from clinical studies due to the putative risk of allograft rejection however 48 cases of liver and renal transplant patients treated with CPI were already described in literature. RECENT FINDINGS: Here we discuss 19 cases of liver and 29 cases of renal transplant patients who received CPI for advanced cancer. Disease control rate [stable disease, complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) together] was 35% (21% for liver and 45% for kidney transplant patients). Graft rejection was seen in 37% of liver and 45% and kidney transplant patients. Significantly, our analysis shows that an 'ideal' response occurs in 21% of all patients (antitumor response accompanied with durable graft tolerance). SUMMARY: We believe that transplant patients can be treated with CPI in a controlled setting and for well informed patients. To obtain a durable antitumor immune response while avoiding rejection, to be able to adjust immunosuppression and to have the opportunity to develop biomarkers for tumor response and transplant rejection, these patients should be treated according to a clinical care path or a prospective clinical trial.