RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is a curative treatment option in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). Undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 0.1 ng/mL following SRT predicts biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS). The aim of this large retrospective study was to evaluate whether this effect persists in an extended follow-up of >5 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 678 patients treated with SRT for biochemical recurrence after RP were included. Exclusion criteria were lymph node or distant metastases, pre-SRT PSA > 3 ng/mL, and receipt of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between RP and SRT. All patients received a median dose of 70.2 (range 59.4-72.0) Gy to the prostatic fossa. The log-rank test (Kaplan-Meier) and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the impact of disease- and treatment-related parameters on BPFS, metastasis-free survival (MFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median follow-up after SRT was 5.6 (range 0.1-14.5) years. The 5-year BPFS was 77.8 % in patients with a PSA nadir < 0.1 ng/mL (undetectable) and 16.3 % in the remaining cohort (p < 0.001). Five-year MFS was 95.3 % with undetectable PSA versus 84.0 % with detectable PSA (p < 0.001), and 5-year OS values were 97.5 % and 92.7 % with undetectable versus detectable PSA, respectively (p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, undetectable PSA was the strongest predictor of BPFS (HR = 0.122; 95 %CI: 0.080-0.187; p < 0.001) and MFS (HR = 0.262; 95 %CI: 0.136-0.594; p < 0.001), but was not significant for OS (HR = 0.615; 95 %CI: 0.298-1.269; p = 0.189). CONCLUSION: PSA < 0.1 ng/mL following SRT without ADT is a significant predictor of BPFS and MFS. The results suggest that it might be feasible to withhold ADT in selected patients if they have undetectable PSA after SRT. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Despite growing evidence for bilateral pelvic radiotherapy (whole pelvis RT, WPRT) there is almost no data on unilateral RT (hemi pelvis RT, HPRT) in patients with nodal recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Nevertheless, in clinical practice HPRT is sometimes used with the intention to reduce side effects compared to WPRT. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography / computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) is currently the best imaging modality in this clinical situation. This analysis compares PSMA-PET/CT based WPRT and HPRT. METHODS: A propensity score matching was performed in a multi-institutional retrospective dataset of 273 patients treated with pelvic RT due to nodal recurrence (214 WPRT, 59 HPRT). In total, 102 patients (51 in each group) were included in the final analysis. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) defined as prostate specific antigen (PSA) < post-RT nadir + 0.2ng/ml, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and nodal recurrence-free survival (NRFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 29 months. After propensity matching, both groups were mostly well balanced. However, in the WPRT group there were still significantly more patients with additional local recurrences and biochemical persistence after prostatectomy. There were no significant differences between both groups in BRFS (p = .97), MFS (p = .43) and NRFS (p = .43). After two years, BRFS, MFS and NRFS were 61%, 86% and 88% in the WPRT group and 57%, 90% and 82% in the HPRT group, respectively. Application of a boost to lymph node metastases, a higher RT dose to the lymphatic pathways (> 50 Gy EQD2α/ß=1.5 Gy) and concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were significantly associated with longer BRFS in uni- and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this analysis presents the outcome of HPRT in nodal recurrent prostate cancer patients and shows that it can result in a similar oncologic outcome compared to WPRT. Nevertheless, patients in the WPRT may have been at a higher risk for progression due to some persistent imbalances between the groups. Therefore, further research should prospectively evaluate which subgroups of patients are suitable for HPRT and if HPRT leads to a clinically significant reduction in toxicity.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines provide recommendations for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). This paper aims to present a summary of the 2024 version of the EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised PCa. METHODS: The panel performed a literature review of all new data published in English, covering the time frame between May 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated, and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is considered, a combination of targeted and regional biopsies should be performed. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography imaging is the most sensitive technique for identifying metastatic spread. Active surveillance is the appropriate management for men with low-risk PCa, as well as for selected favourable intermediate-risk patients with International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A recommendation to consider hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term intensified hormonal treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. PATIENT SUMMARY: This article is the summary of the guidelines for "curable" prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is "found" through a multistep risk-based screening process. The objective is to find as many men as possible with a curable cancer. Prostate cancer is curable if it resides in the prostate; it is then classified into low-, intermediary-, and high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. These risk classes are the basis of the treatments. Low-risk prostate cancer is treated with "active surveillance", a treatment with excellent prognosis. For low-intermediary-risk active surveillance should also be discussed as an option. In other cases, active treatments, surgery, or radiation treatment should be discussed along with the potential side effects to allow shared decision-making.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) have been updated. Here we provide a summary of the 2024 guidelines. METHODS: The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Risk stratification for relapsing PCa after primary therapy may guide salvage therapy decisions. New treatment options, such as androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), ARTA + chemotherapy combinations, PARP inhibitors and their combinations, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based therapy have become available for men with metastatic PCa. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Evidence for relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is evolving rapidly. These guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. The full version is available online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/ prostate-cancer/). PATIENT SUMMARY: This article summarises the 2024 guidelines for the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence and guide doctors in discussing treatment decisions with their patients. The guidelines are updated every year.
Asunto(s)
Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/terapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The European Association of Urology (EAU) proposed a risk stratification (high vs. low risk) for patients with biochemical recurrence (BR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Here we investigated whether this stratification accurately predicts outcome, particularly in patients staged with PSMA-PET. METHODS: For this study, we used a retrospective database including 1222 PSMA-PET-staged prostate cancer patients who were treated with salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for BR, at 11 centers in 5 countries. Patients with lymph node metastases (pN1 or cN1) or unclear EAU risk group were excluded. The remaining cohort comprised 526 patients, including 132 low-risk and 394 high-risk patients. RESULTS: The median follow-up time after SRT was 31.0 months. The 3-year biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) was 85.7 % in EAU low-risk versus 69.4 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.002). The 3-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) was 94.4 % in low-risk versus 87.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.005). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 99.0 % in low-risk versus 99.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.925). In multivariate analysis, EAU risk group remained a statistically significant predictor of BPFS (p = 0.003, HR 2.022, 95 % CI 1.262-3.239) and MFS (p = 0.013, HR 2.986, 95 % CI 1.262-7.058). CONCLUSION: Our data support the EAU risk group definition. EAU risk grouping for BCR reliably predicted outcome in patients staged lymph node-negative after RP and with PSMA-PET before SRT. To our knowledge, this is the first study validating the EAU risk grouping in patients treated with PSMA-PET-planned SRT.
Asunto(s)
Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Terapia Recuperativa , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Terapia Recuperativa/métodos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Europa (Continente)RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The European Association of Urology (EAU) has proposed a risk stratification for patients harboring biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To assess whether this risk stratification helps in choosing patients for salvage radiotherapy (SRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Analyses of 2379 patients who developed BCR after RP (1989-2020), within ten European high-volume centers, were conducted. Early and late SRT were defined as SRT delivered at prostate-specific antigen values <0.5 and ≥0.5 ng/ml, respectively. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable Cox models tested the effect of SRT versus no SRT on death and cancer-specific death. The Simon-Makuch method tested for survival differences within each risk group. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 805 and 1574 patients were classified as having EAU low- and high-risk BCR. The median follow-up was 54 mo after BCR for survivors. For low-risk BCR, 12-yr overall survival was 87% versus 78% (p = 0.2) and cancer-specific survival was 100% versus 96% (p = 0.2) for early versus no SRT. For high-risk BCR, 12-yr overall survival was 81% versus 66% (p < 0.001) and cancer-specific survival was 98% versus 82% (p < 0.001) for early versus no SRT. In multivariable analyses, early SRT decreased the risk for death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.55, p < 0.01) and cancer-specific death (HR: 0.08, p < 0.001). Late SRT was a predictor of cancer-specific death (HR: 0.17, p < 0.01) but not death (p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Improved survival was recorded within the high-risk BCR group for patients treated with early SRT compared with those under observation. Our results suggest recommending early SRT for high-risk BCR men. Conversely, surveillance might be suitable for low-risk BCR, since only nine patients with low-risk BCR died from prostate cancer during follow-up. PATIENT SUMMARY: The impact of salvage radiotherapy (SRT) on cancer-specific outcomes stratified according to the European Association of Urology biochemical recurrence (BCR) risk classification was assessed. While men with high-risk BCR should be offered SRT, surveillance might be a suitable option for those with low-risk BCR.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Urología , Masculino , Humanos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/análisis , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Terapia Recuperativa/métodos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In addition to erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence is the most common functional limitation after radical prostatectomy (RPE) for prostate cancer (PCa). The German S3 guideline recommends informing patients about possible effects of the therapy options, including incontinence. However, only little data on continence from routine care in German-speaking countries after RPE are currently available, which makes it difficult to inform patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to present data on the frequency and severity of urinary incontinence after RPE from routine care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information from the PCO (Prostate Cancer Outcomes) study is used, which was collected between 2016 and 2022 in 125 German Cancer Society (DKG)-certified prostate cancer centers in 17,149 patients using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form (EPIC-26). Changes in the "incontinence" score before (T0) and 12 months after RPE (T1) and the proportion of patients who used pads, stratified by age and risk group, are reported. RESULTS: The average score for urinary incontinence (value range: 0-worst possible to 100-best possible) was 93 points at T0 and 73 points 12 months later. At T0, 97% of the patients did not use a pad, compared to 56% at T1. 43% of the patients who did not use a pad before surgery used at least one pad a day 12 months later, while 13% use two or more. The proportion of patients using pads differs by age and risk classification. CONCLUSION: The results provide a comprehensive insight into functional outcome 12 months after RPE and can be taken into account when informing patients.
Asunto(s)
Disfunción Eréctil , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Incontinencia Urinaria , Masculino , Humanos , Incontinencia Urinaria/epidemiología , Disfunción Eréctil/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Prostatectomía/efectos adversosRESUMEN
AIM: The optimal management for early recurrent prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with negative prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography (PSMA-PET) scan is an ongoing subject of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of salvage radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with biochemical recurrence with negative PSMA PET finding. METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter (11 centers, 5 countries) analysis included patients who underwent SRT following biochemical recurrence (BR) of PC after RP without evidence of disease on PSMA-PET staging. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), metastatic-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression assessed predefined predictors of survival outcomes. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included, 253 (84.3%) received SRT to the prostate bed only, 46 (15.3%) additional elective pelvic nodal irradiation, respectively. Only 41 patients (13.7%) received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Median follow-up after SRT was 33 months (IQR: 20-46 months). Three-year bRFS, MFS, and OS following SRT were 73.9%, 87.8%, and 99.1%, respectively. Three-year bRFS was 77.5% and 48.3% for patients with PSA levels before PSMA-PET ≤ 0.5 ng/ml and > 0.5 ng/ml, respectively. Using univariate analysis, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade > 2 (p = 0.006), metastatic pelvic lymph nodes at surgery (p = 0.032), seminal vesicle involvement (p < 0.001), pre-SRT PSA level of > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.004), and lack of concomitant ADT (p = 0.023) were significantly associated with worse bRFS. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards, seminal vesicle infiltration (p = 0.007), ISUP score >2 (p = 0.048), and pre SRT PSA level > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.013) remained significantly associated with worse bRFS. CONCLUSION: Favorable bRFS after SRT in patients with BR and negative PSMA-PET following RP was achieved. These data support the usage of early SRT for patients with negative PSMA-PET findings.
Asunto(s)
Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Pronóstico , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Vesículas Seminales/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antagonistas de Andrógenos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Prostatectomía , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Terapia Recuperativa , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with prostate cancer may develop biochemical recurrence after surgery, with salvage radiation therapy (SRT) being the only curative option. In 2016, Tendulkar et al. (Contemporary update of a multi-institutional predictive nomogram for salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:3648-54) published a nomogram to predict distant metastasis in a cohort of patients treated with SRT with pre-SRT prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 0.5 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy. In modern practice, SRT is delivered at lower PSA values. OBJECTIVE: To train and externally validate a machine learning model to predict the risk of distant metastasis at 5 yr in a contemporary cohort of patients receiving SRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We trained a machine learning model on data from 2418 patients treated with SRT at one institution, with a median PSA value of 0.27 ng/ml. External validation was done in 475 patients treated at two different institutions. Patients with cM1, pN1, or pT4 disease were excluded, as were patients with PSA >2 ng/ml or PSA 0, and patients with radiation dose <60 or ≥80 Gy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Model performance was assessed using calibration and time-dependent area under the receiver operating curve (tAUC). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Our model had better calibration and showed improved discrimination (tAUC = 0.72) compared with the Tendulkar model (tAUC = 0.60, p < 0.001). The main limitations of this study are its retrospective design and lack of validation on patients who received hormone therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The updated model can be used to provide more individualized risk assessments to patients treated with SRT at low PSA values, improving decision-making. PATIENT SUMMARY: Up to 40% of patients with prostate cancer may develop biochemical recurrence after surgery, with salvage radiation therapy as the only potentially curative option. We trained and validated a machine learning model using clinical and surgical data to predict a patient's risk of distant metastasis at 5 yr after treatment. Our model outperformed the reference tool and can improve clinical decision-making by providing more personalized risk assessment.
Asunto(s)
Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Prostatectomía/métodos , Terapia Recuperativa/métodosRESUMEN
CONTEXT: The optimum use of brachytherapy (BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localised/locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review to determine the benefits and harms of EBRT-BT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM Reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1, 2000 and June 7, 2022, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Eligible studies compared low- or high-dose-rate EBRT-BT against EBRT ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or radical prostatectomy (RP) ± postoperative radiotherapy (RP ± EBRT). The main outcomes were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), severe late genitourinary (GU)/gastrointestinal toxicity, metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS), at/beyond 5 yr. Risk of bias was assessed and confounding assessment was performed. A meta-analysis was performed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seventy-three studies were included (two RCTs, seven prospective studies, and 64 retrospective studies). Most studies included participants with intermediate-or high-risk PCa. Most studies, including both RCTs, used ADT with EBRT-BT. Generally, EBRT-BT was associated with improved bPFS compared with EBRT, but similar MFS, CSS, and OS. A meta-analysis of the two RCTs showed superior bPFS with EBRT-BT (estimated fixed-effect hazard ratio [HR] 0.54 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.40-0.72], p < 0.001), with absolute improvements in bPFS at 5-6 yr of 4.9-16%. However, no difference was seen for MFS (HR 0.84 [95% CI 0.53-1.28], p = 0.4) or OS (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.63-1.19], p = 0.4). Fewer studies examined RP ± EBRT. There is an increased risk of severe late GU toxicity, especially with low-dose-rate EBRT-BT, with some evidence of increased prevalence of severe GU toxicity at 5-6 yr of 6.4-7% across the two RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: EBRT-BT can be considered for unfavourable intermediate/high-risk localised/locally advanced PCa in patients with good urinary function, although the strength of this recommendation based on the European Association of Urology guideline methodology is weak given that it is based on improvements in biochemical control. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found good evidence that radiotherapy combined with brachytherapy keeps prostate cancer controlled for longer, but it could lead to worse urinary side effects than radiotherapy without brachytherapy, and its impact on cancer spread and patient survival is less clear.
Asunto(s)
Braquiterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Braquiterapia/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background: The European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) panel on prostate bed delineation reflected on macroscopic local recurrences in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT), a challenging situation without standardized approach, and decided to propose a consensus recommendation on target volume selection and definition. Methods: An ESTRO ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 12 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in two separate clinically relevant scenarios: a local recurrence at the seminal vesicle bed and one apically at the level of the anastomosis. Both recurrences were prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-avid and had an anatomical correlate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: Contouring of the two cases confirmed considerable variation among the panelists. Finally, however, a consensus recommendation could be agreed upon. Firstly, it was proposed to always delineate the entire prostate bed as clinical target volume and not the local recurrence alone. The panel judged the risk of further microscopic disease outside of the visible recurrence too high to safely exclude the rest of the prostate bed from the CTV. A focused, "stereotactic" approach should be reserved for re-irradiation after previous PORT. Secondly, the option of a focal boost on the recurrence was discussed. Conclusion: Radiation oncologists are increasingly confronted with macroscopic local recurrences visible on imaging in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy. It was recommended to always delineate and irradiate the entire prostate bed, and not the local recurrence alone, whatever the exact location of that recurrence. Secondly, specific dose-escalation on the macroscopic recurrence should only be considered if an anatomic correlate is visible. Such a focal boost is probably feasible, provided that OAR constraints are prioritized. Possible dose is also dependent on the location of the recurrence. Its potential benefit should urgently be investigated in prospective clinical trials.
RESUMEN
Castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is characterized by an aggressive biological behavior with a relatively short survival time, especially in progressive tumors pretreated with new hormonal agents and taxane chemotherapy. [177Lu]-Lutetium-PSMA (Lu-PSMA) treatment has proven efficacy in these patients. However, around 30% of the CRPC patients do not benefit from Lu-PSMA treatment, and little is known about predictive factors for treatment success if Lu-PSMA is offered in an individualized approach based on clinical and laboratory features. In this monocentric retrospective study, 86 CRPC patients receiving Lu-PSMA treatment were evaluated. The focus of the study was to describe clinical factors at baseline and during early treatment that are related to overall survival (OS). In addition, PSMA PET/CT-, PSA-response, and safety and tolerability (CTCAE adverse event reporting) were assessed. Efficacy endpoints were calculated using stratified Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models. Mean applied dose was 17.7 GBq (mean 5.3 ± 1.1 GBq per cycle) with an average of 3.6 (range 1-8) therapy cycles. Patients were followed up for a mean of 12.4 months (range 1-39). The median OS was 15 months (95% CI 12.8-17.2). The best overall response rate in patients assessed with PSMA PET/CT and PSA response was 27.9%, and 50.0% had at least stable disease. Nine patients had a ≥grade 3 adverse event with anemia being the most frequent adverse event. Positive predictors for prolonged OS from baseline parameters were pre-treatment hemoglobin level of ≥10 g/dL and a lower PSA values at treatment start, while the presence of visceral or liver metastases were not significantly associated with worse prognoses in this cohort. With careful patient selection, an individualized Lu-PSMA treatment approach is feasible and patients with dose-limiting factors or visceral metastases should be included in prospective trials.
RESUMEN
Purpose/Objective: Radiotherapy to the prostate bed is a potentially curative salvage option after radical prostatectomy. Although prostate bed contouring guidelines are available in the literature, important variabilities exist. The objective of this work is to provide a contemporary consensus guideline for prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy. Methods: An ESTRO-ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 11 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in 3 separate clinically relevant scenarios: adjuvant radiation, salvage radiation with PSA progression, and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA. These cases focused on the presence of positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension, and seminal vesicles involvement. None of the cases had radiographic evidence of local recurrence on imaging. A single computed tomography (CT) dataset was shared via FALCON platform and contours were performed using EduCaseTM software. Contours were analyzed qualitatively using heatmaps which provided a visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively analyzed using Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficients. Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: The mean CTV for the adjuvant case was 76 cc (SD = 26.6), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 51.80 cc (SD = 22.7), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 57.63 cc (SD = 25.2). Compared to the median, the mean Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficient for the adjuvant case was 0.60 (SD 0.10), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 0.58 (SD = 0.12), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 0.60 (SD = 0.11). A heatmap for each clinical scenario was generated. The group agreed to proceed with a uniform recommendation for all cases, independent of the radiotherapy timing. Several controversial areas of the prostate bed CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences where the panel achieved consensus on the prostate bed CTV to be used as a novel guideline for postoperative prostate cancer radiotherapy. Conclusion: Variability was observed in a group formed by experienced genitourinary radiation oncologists and a radiologist. A single contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in prostate bed delineation, independent of the indication.There is important variability in existing contouring guidelines for postoperative prostate bed (PB) radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy. This work aimed at providing a contemporary consensus guideline for PB delineation. An ESTRO ACROP consensus panel including radiation oncologists and a radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, delineated the PB CTV in 3 scenarios: adjuvant RT, salvage RT with PSA progression, and salvage RT with persistently elevated PSA. None of the cases had evidence of local recurrence. Contours were analysed qualitatively using heatmaps for visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively using Sorensen-Dice coefficient. Case-specific questionnaires were also discussed via e-mails and videoconferences for consensus. Several controversial areas of the PB CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences. Finally, a contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in PB delineation, independent of the indication.
RESUMEN
Importance: Prostate-specific antigen membrane positron-emission tomography (PSMA-PET) is increasingly used to guide salvage radiotherapy (sRT) after radical prostatectomy for patients with recurrent or persistent prostate cancer. Objective: To develop and validate a nomogram for prediction of freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) after PSMA-PET-based sRT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 1029 patients with prostate cancer treated between July 1, 2013, and June 30, 2020, at 11 centers from 5 countries. The initial database consisted of 1221 patients. All patients had a PSMA-PET scan prior to sRT. Data were analyzed in November 2022. Exposures: Patients with a detectable post-radical prostatectomy prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level treated with sRT to the prostatic fossa with or without additional sRT to pelvic lymphatics or concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were eligible. Main Outcomes and Measures: The FFBF rate was estimated, and a predictive nomogram was generated and validated. Biochemical relapse was defined as a PSA nadir of 0.2 ng/mL after sRT. Results: In the nomogram creation and validation process, 1029 patients (median age at sRT, 70 years [IQR, 64-74 years]) were included and further divided into a training set (n = 708), internal validation set (n = 271), and external outlier validation set (n = 50). The median follow-up was 32 months (IQR, 21-45 months). Based on the PSMA-PET scan prior to sRT, 437 patients (42.5%) had local recurrences and 313 patients (30.4%) had nodal recurrences. Pelvic lymphatics were electively irradiated for 395 patients (38.4%). All patients received sRT to the prostatic fossa: 103 (10.0%) received a dose of less than 66 Gy, 551 (53.5%) received a dose of 66 to 70 Gy, and 375 (36.5%) received a dose of more than 70 Gy. Androgen deprivation therapy was given to 325 (31.6%) patients. On multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, pre-sRT PSA level (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80 [95% CI, 1.41-2.31]), International Society of Urological Pathology grade in surgery specimen (grade 5 vs 1+2: HR, 2.39 [95% CI, 1.63-3.50], pT stage (pT3b+pT4 vs pT2: HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.39-2.67]), surgical margins (R0 vs R1+R2+Rx: HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.48-0.78]), ADT use (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.37-0.65]), sRT dose (>70 vs ≤66 Gy: HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.29-0.67]), and nodal recurrence detected on PSMA-PET scans (HR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.09-1.85]) were associated with FFBF. The mean (SD) nomogram concordance index for FFBF was 0.72 (0.06) for the internal validation cohort and 0.67 (0.11) in the external outlier validation cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with prostate cancer presents an internally and externally validated nomogram that estimated individual patient outcomes after PSMA-PET-guided sRT.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Antagonistas de Andrógenos , Andrógenos , Estudios de Cohortes , Nomogramas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedad Crónica , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The present study aimed to assess whether SRT to the prostatic fossa should be initiated in a timely manner after detecting biochemical recurrence (BR) in patients with prostate cancer, when no correlate was identified with prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter analysis included 1222 patients referred for PSMA-PET after a radical prostatectomy due to BR. Exclusion criteria were: pathological lymph node metastases, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence, distant or lymph node metastases, nodal irradiation, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). This led to a cohort of 341 patients. Biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) was the primary study endpoint. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 28.0 months. The 3-year BPFS was 71.6% in PET-negative cases and 80.8% in locally PET-positive cases. This difference was significant in univariate (p = 0.019), but not multivariate analyses (p = 0.366, HR: 1.46, 95%CI: 0.64-3.32). The 3-year BPFS in PET-negative cases was significantly influenced by age (p = 0.005), initial pT3/4 (p < 0.001), pathology scores (ISUP) ≥ 3 (p = 0.026), and doses to fossa > 70 Gy (p = 0.027) in univariate analyses. In multivariate analyses, only age (HR: 1.096, 95%CI: 1.023-1.175, p = 0.009) and PSA-doubling time (HR: 0.339, 95%CI: 0.139-0.826, p = 0.017) remained significant. CONCLUSION: To our best knowledge, this study provided the largest SRT analysis in patients without ADT that were lymph node-negative on PSMA-PET. A multivariate analysis showed no significant difference in BPFS between locally PET-positive and PET-negative cases. These results supported the current EAU recommendation to initiate SRT in a timely manner after detecting BR in PET negative patients.
Asunto(s)
Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Metástasis Linfática , Antagonistas de Andrógenos , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodos , Radioisótopos de Galio , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Prostatectomía/métodos , Terapia Recuperativa/métodosRESUMEN
CONTEXT: The optimal management for men with prostate cancer (PCa) with unconventional histology (UH) is unknown. The outcome for these cancers might be worse than for conventional PCa and so different approaches may be needed. OBJECTIVE: To compare oncological outcomes for conventional and UH PCa in men with localized disease treated with curative intent. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review adhering to the Referred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022296013) was performed in July 2021. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We screened 3651 manuscripts and identified 46 eligible studies (reporting on 1 871 814 men with conventional PCa and 6929 men with 10 different PCa UHs). Extraprostatic extension and lymph node metastases, but not positive margin rates, were more common with UH PCa than with conventional tumors. PCa cases with cribriform pattern, intraductal carcinoma, or ductal adenocarcinoma had higher rates of biochemical recurrence and metastases after radical prostatectomy than for conventional PCa cases. Lower cancer-specific survival rates were observed for mixed cribriform/intraductal and cribriform PCa. By contrast, pathological findings and oncological outcomes for mucinous and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like PCa were similar to those for conventional PCa. Limitations of this review include low-quality studies, a risk of reporting bias, and a scarcity of studies that included radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Intraductal, cribriform, and ductal UHs may have worse oncological outcomes than for conventional and mucinous or PIN-like PCa. Alternative treatment approaches need to be evaluated in men with these cancers. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the literature to explore whether prostate cancers with unconventional growth patterns behave differently to conventional prostate cancers. We found that some unconventional growth patterns have worse outcomes, so we need to investigate if they need different treatments. Urologists should be aware of these growth patterns and their clinical impact.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasia Intraepitelial Prostática , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Próstata/cirugía , Próstata/patología , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective, multicenter study was to assess efficacy of PSMA-PET/CT-guided salvage radiotherapy (sRT) in patients with recurrent or persistent PSA after primary surgery and PSA levels < 0.2 ng/ml. METHODS: The study included patients from a pooled cohort (n = 1223) of 11 centers from 6 countries. Patients with PSA levels > 0.2 ng/ml prior to sRT or without sRT to the prostatic fossa were excluded. The primary study endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and BR was defined as PSA nadir after sRT + 0.2 ng/ml. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of clinical parameters on BRFS. Recurrence patterns after sRT were analyzed. RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 273 patients; 78/273 (28.6%) and 48/273 (17.6%) patients had local or nodal recurrence on PET/CT. The most frequently applied sRT dose to the prostatic fossa was 66-70 Gy (n = 143/273, 52.4%). SRT to pelvic lymphatics was delivered in 87/273 (31.9%) patients and androgen deprivation therapy was given to 36/273 (13.2%) patients. After a median follow-up time of 31.1 months (IQR: 20-44), 60/273 (22%) patients had biochemical recurrence. The 2- and 3-year BRFS was 90.1% and 79.2%, respectively. The presence of seminal vesicle invasion in surgery (p = 0.019) and local recurrences in PET/CT (p = 0.039) had a significant impact on BR in multivariate analysis. In 16 patients, information on recurrence patterns on PSMA-PET/CT after sRT was available and one had recurrent disease inside the RT field. CONCLUSION: This multicenter analysis suggests that implementation of PSMA-PET/CT imaging for sRT guidance might be of benefit for patients with very low PSA levels after surgery due to promising BRFS rates and a low number of relapses within the sRT field.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodos , Radioisótopos de Galio , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antagonistas de Andrógenos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/radioterapia , Terapia Recuperativa , ProstatectomíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is the gold standard for diagnosis of lymph node involvement (LNI) in patients with prostate cancer. The Roach formula, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) calculator, and Briganti 2012 nomogram are elegant and simple traditional tools used to estimate the risk of LNI and select patients for PLND. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether machine learning (ML) can improve patient selection and outperform currently available tools for predicting LNI using similar readily available clinicopathologic variables. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective data for patients treated with surgery and PLND between 1990 and 2020 in two academic institutions were used. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We trained three models (two logistic regression models and one gradient-boosted trees-based model [XGBoost]) on data provided from one institution (n = 20267) with age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, clinical T stage, percentage positive cores, and Gleason scores as inputs. We externally validated these models using data from another institution (n = 1322) and compared their performance to that of the traditional models using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and decision curve analysis (DCA). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: LNI was present in 2563 patients (11.9%) overall, and in 119 patients (9%) in the validation data set. XGBoost had the best performance among all the models. On external validation, its AUC outperformed that of the Roach formula by 0.08 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.042-0.12), the MSKCC nomogram by 0.05 (95% CI 0.016-0.070), and the Briganti nomogram by 0.03 (95% CI 0.0092-0.051; all p < 0.05). It also had better calibration and clinical utility in terms of net benefit on DCA across relevant clinical thresholds. The main limitation of the study is its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Taking all measures of performance together, ML using standard clinicopathologic variables outperforms traditional tools in predicting LNI. PATIENT SUMMARY: Determining the risk of cancer spread to the lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer allows surgeons to perform lymph node dissection only in patients who need it and avoid the side effects of the procedure in those who do not. In this study, we used machine learning to develop a new calculator to predict the risk of lymph node involvement that outperformed traditional tools currently used by oncologists.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is no consensus concerning the appropriate use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) during primary and postoperative external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Thus, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) guidelines seeks to present current recommendations for the clinical use of ADT in the various indications of EBRT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE PubMed that evaluated EBRT and ADT in prostate cancer. The search focused on randomized, Phase II and III trials published in English from January 2000 to May 2022. In case topics were addressed in the absence of Phase II or III trials, recommendations were labelled accordingly based on the limited body of evidence. Localized PCa was classified according to D'Amico et al. classification in low-, intermediate and high risk PCa. The ACROP clinical committee identified 13 European experts who discussed and analyzed the body of evidence concerning the use of ADT with EBRT for prostate cancer. RESULTS: Key issues were identified and are discussed: It was concluded that no additional ADT is recommended for low-risk prostate cancer patients, whereas for intermediate- and high-risk patients four to six months and two to three years of ADT are recommended. Likewise, patients with locally advanced prostate cancer are recommended to receive ADT for two to three years and when ≥ 2 high-risk factors (cT3-4, ISUP grade ≥ 4 or PSA ≥ 40 ng/ml) or cN1 is present ADT for three years plus additional Abiraterone for two years is recommended. For postoperative patients no ADT is recommended for adjuvant EBRT in pN0 patients whereas for pN1 patients adjuvant EBRT with long-term ADT is performed for at least 24 to 36 months. In the setting of salvage EBRT ADT is performed in biochemically persistent PCa patients with no evidence of metastatic disease. Long-term ADT (24 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with high risk of further progression (PSA ≥ 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group ≥ 4) and a life expectancy of over ten years, whereas short-term ADT (6 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with lower risk profile (PSA < 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group 4). Patients considered for ultra-hypofractionated EBRT as well as patients with image based local recurrence within the prostatic fossa or lymph node recurrence should participate in appropriate clinical trials evaluating the role of additional ADT. CONCLUSION: These ESTRO-ACROP recommendations are evidence-based and relevant to the use of ADT in combination with EBRT in PCa for the most common clinical settings.