Prostate Cancer Screening With PSA, Kallikrein Panel, and MRI: The ProScreen Randomized Trial.

Importance: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has potential to reduce prostate cancer mortality but frequently detects prostate cancer that is not clinically important. Objective: To describe rates of low-grade (grade group 1) and high-grade (grade groups 2-5) prostate cancer identified among men invited to participate in a prostate cancer screening protocol consisting of a PSA test, a 4-kallikrein panel, and a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ProScreen trial is a clinical trial conducted in Helsinki and Tampere, Finland, that randomized 61 193 men aged 50 through 63 years who were free of prostate cancer in a 1:3 ratio to either be invited or not be invited to undergo screening for prostate cancer between February 2018 and July 2020. Interventions: Participating men randomized to the intervention underwent PSA testing. Those with a PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or higher underwent additional testing for high-grade prostate cancer with a 4-kallikrein panel risk score. Those with a kallikrein panel score of 7.5% or higher underwent an MRI of the prostate gland, followed by targeted biopsies for those with abnormal prostate gland MRI findings. Final data collection occurred through June 31, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: In descriptive exploratory analyses, the cumulative incidence of low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer after the first screening round were compared between the group invited to undergo prostate cancer screening and the control group. Results: Of 60 745 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 57.2 [4.0] years), 15 201 were randomized to be invited and 45 544 were randomized not to be invited to undergo prostate cancer screening. Of 15 201 eligible males invited to undergo screening, 7744 (51%) participated. Among them, 32 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.41%) and 128 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 1.65%) were detected, with 1 cancer grade group result missing. Among the 7457 invited men (49%) who refused participation, 7 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.1%) and 44 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.6%) were detected, with 7 cancer grade groups missing. For the entire invited screening group, 39 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.26%) and 172 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 1.13%) were detected. During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, in the group not invited to undergo screening, 65 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.14%) and 282 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.62%) were detected. The risk difference for the entire group randomized to the screening invitation vs the control group was 0.11% (95% CI, 0.03%-0.20%) for low-grade and 0.51% (95% CI, 0.33%-0.70%) for high-grade cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: In this preliminary descriptive report from an ongoing randomized clinical trial, 1 additional high-grade cancer per 196 men and 1 low-grade cancer per 909 men were detected among those randomized to be invited to undergo a single prostate cancer screening intervention compared with those not invited to undergo screening. These preliminary findings from a single round of screening should be interpreted cautiously, pending results of the study's primary mortality outcome. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03423303.

Cancer origin tracing and timing in two high-risk prostate cancers using multisample whole genome analysis: prospects for personalized medicine.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PrCa) genomic heterogeneity causes resistance to therapies such as androgen deprivation. Such heterogeneity can be deciphered in the context of evolutionary principles, but current clinical trials do not include evolution as an essential feature. Whether or not analysis of genomic data in an evolutionary context in primary prostate cancer can provide unique added value in the research and clinical domains remains an open question. METHODS: We used novel processing techniques to obtain whole genome data together with 3D anatomic and histomorphologic analysis in two men (GP5 and GP12) with high-risk PrCa undergoing radical prostatectomy. A total of 22 whole genome-sequenced sites (16 primary cancer foci and 6 lymph node metastatic) were analyzed using evolutionary reconstruction tools and spatio-evolutionary models. Probability models were used to trace spatial and chronological origins of the primary tumor and metastases, chart their genetic drivers, and distinguish metastatic and non-metastatic subclones. RESULTS: In patient GP5, CDK12 inactivation was among the first mutations, leading to a PrCa tandem duplicator phenotype and initiating the cancer around age 50, followed by rapid cancer evolution after age 57, and metastasis around age 59, 5 years prior to prostatectomy. In patient GP12, accelerated cancer progression was detected after age 54, and metastasis occurred around age 56, 3 years prior to prostatectomy. Multiple metastasis-originating events were identified in each patient and tracked anatomically. Metastasis from prostate to lymph nodes occurred strictly ipsilaterally in all 12 detected events. In this pilot, metastatic subclone content analysis appears to substantially enhance the identification of key drivers. Evolutionary analysis' potential impact on therapy selection appears positive in these pilot cases. CONCLUSIONS: PrCa evolutionary analysis allows tracking of anatomic site of origin, timing of cancer origin and spread, and distinction of metastatic-capable from non-metastatic subclones. This enables better identification of actionable targets for therapy. If extended to larger cohorts, it appears likely that similar analyses could add substantial biological insight and clinically relevant value.

Robot-assisted versus three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 12-month outcomes of a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare functional and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) to three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (3D-LRP) at 12 months after surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomised single-centre study of 145 consecutive men referred to radical prostatectomy in a tertiary referral centre in Finland. Patients were randomised 1:1 to the RALP (N = 75) and 3D-LRP (N = 70) groups. The primary outcome was urinary continence evaluated with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26-item version (EPIC-26) incontinence domain score at 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the use of protective pads at 12 months after surgery, EPIC-26 domain scores of irritative/obstructive, bowel, sexual and hormonal symptoms, positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Complication frequency within the 3-month period after surgery was evaluated according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Statistical significance between groups was analysed using Mann-Whitney, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. The trial was terminated after interim analysis based on no statistically significant difference in EPIC-26 urinary incontinence domain scores. Altogether 145 patients of the target accrual of 280 patients were recruited. RESULTS: Postoperative continence at 12 months after surgery according to the EPIC-26 incontinence domain was 79.25 in both groups (P = 0.4). Between group difference was -5.8 (95% confidence interval -15.2 to 3.6). There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of PSM or BCR between the two surgical modality groups. CONCLUSION: We were unable to demonstrate a difference between the RALP and 3D-LRP groups for functional and oncological outcomes at 12 months after surgery.

Including Information on Overdiagnosis in Shared Decision Making: A Review of Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aids.

Background. Overdiagnosis is an accepted harm of cancer screening, but studies of prostate cancer screening decision aids have not examined provision of information important in communicating the risk of overdiagnosis, including overdiagnosis frequency, competing mortality risk, and the high prevalence of indolent cancers in the population. Methods. We undertook a comprehensive review of all publicly available decision aids for prostate cancer screening, published in (or translated to) the English language, without date restrictions. We included all decision aids from a recent systematic review and screened excluded studies to identify further relevant decision aids. We used a Google search to identify further decision aids not published in peer reviewed medical literature. Two reviewers independently screened the decision aids and extracted information on communication of overdiagnosis. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or by consulting a third author. Results. Forty-one decision aids were included out of the 80 records identified through the search. Most decision aids (n = 32, 79%) did not use the term overdiagnosis but included a description of it (n = 38, 92%). Few (n = 7, 17%) reported the frequency of overdiagnosis. Little more than half presented the benefits of prostate cancer screening before the harms (n = 22, 54%) and only 16, (39%) presented information on competing risks of mortality. Only 2 (n = 2, 5%) reported the prevalence of undiagnosed prostate cancer in the general population. Conclusion. Most patient decision aids for prostate cancer screening lacked important information on overdiagnosis. Specific guidance is needed on how to communicate the risks of overdiagnosis in decision aids, including appropriate content, terminology and graphical display. Highlights: Most patient decision aids for prostate cancer screening lacks important information on overdiagnosis.Specific guidance is needed on how to communicate the risks of overdiagnosis.

Randomised double-blind phase 3 clinical study testing impact of atorvastatin on prostate cancer progression after initiation of androgen deprivation therapy: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Blood cholesterol is likely a risk factor for prostate cancer prognosis and use of statins is associated with lowered risk of prostate cancer recurrence and progression. Furthermore, use of statins has been associated with prolonged time before development of castration resistance (CR) during androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer. However, the efficacy of statins on delaying castration-resistance has not been tested in a randomised placebo-controlled setting.This study aims to test statins' efficacy compared to placebo in delaying development of CR during ADT treatment for primary metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer. Secondary aim is to explore effect of statin intervention on prostate cancer mortality and lipid metabolism during ADT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this randomised placebo-controlled trial, a total of 400 men with de novo metastatic prostate cancer or recurrent disease after primary treatment and starting ADT will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to use daily 80 mg of atorvastatin or placebo. All researchers, study nurses and patients will be blinded throughout the trial. Patients are followed until disease recurrence or death. Primary outcome is time to formation of CR after initiation of ADT. Serum lipid levels (total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and trigyserides) are analysed to test whether changes in serum cholesterol parameters during ADT predict length of treatment response. Furthermore, the trial will compare quality of life, cardiovascular morbidity, changes in blood glucose and circulating cell-free DNA, and urine lipidome during trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the Regional ethics committees of the Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Science centre, Tampere, Finland (R18065M) and Tarto University Hospital, Tarto, Estonia (319/T-6). All participants read and sign informed consent form before study entry. After publication of results for the primary endpoints, anonymised summary metadata and statistical code will be made openly available. The data will not include any information that could make it possible to identify a given participant. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrial.gov: NCT04026230, Eudra-CT: 2016-004774-17, protocol code: ESTO2, protocol date 10 September 2020 and version 6.

Detection of Prostate Cancer Using Biparametric Prostate MRI, Radiomics, and Kallikreins: A Retrospective Multicenter Study of Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Accurate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), Gleason Grade Group ≥ 2, remains a challenge. Prostate MRI radiomics and blood kallikreins have been proposed as tools to improve the performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI). PURPOSE: To develop and validate radiomics and kallikrein models for the detection of csPCa. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: A total of 543 men with a clinical suspicion of csPCa, 411 (76%, 411/543) had kallikreins available and 360 (88%, 360/411) did not take 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. Two data splits into training, validation (split 1: single center, n = 72; split 2: random 50% of pooled datasets from all four centers), and testing (split 1: 4 centers, n = 288; split 2: remaining 50%) were evaluated. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 3 T/1.5 T, TSE T2-weighted imaging, 3x SE DWI. ASSESSMENT: In total, 20,363 radiomic features calculated from manually delineated whole gland (WG) and bpMRI suspicion lesion masks were evaluated in addition to clinical parameters, prostate-specific antigen, four kallikreins, MRI-based qualitative (PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert) scores. STATISTICAL TESTS: For the detection of csPCa, area under receiver operating curve (AUC) was calculated using the DeLong's method. A multivariate analysis was conducted to determine the predictive power of combining variables. The values of P-value < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: The highest prediction performance was achieved by IMPROD bpMRI Likert and PI-RADSv2.1 score with AUC = 0.85 and 0.85 in split 1, 0.85 and 0.83 in split 2, respectively. bpMRI WG and/or kallikreins demonstrated AUCs ranging from 0.62 to 0.73 in split 1 and from 0.68 to 0.76 in split 2. AUC of bpMRI lesion-derived radiomics model was not statistically different to IMPROD bpMRI Likert score (split 1: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.306; split 2: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.488). DATA CONCLUSION: The use of radiomics and kallikreins failed to outperform PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert and their combination did not lead to further performance gains. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Preservation of Endopelvic Fascia: Effects on Postoperative Incontinence and Sexual Function - A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunction are common after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP). New surgical techniques to improve these functions after the operation are under evaluation for example, preservation of endopelvic fascia during RALP. However, the benefits of this technique have not been critically scrutinized in a randomized setting. AIM: In this study, we compared endopelvic fascia preserving operation with the standard surgical procedure in a randomized trial at the Tampere University Hospital, Finland. METHODS: A total of 158 men with localized prostate cancer and scheduled for RALP were randomized 1:1 into endopelvic fascia-preserving RALP or a control group that is, standard operation. All operations were performed by a single surgeon. OUTCOMES: Urinary and sexual function were evaluated by the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 questionnaire at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months after the surgery. RESULTS: There was no difference in urinary incontinence or sexual function between the groups at any time point (urinary incontinence domain at 12 months after RALP for fascia preserving and control group 73.6 ± 3 vs 78.9 ± 2.5 and sexual domain 43 ± 3.2 vs 40.3 ± 3, respectively). Clinical and pathologic tumor characteristics, duration of surgery, blood loss, rate of complications, and time to hospital discharge were similar between the study arms. Compliance of filling out the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 questionnaire varied from 91% to 98%, with no difference between study arms. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Based on our results, endopelvic fascia preservation alone during RALP is not recommended over the standard surgical method. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: This is a randomized clinical study with sufficient statistical power. As a limitation, only a minority of participants underwent magnetic resonance imaging before the operation, thus we could not evaluate the role of urethral length or shape of the prostate. Urinary and sexual function results are based on questionnaires filled out by the patients, however, participants completed the surveys independently unassisted by health care personnel. CONCLUSION: Endopelvic fascia-preserving RALP does not improve urinary continence or sexual function as compared with the standard surgical technique. Future studies aiming to improve functional outcomes after RALP should focus on evaluating other technique modifications. Siltari A, Riikonen J, Murtola TJ. Preservation of Endopelvic Fascia: Effects on Postoperative Incontinence and Sexual Function - A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Sex Med 2021;18:327-338.

Circulatory and prostatic tissue lipidomic profiles shifts after high-dose atorvastatin use in men with prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer patients using cholesterol-lowering statins have 30% lower risk of prostate cancer death compared to non-users. The effect is attributed to the inhibition of the mevalonate pathway in prostate cancer cells. Moreover, statin use causes lipoprotein metabolism changes in the serum. Statin effect on serum or intraprostatic lipidome profiles in prostate cancer patients has not been explored. We studied changes in the serum metabolomic and prostatic tissue lipidome after high-dose 80 mg atorvastatin intervention to expose biological mechanisms causing the observed survival benefit. Our randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial consisted of 103 Finnish men with prostate cancer. We observed clear difference in post-intervention serum lipoprotein lipid profiles between the study arms (median classification error 11.7%). The atorvastatin effect on intraprostatic lipid profile was not as clear (median classification error 44.7%), although slightly differing lipid profiles by treatment arm was observed, which became more pronounced in men who used atorvastatin above the median of 27 days (statin group median classification error 27.2%). Atorvastatin lowers lipids important for adaptation for hypoxic microenvironment in the prostate suggesting that prostate cancer cell survival benefit associated with statin use might be mediated by both, local and systemic, lipidomic/metabolomic profile changes.

Urine colour as an indicator for anastomotic leakage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Objectives: To determine whether macroscopic haematuria predicts urethrovesical anastomotic leakage after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) as well as a cystogram.Patients and methods: Participants were recruited before cystogram and catheter removal 5-14 days after RALP surgery. Urine colour in the collection bag was classified according to a three-step scale (clear, light red and dark red) and leakages in cystogram were graded with a four-step scale (Grade 0-3). Diagnostic accuracy parameters were calculated for urine colour. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to evaluate other leakage risk factors.Results: Of 214 patients, 201 (94%) had clear, six (3%) had light red and seven (3%) had dark red coloured urine. In the cystogram, 20 (9%) patients had leakage; 14 had Grade 1, five Grade 2 and one Grade 3 leakage. Overall, specificity and sensitivity of urine colour in predicting anastomotic leakage were 0.97 (95% CI = 0.95-100) and 0.38 (95% CI = 0.17-0.59), respectively. Negative and positive predictive values were 94% and 62%, respectively. Other significant risk factors for anastomotic leakage were previous transurethral resection or radiation therapy to the prostate, non-waterproof anastomosis at surgery, postoperative pelvic haematoma, long catheterization and surgeon's inexperience. In patients with no other risk factors, test sensitivity improved to 0.80 (95% CI = 0.45-1.15) and negative and positive predictive values to 99% and 44%, respectively.Conclusion: This prospective single-arm trial indicates that in patients with clear urine and no other risk factors for anastomotic leakage, a cystogram examination before urethral catheter removal can be safely omitted.

The Impact of Nocturia on Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Nocturia (waking from sleep at night to void) is a common cause of sleep disruption associated with increased comorbidity and impaired quality of life. However, its impact on mortality remains unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association of nocturia with mortality as a prognostic factor and a causal risk factor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed®, Scopus®, CINAHL® (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and major conference abstracts up to December 31, 2018. Random effects meta-analyses were done to address the adjusted RR of mortality in people with nocturia. Meta-regression was performed to explore potential determinants of heterogeneity, including the risk of bias. We applied the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework to rate the quality of evidence for nocturia as a prognostic risk factor for mortality and separately as a cause of mortality. RESULTS: Of the 5,230 identified reports 11 observational studies proved eligible for inclusion. To assess nocturia 10 studies used symptom questionnaires and 1 used frequency-volume charts. Nocturia was defined as 2 or more episodes per night in 6 studies (55%) and as 3 or more episodes per night in 5 (45%). Pooled estimates demonstrated a RR of 1.27 (95% CI 1.16-1.40, I2=48%) with an absolute 1.6% and 4.0% 5-year mortality difference in individuals 60 and 75 years old, respectively. The pooled estimates of relative risk did not differ significantly across varying age, gender, followup, nocturia case definition, risk of bias or study region. We rated the quality of evidence for nocturia as a prognostic factor as moderate and as a cause of mortality as very low. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturia is probably associated with an approximately 1.3-fold increased risk of death.

The Impact of Nocturia on Falls and Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Although nocturia is associated with various comorbidities, its impact on falls and fractures remains unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between nocturia and falls and fractures as a prognostic and as a causal risk factor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed®, Scopus®, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and abstracts of major urological meetings up to December 31, 2018. We conducted random effects meta-analyses of adjusted relative risks of falls and fractures. We applied the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to rate the quality of evidence for nocturia as a prognostic and causal factor of falls and fractures. RESULTS: Among 5,230 potential reports 9 observational longitudinal studies provided data on the association between nocturia and falls or fractures (1 for both, 4 for falls, 4 for fractures). Pooled estimates demonstrated a risk ratio of 1.20 (95% CI 1.05-1.37, I2=51.7%, annual risk difference 7.5% among the elderly) for association between nocturia and falls and 1.32 (95% CI 0.99-1.76, I2=57.5%, annual risk difference 1.2%) for association between nocturia and fractures. Subgroup analyses showed no significant effect modification by age, gender, followup time, nocturia case definition or risk of bias. We rated the quality of evidence for nocturia as a prognostic factor as moderate for falls and low for fractures, and as very low as a cause of falls/fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturia is probably associated with an approximately 1.2-fold increased risk of falls and possibly an approximately 1.3-fold increased risk of fractures.

Qualitative and Quantitative Reporting of a Unique Biparametric MRI: Towards Biparametric MRI-Based Nomograms for Prediction of Prostate Biopsy Outcome in Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer (IMPROD and MULTI-IMPROD Trials).

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric MRI of the prostate has been shown to improve the risk stratification of men with an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA). However, long acquisition time, high cost, and inter-center/reader variability of a routine prostate multiparametric MRI limit its wider adoption. PURPOSE: To develop and validate nomograms based on unique rapid biparametric MRI (bpMRI) qualitative and quantitative derived variables for prediction of clinically significant cancer (SPCa). STUDY TYPE: Retrospective analyses of single (IMPROD, NCT01864135) and multiinstitution trials (MULTI-IMPROD, NCT02241122). POPULATION: 161 and 338 prospectively enrolled men who completed the IMPROD and MULTI-IMPROD trials, respectively. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: IMPROD bpMRI: 3T/1.5T, T2 -weighted imaging, three separate diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) acquisitions: 1) b-values 0, 100, 200, 300, 500 s/mm2 ; 2) b values 0, 1500 s/mm2 ; 3) values 0, 2000 s/mm2 . ASSESSMENT: The primary endpoint of the combined trial analysis was the diagnostic accuracy of the combination of IMPROD bpMRI and clinical variables for detection of SPCa. STATISTICAL TESTS: Logistic regression models were developed using IMPROD trial data and validated using MULTI-IMPROD trial data. The model's performance was expressed as the area under the curve (AUC) values for the detection of SPCa, defined as ISUP Gleason Grade Group ≥2. RESULTS: A model incorporating clinical variables had an AUC (95% confidence interval) of 0.83 (0.77-0.89) and 0.80 (0.75-0.85) in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The corresponding values for a model using IMPROD bpMRI findings were 0.93 (0.89-0.97), and 0.88 (0.84-0.92), respectively. Further addition of the quantitative DWI-based score did not improve AUC values (P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: A prediction model using qualitative IMPROD bpMRI findings demonstrated high accuracy for predicting SPCa in men with an elevated PSA. Online risk calculator: http://petiv.utu.fi/multiimprod/ Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1556-1567.

Effects of Preoperative Atorvastatin Treatment On Erectile Function After Radical Prostatectomy: Results From a Subgroup of ESTO1, a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction is common after radical prostatectomy because of damage to the cavernous nerves. Thus, it is important to identify new ways to avoid this problem. For example, statins have shown positive effects on erectile function and may have anti-inflammatory effects that improve recovery after surgery. AIM: The aim of this exploratory analysis of a subgroup from ESTO1, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, was to evaluate the preoperative use of atorvastatin on erectile function after radical prostatectomy. METHOD: Patients were randomized to either 80 mg atorvastatin or placebo daily before undergoing radical prostatectomy from study inclusion to the day of surgery. Altogether 118 men with prostate cancer and scheduled for radical prostatectomy were asked to fill out the 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire before surgery and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The study was exploratory, with the main outcome being the overall difference between IIEF-5 scores in the 2 groups at 12 months. Several hypotheses generating sub-analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 85% filled out the IIEF-5 questionnaire before their operation and 85%, 81%, 78%, and 78% completed it at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months follow-up, respectively. 52% of men had information available at all time points. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at baseline in either erectile function, comorbidities, or tumor characteristics. The median duration of use of atorvastatin and placebo before surgery was 27 and 25 days, respectively. Preoperative atorvastatin treatment had no statistically significant effect on erectile function after prostatectomy as compared with placebo, although IIEF-5 scores were higher at all time points in the statin arm. Furthermore, atorvastatin treatment compared with placebo improved IIEF-5 scores at 12 months after surgery when the cavernous nerves were at least partially intact bilaterally (P < .04, n = 65); however, after full bilateral or unilateral nerve-sparing, the difference was not statistically significant. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: Short-term statin treatment did not improve recovery of erectile function after prostatectomy; however, further studies are needed before final conclusions. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: This was a randomized placebo-controlled study. Original ESTO1 study was designed to detect a difference in prostate cancer biomarkers. CONCLUSION: Short-term atorvastatin treatment before radical prostatectomy had no statistically significant effect on the recovery of erectile functions in a non-selected cohort of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Further studies will be needed to clarify the role of long-term atorvastatin use before and after prostatectomy. Siltari A, Riikonen J, Fode M, et al. Effects of Preoperative Atorvastatin Treatment On Erectile Function After Radical Prostatectomy: Results From a Subgroup of ESTO1, a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study. J Sex Med 2019;16:1597-1605.

Randomised Trial of Adjuvant Radiotherapy Following Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radical Prostatectomy Alone in Prostate Cancer Patients with Positive Margins or Extracapsular Extension.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether patients with positive surgical margins or extracapsular extension benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a randomised, open-label, parallel-group trial. A total of 250 patients were enrolled between April 2004 and October 2012 in eight Finnish hospitals, with pT2 with positive margins or pT3a, pN0, M0 cancer without seminal vesicle invasion. INTERVENTION: A total of 126 patients received adjuvant radiotherapy at 66.6Gy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival, which we analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard regression. Overall survival, cancer-specific survival, local recurrence, and adverse events were secondary endpoints. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time for patients who were alive when the follow-up ended was 9.3yr in the adjuvant group and 8.6yr in the observation group. The 10-yr survival for biochemical recurrence was 82% in the adjuvant group and 61% in the observation group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.26 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.14-0.48], p<0.001), and for overall survival 92% and 87%, respectively (HR 0.69 [95% CI 0.29-1.60], p=0.4). Two and four metastatic cancers occurred, respectively. Out of the 43 patients with biochemical recurrence in the observation group, 37 patients received salvage radiotherapy. In the adjuvant group, 56% experienced grade 3 adverse events, versus 40% in the observation group (p=0.016). Only one grade 4 adverse event occurred (adjuvant group). A limitation of this study was the number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy is generally well tolerated and prolongs biochemical recurrence-free survival compared with radical prostatectomy alone in patients with positive margins or extracapsular extension. PATIENT SUMMARY: Radiotherapy given immediately after prostate cancer surgery prolongs prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival, but causes more adverse events, when compared with surgery alone.

Access and concentrations of atorvastatin in the prostate in men with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Statins have anticancer effects on prostate cancer both in vitro and in vivo. It is unclear whether this is due to systemic cholesterol-lowering or direct local growth inhibition in the prostate. It is also unclear whether statins can access the prostate; lipophilic statins could, in theory, pass lipid-enriched cell membranes by passive diffusion. However, statin concentrations in the human prostate have not been measured before. METHODS: The study population was based on a randomized clinical trial where 158 men with prostate cancer were randomized to use 80 mg atorvastatin (ATV) or placebo daily for a median of 27 days before radical prostatectomy. ATV and atorvastatin lactone (ATV-Lactone) concentrations in the plasma and in the prostate were measured with mass spectrometry in men randomized to the ATV arm. Linear trends between intraprostatic concentration and plasma concentration, body mass index, age, and duration of intervention were examined. The relative tissue concentrations of ATV and ATV-Lactone were calculated in prostatic tissue and plasma to evaluate drug homeostasis. Subgroup analyses were stratified by tumor and population characteristics. RESULTS: The analysis involved a total of 55 men. When limited to men whose tissue concentrations of ATV was measurable (n = 28, 50%), median ATV concentration was 212% higher in the tissue (median concentration 17.6 ng/g) compared to the plasma (median concentration 3.6 ng/mL). Also, ATV-L concentration was 590% higher in the tissue as compared to the plasma concentration. No statistically significant linear trends between the plasma and tissue concentrations were observed. When comparing the relative concentration of atorvastatin lactone over ATV, the concentrations were in balance in the plasma, In the prostate, however, the relative concentration of atorvastatin lactone was 57% lower compared to ATV (P = .009 for the difference between prostate tissue and plasma). No effect modification by tumor or population characteristics was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Measurable ATV concentrations in the prostate support ATV's ability to access the prostate from the circulation. ATV may accumulate in the prostate as intraprostatic concentrations are elevated compared to the plasma concentration.

Decision Aids for Prostate Cancer Screening Choice: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: US guidelines recommend that physicians engage in shared decision-making with men considering prostate cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association of decision aids with decisional outcomes in prostate cancer screening. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception through June 19, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials comparing decision aids for prostate cancer screening with usual care. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Independent duplicate assessment of eligibility and risk of bias, rating of quality of the decision aids, random-effects meta-analysis, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations rating of the quality of evidence. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Knowledge, decisional conflict, screening discussion, and screening choice. RESULTS: Of 19 eligible trials (12 781 men), 9 adequately concealed allocation and 8 blinded outcome assessment. Of 12 decision aids with available information, only 4 reported the likelihood of a true-negative test result, and 3 presented the likelihood of false-negative test results or the next step if the screening test result was negative. Decision aids are possibly associated with improvement in knowledge (risk ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.09-1.73; I2 = 67%; risk difference, 12.1; low quality), are probably associated with a small decrease in decisional conflict (mean difference on a 100-point scale, -4.19; 95% CI, -7.06 to -1.33; I2 = 75%; moderate quality), and are possibly not associated with whether physicians and patients discuss prostate cancer screening (risk ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.90-1.39; I2 = 60%; low quality) or with men's decision to undergo prostate cancer screening (risk ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88-1.03; I2 = 36%; low quality). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this study provide moderate-quality evidence that decision aids compared with usual care are associated with a small decrease in decisional conflict and low-quality evidence that they are associated with an increase in knowledge but not with whether physicians and patients discussed prostate cancer screening or with screening choice. Results suggest that further progress in facilitating effective shared decision-making may require decision aids that not only provide education to patients but are specifically targeted to promote shared decision-making in the patient-physician encounter.

Validation of IMPROD biparametric MRI in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer: A prospective multi-institutional trial.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with targeted biopsy (TB) is increasingly used in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa), but the long acquisition times, high costs, and inter-center/reader variability of routine multiparametric prostate MRI limit its wider adoption. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The aim was to validate a previously developed unique MRI acquisition and reporting protocol, IMPROD biparametric MRI (bpMRI) (NCT01864135), in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in a multi-institutional trial (NCT02241122). IMPROD bpMRI has average acquisition time of 15 minutes (no endorectal coil, no intravenous contrast use) and consists of T2-weighted imaging and 3 separate diffusion-weighed imaging acquisitions. Between February 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017, 364 men with a clinical suspicion of PCa were enrolled at 4 institutions in Finland. Men with an equivocal to high suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 3-5) of PCa had 2 TBs of up to 2 lesions followed by a systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2) had only SB. All data and protocols are freely available. The primary outcome of the trial was diagnostic accuracy-including overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value-of IMPROD bpMRI for clinically significant PCa (SPCa), which was defined as a Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4 (Gleason grade group 2 or higher). In total, 338 (338/364, 93%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial. The accuracy and NPV of IMPROD bpMRI for SPCa were 70% (113/161) and 95% (71/75) (95% CI 87%-98%), respectively. Restricting the biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious IMPROD bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 22% (75/338) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy while missing 4 (3%, 4/146) men with SPCa. The main limitation is uncertainty about the true PCa prevalence in the study cohort, since some of the men may have PCa despite having negative biopsy findings. CONCLUSIONS: IMPROD bpMRI demonstrated a high NPV for SPCa in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in this prospective multi-institutional clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02241122.

Prevalence of Complications Leading to a Health Care Contact After Transrectal Prostate Biopsies: A Prospective, Controlled, Multicenter Study Based on a Selected Study Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) is typically considered a safe procedure. However, infectious complications have been increasing. OBJECTIVE: To determine the contemporary rate of biopsy-related infectious and noninfectious complications after TRUS-Bx, and identify potential risk factors associated with the complications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective multicenter study and a substudy of a trial investigating the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prostate cancer diagnosis (multi-IMPROD, NCT02241122). INTERVENTION: TRUS-Bx was performed for all patients included in the study. Ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, or fosfomycin was administered for antibiotic prophylaxis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: On inclusion, patients completed a detailed questionnaire and underwent MRI scanning. Antibiotic prophylaxis was prospectively recorded. After collection of a rectal swab, TRUS-Bx (total of 14-18 biopsy cores) was performed and. The rectal swabs were cultured and the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of Escherichia coli strains was analyzed. Biopsy complications leading to a visit to a health care unit were recorded and potential risk factors for complications were analyzed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Twelve of the 294 patients (4.1%) had a biopsy-related complication, of which two (0.7%) were infectious and managed in the outpatient setting. Some 11% of the patients had an E. coli strain resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic administered. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of an infectious or noninfectious complication after TRUS-Bx is very low, although the FQ resistance rate in the study population was significant. Accordingly, the present TRUS-Bx procedure and antibiotic prophylaxis are efficient in guarding against biopsy complications, but regional resistance rates may affect the generalizability of the results. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the rate of complications after prostate biopsies in 294 patients. The risk of having a biopsy-related complication was low (4.1%). The rate of infectious complications was reasonably low (0.7%) although antibiotic resistance to the prophylactic antibiotic regimen was significant (11%).

Atorvastatin Versus Placebo for Prostate Cancer Before Radical Prostatectomy-A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial.

We tested whether intervention with atorvastatin affects the prostate beneficially compared with placebo in men with prostate cancer in a randomized clinical trial. A total of 160 statin-naïve prostate cancer patients scheduled for radical prostatectomy were randomized to use 80mg atorvastatin or placebo daily from recruitment to surgery for a median of 27 d. Blinding was maintained throughout the trial. In total, 158 men completed the follow-up, with 96% compliance. Overall, atorvastatin did not significantly lower tumor proliferation index Ki-67 or serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) compared with placebo. In subgroup analyses, after a minimum of 28 d of atorvastatin use, Ki-67 was 14.1% lower compared with placebo (p = 0.056). Among high-grade cases (International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason grade 3 or higher), atorvastatin lowered PSA compared with placebo: median change -0.6 ng/ml; p = 0.024. Intraprostatic inflammation did not differ between the study arms (p = 0.8). Despite a negative overall result showing no effect of statins on Ki67 or PSA overall, in post hoc exploratory analyses, there appeared to be benefit after a minimum duration of 28 d. Further studies are needed to verify this. PATIENT SUMMARY: Cholesterol-lowering atorvastatin does not lower prostate cancer proliferation rate compared with placebo overall, but exploratory analyses suggest a benefit in longer exposure.