Biochemical recurrence after chemohormonal therapy followed by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in very-high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become one of the standard radical treatments for prostate cancer (PCa). A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted on patients with PCa who underwent RARP at Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and September 2022. In this study, patients were classified into three groups based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification: low/intermediate-risk, high-risk, and very-high-risk groups. Patients with high- and very-high-risk PCa who were registered in the study received neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy prior to RARP. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) after RARP in patients with PCa was the primary endpoint of this study. The secondary endpoint was the relationship between biochemical recurrence (BCR) and clinical covariates. We enrolled 230 patients with PCa in our study, with a median follow-up of 17.0 months. When the time of follow-up was over, 19 patients (8.3%) had BCR, and the 2 years BRFS rate for the enrolled patients was 90.9%. Although there was no significant difference in BRFS between the low- and intermediate-risk group and the high/very-high-risk group, the 2 years BRFS rate was 100% in the high-risk group and 68.3% in the very-high-risk group (P = 0.0029). Multivariate analysis showed that positive surgical margins were a significant predictor of BCR in patients with PCa treated with RARP. Multimodal therapies may be necessary to improve the BCR in patients with very-high-risk PCa.

The Association of Radiation Dose With Overall Survival for Patients Treated With Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.

Introduction Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa) has demonstrated excellent biochemical recurrence-free survival, with studies showing improved BRFS with higher-dose SBRT. However, current studies have been underpowered to evaluate the relationship of SBRT dose to overall survival (OS). In this retrospective study using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we hypothesize that, given the low alpha/beta ratio of PCa, a relatively small increase in the dose-per-fraction would be associated with improved survival outcomes for intermediate-risk PCa (IR-PCa) comparing 36.25 Gy/5 fx [biologically equivalent dose (BEDα/ß = 1.5 = 211.46 Gy vs. 35 Gy (BED1.5 = 198.33 Gy)]. Materials and methods We queried records from the NCDB from 2005 to 2015 for men receiving prostate SBRT for IR-PCa (n=2673). 82% were treated using either 35 Gy/5 fx or 36.25 Gy/5 fx. We compared OS in men receiving 35 Gy versus 36.25 Gy. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for covariable imbalances. Unweighted- and weighted-multivariable analysis (MVA) using Cox regression was used to compare OS hazard ratios, accounting for age, race, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, treatment facility type, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), clinical T-stage, Gleason Score, and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed. Results Seven hundred and eighty men (35%) were treated with 35 Gy/5 fx and 1434 men (65%) were treated with 36.25 Gy/5 fx (n=2214). Compared to 35 Gy, treatment with 36.25 Gy was associated with significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.43-0.89], P=0.009) on MVA. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 36.25 Gy was associated with improved survival (p=0.034), with a five-year OS of 92% and 88%, respectively. Conclusions In a multi-institutional retrospective database of 2,214 IR patients treated with prostate SBRT, a prescription dose of 36.25 Gy/5 fx was associated with improved OS vs. 35 Gy/5 fx. Results are hypothesis-generating but do lend support to the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines that the minimum recommended dose for prostate SBRT is 36.25 Gy/5 fx.

Cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy vs external beam radiotherapy in high-risk Hispanic/Latino prostate cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To test for differences in cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates in Hispanic/Latino prostate cancer patients according to treatment type, radical prostatectomy (RP) vs external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2010-2016), we identified 2290 NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) high-risk (HR) Hispanic/Latino prostate cancer patients. Of those, 893 (39.0%) were treated with RP vs 1397 (61.0%) with EBRT. First, cumulative incidence plots and competing risks regression models tested for CSM differences after adjustment for other cause mortality (OCM). Second, cumulative incidence plots and competing risks regression models were refitted after 1:1 propensity score matching (according to age, PSA, biopsy Gleason score, cT-stage, cN-stage). RESULTS: In NCCN HR patients, 5-year CSM rates for RP vs EBRT were 2.4 vs 4.7%, yielding a multivariable hazard ratio of 0.37 (95% CI 0.19-0.73, p = 0.004) favoring RP. However, after propensity score matching, the hazard ratio of 0.54 was no longer statistically significant (95% CI 0.21-1.39, p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: Without the use of strictest adjustment for population differences, NCCN high-risk Hispanic/Latino prostate cancer patients appear to benefit more of RP than EBRT. However, after strictest adjustment for baseline patient and tumor characteristics between RP and EBRT cohorts, the apparent CSM benefit of RP is no longer statistically significant. In consequence, in Hispanic/Latino NCCN high-risk patients, either treatment modality results in similar CSM outcome.

Favorable Biochemical Freedom From Recurrence With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Single Institutional Experience With Long-Term Follow-Up.

Purpose/Objective(s): The current study reports long-term overall survival (OS) and biochemical freedom from recurrence (BFFR) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer in a single community hospital setting with early adoption. Materials/Methods: Ninety-seven consecutive men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer treated with SBRT between 2007 and 2015 were retrospectively studied. Categorical variables for analysis included National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, race, Gleason grade group, T stage, use of androgen deprivation therapy, and planning target volume dose. Continuous variables for analysis included pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), percent cores positive, age at diagnosis, PSA nadir, prostate volume, percent prostate that received 40 Gy, and minimum dose to 0.03 cc of prostate (Dmin). BFFR was assessed using the Phoenix nadir +2 definition. OS and BFFR were estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methodology with comparisons accomplished using log-rank statistics. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was accomplished with a backwards selection Cox proportional-hazards model with statistical significance taken at the p < 0.05 level. Results: Median FU is 78.4 months. Five- and ten-year OS KM estimates are 90.9 and 73.2%, respectively, with 19 deaths recorded. MVA reveals pretreatment PSA (p = 0.032), percent prostate 40 Gy (p = 0.003), and race (p = 0.031) were predictive of OS. Five- and nine-year BFFR KM estimates are 92.1 and 87.5%, respectively, with 10 biochemical failures recorded. MVA revealed PSA nadir (p < 0.001) was the only factor predictive of BFFR. Specifically, for every one-unit increase in PSA nadir, there was a 4.2-fold increased odds of biochemical failure (HR = 4.248). No significant differences in BFFR were found between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk prostate cancer (p = 0.054) with 7-year KM estimates of 96.6, 81.0, and 85.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Favorable OS and BFFR can be expected after SBRT for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer with non-significant differences seen for BFFR between favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk groups. Our 5-year BFFR compares favorably with the HYPO-RT-PC trial of 84%. PSA nadir was predictive of biochemical failure. This study is ultimately limited by the small absolute number of high-risk patients included.

Heterogeneity in Definitions of High-risk Prostate Cancer and Varying Impact on Mortality Rates after Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Multiple definitions of high-risk prostate cancer (PC) exist in clinical practice. Prior studies have primarily evaluated the variability in prediction of biochemical recurrence. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of different definitions on mortality after radical prostatectomy (RP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective study of 6477 men with clinically localized disease undergoing RP at Barnes-Jewish Hospital (St. Louis, MO, USA) and Cleveland Clinic (Cleveland, OH, USA) between 1995 and 2007. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Seven pretreatment definitions of high-risk PC (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥20ng/ml, biopsy Gleason score 8-10, clinical stage ≥T2c, cT3, D'Amico definition, National Comprehensive Cancer Network definition, Kattan nomogram) were evaluated. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to generate unadjusted survival estimates. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models (controlling for age) were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for PC-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall mortality (OM) in the high-risk group compared to men with lower risk not meeting that definition. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: 6477 men were treated with RP from 1995 to 2007 and were followed for a median of 67 mo. Depending on the definition, patients with high-risk PC comprised between 0.7% (when using cT3 as the criterion) and 8.2% (when using the D'Amico criterion) of the population. The 10-yr PC survival estimates varied from 89.7% (PSA ≥20ng/ml) to 69.7% (cT3) and overall survival ranged from 83.4% to 58.1%. On multivariable analysis, all high-risk definitions were associated with a higher risk of PCSM compared to lower risk (HR ranging from 4.38 for PSA ≥20ng/ml to 19.97 for cT3; all p<0.001). All definitions of high risk except for preoperative PSA ≥20ng/ml were associated with a higher risk of OM (HR 1.72 for D'Amico to 3.31 for cT3; all p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity in outcomes existed, depending on the pretreatment definition of high-risk PC. Clinical stage T3 and Gleason score 8-10 were most strongly associated with PCSM and OM. PATIENT SUMMARY: There is variability in prostate cancer outcomes after surgery, depending on the definition of pretreatment high-risk disease used. Clinical stage T3 and high Gleason score were most strongly associated with prostate cancer-specific mortality and overall mortality.

Cancer-specific mortality of high-risk prostate cancer after carbon-ion radiotherapy plus long-term androgen deprivation therapy.

The treatment outcomes of patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PC) after carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) combined with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (LTADT) were analyzed, and compared with those of other treatment modalities, focusing on PC-specific mortality (PCSM). A total of 1247 patients were enrolled in three phase II clinical trials of fixed-dose CIRT between 2000 and 2013. Excluding patients with T4 disease, 608 patients with high-risk or very-high-risk PC, according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network classification system, who received CIRT with LTADT were evaluated. The median follow-up time was 88.4 months, and the 5-/10-year PCSM rates were 1.5%/4.3%, respectively. T3b disease, Gleason score of 9-10 and percentage of positive biopsy cores >75% were associated with significantly higher PCSM on univariate and multivariate analyses. The 10-year PCSM rates of patients having all three (n = 16), two (n = 74) or one of these risk factors (n = 217) were 27.1, 11.6 and 5.7%, respectively. Of the 301 patients with none of these factors, only 1 PCSM occurred over the 10-year follow-up (10-year PCSM rate, 0.3%), and significant differences were observed among the four stratified groups (P <0.001). CIRT combined with LTADT yielded relatively favorable treatment outcomes in patients with high-risk PC and very favorable results in patients without any of the three abovementioned factors for PCSM. Because a significant difference in PCSM among the high-risk PC patient groups was observed, new categorization and treatment intensity adjustment may be required for high-risk PC patients treated with CIRT.

Evaluation of biochemical recurrence in patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation therapy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: Subjects were patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network-defined high-risk PCa treated with either RP or RT plus ADT. We calculated BCR-free survival in patients with those treatments and evaluated risk factor against BCR. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients, 71 RP and 43 RT plus ADT, were evaluated. A total of 59 and 20.9% of patients experienced BCR in the RP and RT treatment groups, respectively. The 5-year BCR-free survival probabilities improved significantly for patients who received RT compared to those who received RP (81.3 vs 37.3%, P<0.001). According to the number of risk factors, 59.2% of patients in the RP and 51.2% of patients in the RT treatment groups were classified with one risk factor (P<0.014). The 5-year BCR-free survival probabilities for patients treated with RP were 46.6 and 21.7% for one and multiple risk factors, respectively (P=0.008). On univariate analysis, only the number of risk factors had a significant impact on the risk of BCR. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in the 5-year BCR-free survival probabilities between one and multiple risk factors in patients treated with RT. CONCLUSION: Among patients treated with RP, a marked heterogeneity existed in the oncological outcomes. Based on these findings, the number of risk factors should be emphasized to decide the optimal treatments for patients with high-risk PCa.

Factors associated with the omission of androgen deprivation therapy in radiation-managed high-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been shown to improve survival for men with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We investigated the utilization and factors associated with the omission of ADT in radiation-managed high-risk PCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used the National Cancer Database to identify men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk PCa treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with or without brachytherapy boost from 2004 to 2012. Multivariable logistic regression adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic factors was used to identify independent predictors for ADT use. RESULTS: A total of 57,968 radiation-treated high-risk PCa men were included in our analysis. There were 49,363 patients (85.2%) treated with EBRT alone and 8605 patients (14.8%) treated with EBRT plus brachytherapy boost. Overall, 77% of men received ADT. In multivariable regression analysis, the use of brachytherapy boost was associated with a significantly lower utilization of ADT (70% vs. 78%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.62-0.69; p-Value <0.0001), as was treatment at an academic vs. nonacademic center (AOR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.86-0.95; p-Value <0.0001) and treatment in 2010-2012 compared to 2004-2006 (AOR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.81-0.90; p-Value <0.0001). Conversely, greater ADT use was seen with higher Gleason scores, PSA, and T-category (all p-Values <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in four men with radiation-managed high-risk PCa do not receive ADT, which may reflect concerns about its toxicity profile despite known improvements in overall survival. Practice patterns suggest that some providers believe dose escalation through brachytherapy boost may obviate the need for ADT in some high-risk patients, but this hypothesis requires further testing.

Assessment of the Rate of Adherence to International Guidelines for Androgen Deprivation Therapy with External-beam Radiation Therapy: A Population-based Study.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Association of Urology guidelines recommend using radiation therapy (RT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to treat high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degree of adherence to these guidelines. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between 2003 and 2009, in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, 14 180 patients were diagnosed with high-risk (T1-T2 with World Health Organization histologic grade 3) or locally advanced (T3-T4 with any histologic grade) prostatic adenocarcinoma. INTERVENTION: Administration of RT-ADT versus RT alone. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed the rate of adherence to guidelines with respect to use of RT-ADT in the overall population and after stratification according to stage-grade groupings (T1-T2 G3 vs T3-T4 any grade), age (66-69, 70-74, 75-79, ≥80 yr), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (0, 1, ≥2), and preexisting baseline cardiovascular (CV) disease. We depicted the rate of RT-ADT administration graphically over the study period. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the predictors of RT-ADT use. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: RT-ADT rates and guideline adherence were 58-75%, with the highest rate (75%) in 2003 and the lowest (58%) in 2009. When stratified according to stage-grade groupings, age, CCI, and preexisting baseline CV disease, similar results were obtained. In multivariable analyses, year of diagnosis (p<0.001), patient age (p<0.001), stage-grade groupings (p<0.001), CCI (p=0.036), race (p<0.001), marital status (p<0.001), population density (p<0.001), and US regions (p<0.001) were independent predictors of RT-ADT use. The limitations of our study include age >65 yr and exclusive Medicare coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of guideline adherence regarding the use of RT-ADT is suboptimal and decreases with time instead of increasing. PATIENT SUMMARY: This population-based study provides evidence of low adherence to international urologic guidelines regarding the combination of radiation therapy (RT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Despite the increasing number of randomized controlled trials over time that showed a survival benefit for patients with high-risk and locally advanced PCa treated with RT-ADT compared with RT alone, the rate of adherence to guidelines decreased with time.

Biochemical Recurrence Prediction in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients, Following Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: High-risk prostate cancer treatment has been controversial. Some high-risk prostate cancer patients fail to respond to radical prostatectomy only. Thus, we aimed to investigate the predictive factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and identify patients who could achieve sufficient therapeutic effect by radical prostatectomy only. METHODS: Of 264 medical records reviewed, 141 low-intermediate-risk and 100 high-risk prostate cancer patients, excluding those who had received neoadjuvant hormone therapy, were analyzed. BCR was defined as the first increase in prostate-specific antigen levels (≥ 0.2 ng/mL), with levels not decreasing to undetectable limits, after radical prostatectomy. Log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to determine the prognostic factors. We investigated the perioperative predictive factors for BCR and BCR-free survival rates, with the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk factors for high-risk prostate cancer patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: Multivariate analyses showed that clinical T3 was significantly associated with BCR [hazard ratio (HR) = 4.052; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.26-12.99; P = 0.019]. Of the 100 patients, 77 had 1 high-risk factor and 23 had ≥ 2 high-risk factors; the 1-year BCR-free survival rate of patients with 1 high-risk factor and those with ≥ 2 high-risk factors was 94.8% and 69.6%, respectively. Patients with ≥ 2 high-risk factors were significantly associated with BCR (P = 0.002). No difference in BCR rate between patients with 1 high-risk factor and those with low- and intermediate-risk was found. CONCLUSION: High-risk prostate cancer patients with 1 NCCN high-risk factor can be considered for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy treatment only.

Combination therapy improves prostate cancer survival for patients with potentially lethal prostate cancer: The impact of Gleason pattern 5.

PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of Gleason pattern 5 (GP5) prostate cancer after either external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or the combination of EBRT with low-dose rate brachytherapy boost (combo). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1998 and 2008, 467 patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk prostate cancer were treated with EBRT (n = 326) or combo (low-dose rate to 90-108 Gy using I-125 followed by EBRT) (n = 141). Freedom from biochemical failure, freedom from metastasis (FFM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival were evaluated. RESULTS: Combo patients were younger (66 vs. 72 years, p < 0.001) and had fewer comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index 3.7 vs. 4.4, p < 0.001). EBRT patients had higher tumor stages (T3-4: 30% vs. 21%, p = 0.03) and lower Gleason scores (8-10: 61% vs. 75%, p = 0.01). Androgen deprivation therapy use was similar between cohorts (85% vs. 87%, p = 0.5), but EBRT patients had longer androgen deprivation therapy use (median 14 vs. 12 months, p = 0.05). GP5 predicted worse FFM (p < 0.001, hazard ratio [HR] 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.8-6.2]) and CSS (p < 0.001, HR 5.9, 95% CI 2.7-12.9) for the EBRT group, but not for the combo group (p = 0.86, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.1-2.4 for metastasis and p = 0.5, HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.33-8.0 for CSS). In those with GP5 (n = 143), combo was associated with improved outcomes in all endpoints. On univariate analysis, 5-year outcomes for combo vs. EBRT were as follows: freedom from biochemical failure 89% vs. 65%, FFM 89% vs. 67%, CSS 93% vs. 78%, and overall survival 88% vs. 67% (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: Combo was associated with improved outcomes for men with GP5 prostate cancer. This highlights the importance of local therapy, especially in patients with the highest pathologic grade disease.

Long-term outcomes of prostate cancer patients with Gleason pattern 5 treated with combined brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Recent reports have suggested relatively poor prognosis for prostate cancer patients with Gleason pattern 5 treated with dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (XRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We present the largest series of men with high-risk, Gleason pattern 5 prostate cancer treated with permanent interstitial brachytherapy and XRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between April 1995 and December 2008, 329 consecutive patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk disease were treated with permanent interstitial brachytherapy. Most received XRT and ADT. Median followup was 7.2 years. The cause of death was determined for each deceased patient. Multiple clinical, treatment, and dosimetric parameters were evaluated for impact on the evaluated survival parameters. RESULTS: At 10 years, biochemical progression-free survival, cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival for the group of high-risk patients as a whole was 91.1%, 95.5%, and 72.5%, respectively. There was no difference in biochemical progression-free survival between men with and without Gleason pattern 5 (89.7% vs. 91.8%; p=0.56). However, men with Gleason pattern 5 had lower prostate cancer CSS (90.3% vs. 98.1%; p=0.011). There was no difference in overall survival comparing men with and without Gleason pattern 5 disease (67.7% vs. 75.4%; p=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Men with high-risk, Gleason pattern 5 histology treated with brachytherapy and XRT have excellent long-term outcomes, which compare favorably to dose-escalated XRT/ADT series without brachytherapy. Nonetheless, Gleason pattern 5 results in lower CSS than high-risk disease without Gleason pattern 5.