Organoid cultures derived from patients with advanced prostate cancer.

The lack of in vitro prostate cancer models that recapitulate the diversity of human prostate cancer has hampered progress in understanding disease pathogenesis and therapy response. Using a 3D organoid system, we report success in long-term culture of prostate cancer from biopsy specimens and circulating tumor cells. The first seven fully characterized organoid lines recapitulate the molecular diversity of prostate cancer subtypes, including TMPRSS2-ERG fusion, SPOP mutation, SPINK1 overexpression, and CHD1 loss. Whole-exome sequencing shows a low mutational burden, consistent with genomics studies, but with mutations in FOXA1 and PIK3R1, as well as in DNA repair and chromatin modifier pathways that have been reported in advanced disease. Loss of p53 and RB tumor suppressor pathway function are the most common feature shared across the organoid lines. The methodology described here should enable the generation of a large repertoire of patient-derived prostate cancer lines amenable to genetic and pharmacologic studies.

The oncologic risk of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic cores in patients treated with radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy (MRI-biopsy) detects high-Grade Group (GG) prostate cancers not identified by systematic biopsy (S-biopsy). However, questions have been raised whether cancers detected by MRI-biopsy and S-biopsy, grade-for-grade, are of equivalent oncologic risk. The authors evaluated the relative oncologic risk of GG diagnosed by S-biopsy and MRI-biopsy. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients who had both MRI-biopsy and S-biopsy and underwent with prostatectomy (2014-2022) at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Three logistic regression models were used with adverse pathology as the primary outcome (primary pattern 4, any pattern 5, seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node involvement). The first model included the presurgery prostate-specific antigen level, the number of positive and negative S-biopsy cores, S-biopsy GG, and MRI-biopsy GG. The second model excluded MRI-biopsy GG to obtain the average risk based on S-biopsy GG. The third model excluded S-biopsy GG to obtain the risk based on MRI-biopsy GG. A secondary analysis using Cox regression evaluated the 12-month risk of biochemical recurrence. RESULTS: In total, 991 patients were identified, including 359 (36%) who had adverse pathology. MRI-biopsy GG influenced oncologic risk compared with S-biopsy GG alone (p < .001). However, if grade was discordant between biopsies, then the risk was intermediate between grades. For example, the average risk of advanced pathology for patients who had GG2 and GG3 on S-biopsy was 19% and 66%, respectively, but the average risk was 47% for patients who had GG2 on S-biopsy and patients who had GG3 on MRI-biopsy. The equivalent estimates for 12-month biochemical recurrence were 5.8%, 15%, and 10%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings cast doubt on the practice of defining risk group based on the highest GG. Because treatment algorithms depend fundamentally on GG, further research is urgently required to assess the oncologic risk of prostate tumors depending on detection technique. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to help diagnose prostate cancer can help identify more high-grade cancers than using a systematic template biopsy alone. However, we do not know if high-grade cancers diagnosed with the help of an MRI are as dangerous to the patient as high-grade cancers diagnosed with a systematic biopsy. We examined all of our patients who had an MRI biopsy and a systematic biopsy and then had their prostates removed to find out if these patients had risk factors and signs of aggressive cancer (cancer that spread outside the prostate or was very high grade). We found that, if there was a difference in grade between the systematic biopsy and the MRI-targeted biopsy, the risk of aggressive cancer was between the two grades.

Have urinary function outcomes after radical prostatectomy improved over the past decade?

BACKGROUND: Changes in surgical technique and postoperative care that target improvements in functional outcomes are widespread in the literature. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is one such procedure that has seen multiple advances over the past decade. The objective of this study was to leverage RP as an index case to determine whether practice changes over time produced observable improvements in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: This study analyzed patients undergoing RP by experienced surgeons at a tertiary care center with prospectively maintained patient-reported outcome data from 2008 to 2019. Four patient-reported urinary function outcomes at 6 and 12 months after RP were defined with a validated instrument: good urinary function (domain score ≥ 17), no incontinence (0 pads per day), social continence (≤1 pad per day), and severe incontinence (≥3 pads per day). Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated changes in outcomes based on the surgical date. RESULTS: Among 3945 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, excellent urinary outcomes were reported throughout the decade but without consistent observable improvements over time. Specifically, there were no improvements in good urinary function at 12 months (P = .087) based on the surgical date, and there were countervailing effects on no incontinence (worsening; P = .005) versus severe incontinence (improving; P = .003). Neither approach (open, laparoscopic, or robotic), nor nerve sparing, nor membranous urethral length mediated changes in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a decade with multiple advances in surgical and postoperative care, there was evidence of improvements in severe incontinence, but no measurable improvements across 3 other urinary outcomes. Although worsening disease factors could contribute to the stable observed outcomes, a more systematic approach to evaluating techniques and implementing patient selection and postoperative care advances is needed. LAY SUMMARY: Although there have been advances in radical prostatectomy over the past decade, consistent observable improvements in postoperative incontinence were not reported by patients. To improve urinary function outcomes beyond the current high standard, the approach to studying innovations in surgical technique needs to be changed, and further development of other aspects of prostatectomy care is needed.

Independent validation of a pre-specified four-kallikrein marker model for prediction of adverse pathology and biochemical recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Accurate markers for prostate cancer (PC) risk stratification could aid decision-making for initial management strategies. The 4Kscore has an undefined role in predicting outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: We included 1476 patients with 4Kscore measured prior to RP at two institutions. The 4Kscore was assessed for prediction of adverse pathology at RP and biochemical recurrence (BCR) relative to a clinical model. We pre-specified that all analyses would be assessed in biopsy Grade Group 1 (GG1) or 2 (GG2) PC patients, separately. RESULTS: The 4Kscore increased discrimination for adverse pathology in all patients (delta area under the receiver operative curve (AUC) 0.009, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.002, 0.016; clinical model AUC 0.767), driven by GG1 (delta AUC 0.040, 95% CI 0.006, 0.073) rather than GG2 patients (delta AUC 0.005, 95% CI -0.012, 0.021). Adding 4Kscore improved prediction of BCR in all patients (delta C-index 0.014, 95% CI 0.007, 0.021; preop-BCR nomogram C-index 0.738), again with larger changes in GG1 than in GG2. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates prior investigations on the use of 4Kscore in men with biopsy-confirmed PC. Men with GG1 PC and a high 4Kscore may benefit from additional testing to guide treatment selection. Further research is warranted regarding the value of the 4Kscore in men with biopsy GG2 PC.

Prevalence of High-Risk Prostate Cancer Metastasis to Cloquet's Ilioinguinal Lymph Node.

PURPOSE: Cloquet's node, located at the junction between the deep inguinal nodes and the external iliac chain, is easily accessible and commonly excised during pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer. However, we hypothesize that Cloquet's node is not part of lymphatic metastatic spread of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2016 and June 2019, 105 consecutive patients with high-risk prostate cancer (cT3a or Grade Group 4/5, or prostate specific antigen >20 ng/ml) underwent a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. First, Cloquet's node was identified, retrieved and submitted separately to pathology as right and left Cloquet's node. Next, a pelvic lymph node dissection was completed including the external iliac, obturator fossa and hypogastric nodal packets. Each lymph node was cut into 3 mm slices which were separately embedded in paraffin, stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and examined microscopically. RESULTS: The final analysis included 95 patients. In this high-risk population, the median number of nodes removed was 22 (IQR 18-29); 39/95 patients (41%) had lymph node metastasis. The median number of Cloquet's nodes removed was 2 (IQR 2-3). Cloquet's node was negative in all but 1 patient (1.1%), who had very high-risk features and high metastatic burden in the lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk prostate cancer, metastasis to the ilioinguinal node of Cloquet is rare. Given this low prevalence, Cloquet's node can be safely excluded from the pelvic lymph node dissection template.

Oncologic Outcomes of Total Length Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Gleason Score 7 prostate cancer comprises a wide spectrum of disease risk, and precise substratification is paramount. Our group previously demonstrated that the total length of Gleason pattern (GP) 4 is a better predictor than %GP4 for adverse pathological outcomes at radical prostatectomy. We aimed to determine the association of GP4 length on prostate biopsy with post-prostatectomy oncologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared 4 GP4 quantification methods-including maximum %GP4 in any single core, overall %GP4, total length GP4 (mm) across all cores and length GP4 (mm) in the highest volume core-for prediction of biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: A total of 457 men with grade group 2 prostate cancer on biopsy subsequently underwent radical prostatectomy. The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival probability was 85% (95% CI 81-88). On multivariable analysis, all 4 GP4 quantification methods were associated with biochemical recurrence-maximum %GP4 (HR=1.30; 95% CI 1.07-1.59; p=0.009), overall %GP4 (HR=1.61; 95% CI 1.21-2.15; p=0.001), total length GP4 (HR=2.48; 95% CI 1.36-4.52; p=0.003) and length GP4 in highest core (HR=1.32; 95% CI 1.11-1.57; p=0.001). However, we were unable to identify differences between methods of quantification with a relatively low event rate. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support further studies on GP4 quantification in addition to the ratio of GP3 and GP4 to classify prostate cancer risk. Research should also be conducted on whether GP4 quantification could provide a surrogate endpoint for disease progression for trials in active surveillance.

Association of Family History of Cancer with Clinical and Pathological Outcomes for Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: The impact of germline mutations associated with hereditary cancer syndromes in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is poorly defined. We examined the association between family history of prostate cancer (FHP) or family history of cancer (FHC) and risk of progression or adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients on AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients on AS at a single tertiary-care center between 2000-2019 were categorized by family history. Disease progression was defined as an increase in Gleason grade on biopsy. Adverse pathology was defined as upgrading/upstaging at RP. Multivariable Cox and logistic regression models were used to assess association between family history and time to progression or adverse pathology, respectively. RESULTS: Among 3,211 evaluable patients, 669 (21%) had FHP, 34 (1%) had FHC and 95 (3%) had both; 753 progressed on AS and 481 underwent RP. FHP was associated with increased risk of progression (HR 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11-1.55; p=0.002) but FHC (HR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.30-1.50; p=0.3) or family history of both (HR 1.22; 95% CI, 0.81-1.85; p=0.3) were not. FHP, FHC or both were not associated with adverse pathology at RP (p >0.4). CONCLUSIONS: While FHP was associated with an increased risk of progression on AS, wide confidence intervals render this outcome of unclear clinical significance. FHC was not associated with risk of progression on AS. In the absence of known genetically defined hereditary cancer syndrome, we suggest FHP and/or FHC should not be used as a sole trigger to preclude patients from enrolling on AS.

Characterization of Symptoms after Radical Prostatectomy and Their Relation to Postoperative Complications.

PURPOSE: Many patients will experience symptoms in the initial days after radical prostatectomy (RP), but early patient-reported symptoms have not been well characterized. Our objective was to illustrate the pattern of symptoms experienced after RP and the relation of severe symptoms to postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2016, electronic patient-reported symptom monitoring began at our institution's ambulatory surgery center. We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with minimally invasive RP who were sent a daily questionnaire completed using a web interface until postoperative day 10. Severe symptoms automatically generate a "yellow alert," which messages the clinic, while very severe symptoms generate a "red alert," additionally prompting the patient to call. We summarized rates of moderate-to-very severe symptoms and fit local polynomial regressions. We compared rates of 30-day or 90-day complications (grade ≥2) based on the presence of alert symptoms. RESULTS: Of 2,266 men undergoing RP, 1,942 (86%) completed surveys. Among moderate-to-very severe symptom levels, pain (72%) and dyspnea (11%) were most common. Pain, nausea and dyspnea consistently decreased over time; fever and vomiting had a flat pattern. In patients experiencing red-alert symptoms, we observed a higher risk of 30-day complications, but rates were low and differences between groups were nonsignificant (2.9% vs 1.9%; difference 1.1%; 95% CI -1.3-3.5; p=0.3). Results were similar examining 90-day complications. CONCLUSIONS: While symptoms are common after RP, substantial improvements occur over the first 10 days. Severe or very severe symptoms conferred at most a small absolute increase in complication risk, which should be reassuring to patients and clinicians.

Morbidity of salvage radical prostatectomy: limited impact of the minimally invasive approach.

PURPOSE: We aimed to report the morbidity profile of salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) after radiotherapy failure and assess the impact of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) on postoperative complications and functional outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1985 and 2019, a total of 293 patients underwent SRP; 232 underwent open SRP; and 61 underwent laparoscopic SRP with or without robotic assistance. Complications were recorded and classified into standardized categories per the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (10%) experienced grade 3 complications within 30 days, 22 (9.5%) after open and 7 (11%) after MIS (p = 0.6). Between 30 and 90 days after surgery, 7.3% of patients in the open group and 10% in the MIS group had grade 3 complications (p = 0.5). The most common complication was bladder neck contracture (BNC), representing 40% of the 30-90 day complications. Within one year of SRP, 81 patients (31%, 95% CI 25%, 37%) developed BNC; we saw non-significant lower rates in MIS (25 vs 32%; p = 0.4). Functional outcomes were poor after SRP and showed no difference between open and MIS groups for urinary continence (16 vs 18%, p = 0.7) and erectile function (7 vs 13%, p = 0.4). 5 year cancer-specific survival and overall survival was 95% and 88% for the entire cohort, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our outcomes suggest poor functional recovery after SRP, regardless of the operative approach. Currently there is no evidence favoring the use of open or MIS approach. Further studies are required to ensure comparable outcomes between these approaches.

The Duration of Antibiotics Prophylaxis at the Time of Catheter Removal after Radical Prostatectomy: Clinically Integrated, Cluster, Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Prophylactic antibiotics are routinely given at the time of catheter removal post-radical prostatectomy (RP). The low rate of infectious complications entails that large sample sizes are required for randomized controlled trials, a challenge given the cost of standard randomized controlled trials. We evaluated infectious complications associated with 1 vs 3 days of prophylactic antibiotics at the time of catheter removal post-RP using a novel, clinically integrated trial with randomization at the surgeon level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgeons were cluster randomized for periods of 3 months to prescribe 1-day vs 3-day regimen of prophylactic antibiotics at the time of catheter removal. The primary end point was an infectious complication as routinely captured by nursing phone call within 10 days of catheter removal and defined as positive urine cultures (≥105 CFU) and at least 1 of the following symptoms: fever (>38°C), urgency, frequency, dysuria or suprapubic tenderness. RESULTS: A total of 824 patients were consented and underwent RP with, respectively, 389 and 435 allocated to 1-day and 3-day antibiotics, predominantly ciprofloxacin. Accrual was achieved within 3 years: 95% vs 88% of patients received the allocated 3-day vs 1-day antibiotic regimen. There were 0 urinary tract infections (0%) in the 1-day regimen and 3 urinary tract infections (0.7%) in the 3-day regimen, meeting our prespecified criterion for declaring the 1-day regimen to be noninferior. CONCLUSIONS: A clinically integrated trial using cluster randomization accrued rapidly with no important logistical problems and negligible burden on surgeons. If surgeons choose to prescribe empiric prophylactic antibiotics after catheter removal following RP, then the duration should not exceed 1 day.

A comparison of oncologic and functional outcomes in patients with pt3a renal cell carcinoma treated with partial and radical nephrectomy.

HYPOTHESIS: Partial Nephrectomy is oncological safe in patients with pT3a RCC. PURPOSE: To compare the oncological and functional outcomes of patients with pT3a RCC scheduled for PN and RN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with pT3a N0 M0 RCC who underwent partial or radical nephrectomy from 2005 to 2016. Perioperative characteristics, including estimated glomerular filtration rate, tumor size, pathological histology, and RENAL nephrometry score, were compared between patients scheduled for partial or radical nephrectomy. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models to compare overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival between planned procedure type. RESULTS: Of the 589 patients, 369 (63%) and 220 (37%) were scheduled for radical and partial nephrectomy, respectively; 26 (12%) of the scheduled partial nephrectomy cases were intraoperatively converted to radical nephrectomy. After adjusting for tumor size and histology, there were no statistically significant differences in overall survival (hazard ratio 0.66; 95% CI, 0.38-1.13), cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI, 0.16-1.75), or recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 0.66; 95% CI, 0.34-1.28) between patients scheduled for partial or radical nephrectomy. Fewer patients scheduled for partial nephrectomy had estimated glomerular filtration rate reductions 3 to 9 months after surgery than patients scheduled for radical nephrectomy. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that patients scheduled to undergo partial nephrectomy had poorer oncologic outcomes than patients scheduled to undergo radical nephrectomy. In select patients with pT3a renal cell carcinoma in whom partial nephrectomy is deemed feasible by the surgeon, partial nephrectomy should not be discouraged.

Risk of Metastasis in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer Managed with Active Surveillance at a Tertiary Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: We studied the risk of metastatic prostate cancer development in men with Grade Group 2 disease managed with active surveillance at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 219 men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer had disease managed with active surveillance between 2000 and 2017. Biopsy was performed every 2 to 3 years, or upon changes in magnetic resonance imaging, prostate specific antigen level or digital rectal examination. The primary outcome was development of distant metastasis. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate treatment-free survival. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 67 years (IQR 61-72), median prostate specific antigen was 5 ng/ml (IQR 4-7) and most patients (69%) had nonpalpable disease. During followup 64 men received treatment, including radical prostatectomy in 36 (56%), radiotherapy in 20 (31%), hormone therapy in 3 (5%) and focal therapy in 5 (8%). Of the 36 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy 32 (89%) had Grade Group 2 disease on pathology and 4 (11%) had Grade Group 3 disease. Treatment-free survival was 61% (95% CI 52-70) at 5 years and 49% (95% CI 37-60) at 10 years. Three men experienced biochemical recurrence, no men had distant metastasis and no men died of prostate cancer during the followup. Median followup was 3.1 years (IQR 1.9-4.9). CONCLUSIONS: Active surveillance appears to be a safe initial management strategy in the short term for carefully selected and closely monitored men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer treated at a tertiary cancer center. Definitive conclusions await further followup.

Long-Term Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Experience.

PURPOSE: We report oncologic outcomes for men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer managed with active surveillance at a tertiary cancer center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2,907 patients were managed with active surveillance between 2000 and 2017, of whom 2,664 had Grade Group 1 disease. Patients were recommended confirmatory biopsy to verify eligibility and were followed semiannually with prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination and review of symptoms. Magnetic resonance imaging was increasingly used in recent years. Biopsy was repeated every 2 to 3 years or after a sustained prostate specific antigen increase or changes in magnetic resonance imaging/digital rectal examination. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate probabilities of treatment, progression and development of metastasis. RESULTS: Median patient age at diagnosis was 62 years. For men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer the treatment-free probability at 5, 10 and 15 years was 76% (95% CI 74-78), 64% (95% CI 61-68) and 58% (95% CI 51-64), respectively. At 5, 10 and 15 years there were 1,146, 220 and 25 men at risk for metastasis, respectively. Median followup for those without metastasis was 4.3 years (95% CI 2.3-6.9). Distant metastasis developed in 5 men. Upon case note review only 2 of these men were deemed to have disease that could have been cured on immediate treatment. The risk of distant metastasis was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.0) at 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Active surveillance is a safe strategy over longer followup for appropriately selected patients with Grade Group 1 disease following a well-defined monitoring plan.

Quality improvement initiative to reduce variability and improve stewardship of antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostate needle biopsy.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of implementing the recommendations included in the 2014 American Urological Association (AUA) white paper on complications of transrectal prostate needle biopsy (PNB). METHODS: In the outpatient setting of a single tertiary-care institution, prophylactic antibiotic use and rate of infectious complications were compared before and after implementation by nursing of a standardized algorithm to select antibiotic prophylaxis (derived from the recommendations of the AUA white paper). The 584 patients in cohort A (January 2011-January 2012) received antimicrobial prophylaxis at the discretion of the treating physician; 654 patients in cohort B (January 2014-January 2015) received standardized risk-adapted antibiotic prophylaxis. Data on antibiotics administered and infectious complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Fluoroquinolone was the most common prophylactic regimen in both cohorts. In cohort A, 73% of men received a single-drug regimen, although 19 different regimens were utilized with duration of 72 h. In cohort B, 97% received 1 of 4 standardized single-drug antibiotic regimens for duration of 24 h. Infectious complications occurred in 19 men (3.3%) in cohort A, and in 18 men (2.8%) in cohort B (difference - 0.5%; one-sided 95% CI 1.1%). No clinically relevant increase in infectious complication rates was found after implementing this quality improvement initiative. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a standardized risk-adapted approach to select antibiotic prophylaxis for PNB by nursing staff reduced the duration of antimicrobial prophylaxis and number of antibiotic regimens used, without increasing the rate of infectious complications. Our findings validate the current AUA recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis.

Extensive disease among potential candidates for hemi-ablative focal therapy for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine a set of proposed eligibility factors for hemi-ablative focal therapy in prostate cancer and to determine the likelihood of residual extensive disease. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 98 patients with unilateral prostate cancer on biopsy with detailed tumor maps from whole-mount slides and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging data. These patients met the focal therapy consensus meeting inclusion criteria (prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, clinical stage T1c-T2a and Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4 on needle biopsy), and underwent radical prostatectomy between 2000 and 2014. Extensive disease was defined as having Gleason pattern 4/5 in bilateral lobes, any extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node invasion. Both lobes of the prostate were scored on magnetic resonance imaging. Preoperative characteristics including biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging data were used to predict extensive disease. RESULTS: Among our cohort of 98 patients, 40% (95% CI 30-50%) had extensive disease. A total of 33% (95% CI 24-43%) had Gleason pattern 4/5 in both lobes with a median Gleason pattern 4/5 tumor volume in the biopsy negative lobe of 0.06 cm3 , 17 patients had pathological tumor stage ≥3 and one patient had lymph node invasion. CONCLUSIONS: An important number of patients meeting the focal therapy consensus meeting inclusion criteria can present extensive disease. Further studies using targeted biopsies might provide more accurate information about the selection of focal therapy candidates.

Biopsy Core Features are Poor Predictors of Adverse Pathology in Men with Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance is often restricted to patients with low risk prostate cancer who have 3 or fewer positive cores. We aimed to identify predictors of adverse pathology results for low risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy and determine whether a threshold number of positive cores could help the decision process for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 3,359 men with low risk prostate cancer underwent radical prostatectomy between January 2000 and August 2016. We analyzed the relationship between biopsy core features and adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy, defined as Grade Group 3 or greater, seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node involvement. RESULTS: Of the 171 cases (5.1%) with adverse pathology findings at radical prostatectomy 144 (4.3%) were upgraded to Grade Group 3 or greater, 31 (0.9%) had seminal vesicle invasion and 15 (0.4%) had lymph node involvement. Prostate specific antigen and patient age were the only predictors of adverse pathology results. There was no significant association with the number of positive cores, the total mm of cancer or the maximum percent of cancer in any core. When we expanded the definition of adverse pathology to include Grade Group 2 and extraprostatic extension, the association between core features and outcome was statistically significant but clinically weak, and with no evidence of threshold effects. CONCLUSIONS: There is little basis for excluding patients with otherwise low risk prostate cancer on biopsy from active surveillance based on criteria such as the number of positive cores or the maximum cancer involvement of biopsy cores.

Does Subclassification of Pathologically Organ Confined (pT2) Prostate Cancer Provide Prognostic Discrimination of Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy?

PURPOSE: We tested the latest update in the prostate cancer staging system by assessing the prognostic association of pT2 subclassification with the probability of survival related outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of a total of 15,305 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at 2 referral centers between 1985 and 2016, and had pT2 disease at the final pathological evaluation. Descriptive statistics were used to compare baseline data stratified by pT2 substages (pT2a/b vs pT2c). Cox regression models were adjusted for institution analyzed differences in the rate of biochemical recurrence, metastasis, cancer specific death and overall mortality. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to evaluate the predictive value of pT2 subclassification for survival, including the linear predictor from the Stephenson nomogram. RESULTS: Prostate specific antigen levels and Gleason score differed significantly between the pT2 substages (each p <0.0001). At a median followup of 6.0 years (IQR 3.3-10.1) 2,083 patients had biochemical recurrence, 161 had metastases, 43 had died of prostate cancer and 1,032 had died of another cause. On univariate analysis the pT2 subclassification was significantly associated with biochemical recurrence (p = 0.001) and distant metastasis (p = 0.033) but not with cancer specific death (p = 0.6) or overall mortality (p = 0.3). Multivariable analysis showed no evidence of a significant association between the pT2 subclassification and biochemical recurrence (p = 0.4) or distant metastasis (p = 0.6). Multivariable analysis of cancer specific death and overall mortality was omitted due to lack of significance on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Subclassification of pT2 prostate cancer is not a prognostic indicator of survival related outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Our results validate the elimination of pT2 substages in the updated staging system.

Contemporary Patterns of Care and Outcomes of Men Found to Have Lymph Node Metastases at the Time of Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: A thorough understanding of the natural history and consensus regarding the optimal management of pathological lymph node positive (pN1) prostate cancer are lacking. Our objective was to describe patterns of care and outcomes of a contemporary cohort of men with pN1 prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the National Cancer Database to identify 7,791 men who were found to have lymph node metastases at radical prostatectomy. Multinomial logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to identify patient, tumor and facility characteristics associated with the choice of management strategy after radical prostatectomy and overall survival, respectively. RESULTS: Initial post-prostatectomy management was observation in 63% of the men, androgen deprivation therapy alone in 20%, radiation therapy alone in 5%, and androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy in 13%. Younger age, lower comorbidity burden, higher grade and stage, and positive surgical margins were associated with a higher likelihood of receiving combination therapy. Grade group 4-5 disease, pT3b-T4 disease, positive surgical margins and a higher number of positive lymph nodes were independent predictors of worse overall survival. The adjusted 10-year overall survival probability decreased from 84% to 32% with the presence of an increasing number of adverse prognostic factors. Treatment with combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy was associated with better overall survival (multivariable HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.92, p = 0.010 for combination therapy vs observation). CONCLUSIONS: Patient and tumor characteristics are associated with the choice of management strategy after radical prostatectomy and survival in men with pN1 prostate cancer. Multimodal therapy may be of benefit in this patient population.