Secondary analysis of late major gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities in unfavorable-risk prostate cancer patients receiving docetaxel: Insights from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to evaluate the late toxicity associated with neoadjuvant and concurrent docetaxel and radiation therapy in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: A secondary analysis was performed of the phase 3 multicenter randomized trial (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 05-043) including 350 patients with nonmetastatic unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive androgen deprivation therapy, radiation therapy, and docetaxel versus androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy. The study assessed the cumulative incidence rates of grade 2 and grade 3 or higher gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and sexual toxicity. A multivariable Fine and Gray's competing risks regression model adjusted for age at randomization and pelvic lymph node radiation therapy was used to evaluate the treatment effect of docetaxel on time to late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities. RESULTS: The study included 338 patients who primarily had minimal or no comorbidity (74.9%) and median age 66 years (interquartile range: 61,71). At a median follow-up of 10.2 years, docetaxel was not associated with increased risk of any grade 3 or higher (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-2.67; p = .96) or grade 2 gastrointestinal (p = .75), genitourinary (p = .44), and sexual (p = .29) toxicity. Age was associated with increased grade 3 or higher (AHR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16; p = .03) and grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity (AHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20; p = .005). A nonsignificant trend (p = .09) toward increased late grade 3 or higher toxicity was observed for pelvic radiation therapy use. CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel combined with radiotherapy has an acceptable long-term toxicity profile.

Insulin resistance during androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer (PCa) has been associated with development of insulin resistance. However, the predominant site of insulin resistance remains unclear. METHODS: The ADT & Metabolism Study was a single-center, 24-week, prospective observational study that enrolled ADT-naive men without diabetes who were starting ADT for at least 24 weeks (ADT group, n = 42). The control group comprised men without diabetes with prior history of PCa who were in remission after prostatectomy (non-ADT group, n = 23). Prevalent diabetes mellitus was excluded in both groups using all three laboratory criteria defined in the American Diabetes Association guidelines. All participants were eugonadal at enrollment. The primary outcome was to elucidate the predominant site of insulin resistance (liver or skeletal muscle). Secondary outcomes included assessments of body composition, and hepatic and intramyocellular fat. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, there was no change in hepatic (1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.10 to 4.43; p = .47) or skeletal muscle (-3.2; 95% CI, -7.07 to 0.66; p = .10) insulin resistance in the ADT group. No increase in hepatic or intramyocellular fat deposition or worsening of glucose was seen. These changes were mirrored by those observed in the non-ADT group. Men undergoing ADT gained 3.7 kg of fat mass. CONCLUSIONS: In men with PCa and no diabetes, 24 weeks of ADT did not change insulin resistance despite adverse body composition changes. These findings should be reassuring for treating physicians and for patients who are being considered for short-term ADT.

Acute toxicity comparison of magnetic resonance-guided adaptive versus fiducial or computed tomography-guided non-adaptive prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is gaining wider adoption for prostate cancer management but there remain significant toxicity risks when delivering prostate SBRT with standard techniques. Magnetic resonance-guided daily adaptive SBRT (MRg-A-SBRT) offers technological advantages in precision of radiation dose delivery, but the toxicity profile associated with MRg-A-SBRT compared to more standardly used fiducial or computed tomography-guided non-adaptive prostate SBRT (CT-SBRT) remains unknown. METHODS: A meta-analysis to compare acute toxicity rates associated with MRg-A-SBRT and CT-SBRT for prostate cancer was performed in compliance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE (PubMed) and Google Scholar were searched for prospective studies of prostate SBRT that were published between January 1, 2018 and August 31, 2022. Random effects and fixed effects models were used to estimate pooled toxicity rates, and meta-regression was performed to compare toxicity between MRg-A-SBRT and CT-SBRT study groups. RESULTS: Twenty-nine prospective studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria and included a total of 2547 patients. The pooled estimates for acute grade 2 or higher (G2+) genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity for MRg-A-SBRT were 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10%-24%) and 4% (95% CI, 2%-7%) and for CT-SBRT they were 28% (95% CI, 23%-33%) and 9% (95% CI, 6%-12%), respectively. On meta-regression, the odds ratios for acute G2+ GU and GI toxicities comparing MRg-A-SBRT and CT-SBRT were 0.56 (95% CI, 0.33-0.97, p = .04) and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.17-0.96, p = .04), respectively. CONCLUSION: MRg-A-SBRT is associated with a significantly reduced risk of acute G2+ GU or GI toxicity compared to CT-SBRT. Longer follow-up will be needed to evaluate late toxicity and disease control outcomes. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Magnetic resonance imaging-guided daily adaptive prostate stereotactic radiation (MRg-A-SBRT) is a treatment that may allow for delivery of prostate radiation more precisely than other radiotherapy techniques, but it is unknown whether this reduces side effects compared to standardly used computed tomography-guided SBRT (CT-SBRT). In this systematic review and meta-analysis combining data from 29 clinical trials including 2547 patients, it was found that the risk of short-term urinary side effects was reduced by 44% and the risk of short-term bowel side effects was reduced by 60% with MRg-A-SBRT compared to CT-SBRT.

Cribriform morphology is associated with higher risk of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with Grade Group 5 prostate cancer.

AIMS: Grade Group 5 (GG5) prostate cancer (PCa) is associated with a high risk of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy (~75% at 5 years). However, this is a heterogeneous category that includes neoplasms with different combinations of Gleason pattern (GP) 4 and 5. Within GP4, large cribriform growth has been associated with adverse disease-specific outcomes in GG2-4 PCa. Less is known about the significance of cribriform morphology and the different histologic patterns of GP5 in GG5 PCa. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this study we evaluated the prognostic implications of cribriform morphology (either invasive or intraductal, henceforth "cribriform") and large solid growth or comedonecrosis (comedo/solid) in patients with GG5 PCa. One-hundred and thirty prostatectomies from a single institution were analysed. The presence of comedo/solid components was associated with a higher frequency of concurrent cribriform PCa (85.7% versus 45.9%, P < 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (44.6% versus 27%, P = 0.04), and biochemical recurrence (48.2% versus 28.4%, P = 0.03). The presence of large cribriform growth was associated with a higher frequency of extraprostatic involvement (i.e. pT3a-b; 85.3% versus 68.7%, P = 0.02), positive surgical margins (47.6% versus 29.2%, P = 0.04) and biochemical recurrence (47.6% versus. 18.7%, P = 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that GG5 PCa with cribriform or comedo/solid components had a higher probability of biochemical recurrence. Multivariable analysis showed that only cribriform components were an independent predictor of a higher risk of biochemical recurrence in this series. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the importance of reporting the presence of cribriform components in GG5 PCa and suggest that cribriform morphology might help decide postsurgical management in these patients.

MR-guided prostate SBRT in prostate cancer patients with low-volume metastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent data have found an overall survival benefit from prostate-directed radiotherapy in patients with low-volume metastatic prostate cancer. Prostate SBRT is an attractive treatment in this setting and may be optimised with MR-guided adaptive treatment. Here, we share our institutional experience delivering stereotactic MR-guided adaptive prostate SBRT (SMART) for patients with low-volume metastatic disease. METHODS: We reviewed patients with low-volume metastatic disease who received prostate SMART from October 2019 to December 2021 on a 0.35T MR-Linac. The cohort included 14 patients. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were assessed using CTCAE v 5.0. Progression was defined as a change in systemic or hormonal therapy regimen as a result of PSA rise or disease progression. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 29 months. Seven patients had hormone sensitive prostate cancer and 7 had castrate resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). 13 patients received 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions and one patient received 33 Gy in 5 fractions. At the time of last follow-up, 11 patients had not experienced progression and three patients, all with CRPC, had experienced progression. No patients developed local progression in the prostate after SMART. One patient experienced acute grade 2 urinary toxicity (7%) and no patients experienced acute grade 2 GI toxicity (0%). No grade 3 + acute toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SMART was found to be well tolerated and all patients had local control of disease within the prostate at the time of last follow-up. Prostate SMART may represent a low-risk and well-tolerated approach for delivering prostate-directed radiotherapy for patients with limited metastatic disease.

Second malignancy probabilities in patients with prostate cancer treated with whole pelvis radiation therapy versus prostate only radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) may improve outcomes compared with prostate only radiation therapy (PORT) in some subsets of men with prostate cancer, as in the POP-RT trial. However, there is concern about increased risk of adverse effects with WPRT, including the development of radiation-induced second malignancies (SM). Given the rarity of SM, little is known about relative rates of SM between WPRT and PORT. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed of men with nonmetastatic, node-negative prostate cancer with at least 60 months of follow-up using a national database. SM probabilities were compared in men receiving either WPRT or PORT using multivariable logistic models adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic factors. Temporal sensitivity analyses stratified by year of diagnosis and length of follow-up were also conducted. RESULTS: Of 50,237 patients in the study, 39,338 (78.4%) received PORT, and 10,899 (21.7%) received WPRT. Median follow-up was 106.2 months (interquartile range 82.32-132.25). Crude probabilities of SM were 9.16% for WPRT and 8.88% for PORT. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for development of SM with PORT versus WPRT was 1.046 (95% confidence interval 0.968-1.130). Temporal sensitivity analyses by stratifying by year of diagnosis and follow-up length also did not demonstrate any significant difference in rates of SM between WPRT and PORT using AORs with WPRT as the referent. CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective analysis of over 50,000 patients did not demonstrate an association between WPRT and an increased probability of SM compared to PORT. Given the findings of POP-RT, the use of WPRT may become widespread for certain subsets of men. Thus, our findings could help guide how we counsel patients deciding between WPRT and PORT and suggest the need for prospective assessment of SM risk with WPRT and PORT.

Prostate-specific antigen levels of ≤4 and >4 ng/mL and risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality in men with biopsy Gleason score 9 to 10 prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Defining workup beyond usual clinical practice that may improve treatment outcomes in men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≤4 ng/mL (vs >4 ng/mL) and Gleason score (GS) 9 to 10 prostate cancer (PC) remains to be determined. METHODS: Between February 25, 1992, and February 25, 2016, 17,632 men with clinical T1-4 PC with a biopsy GS of 6 to 10 underwent radical prostatectomy at a single academic center. Multivariable Fine and Gray regressions were used to evaluate the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) with an interaction model evaluating the prognostic significance of PSA ≤ 4 ng/mL versus PSA > 4 ng/mL among men with PC with a biopsy GS of 9 to 10 versus ≤8, with adjustments made for the time-dependent use of adjuvant and/or salvage radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in addition to known PC prognostic factors. RESULTS: There was a significant interaction in men with a biopsy GS of 9 to 10 versus ≤8 and a PSA level of ≤4 ng/mL versus >4 ng/mL (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-8.08; P = .046). Specifically, among men with a biopsy GS of 9 to 10 and a PSA level of ≤4 ng/mL versus >4 ng/mL, there was a significantly higher rate of PCSM (AHR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.19-5.67; P = .017); however, there was no significant difference in the risk of PCSM in men with a biopsy GS ≤ 8 and a PSA level of ≤4 ng/mL versus >4 ng/mL (AHR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.46-1.78; P = .771). Moreover, the time-dependent use of postoperative ADT was also associated with an increased risk of PCSM (AHR, 10.76; 95% CI, 6.88-16.81; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Some men with PSA ≤ 4 ng/mL and a biopsy GS of 9 to 10 may have pathologic or genetic variants that make them less amenable to a cure with current standards of care. Additional workup assessing for small cell, neuroendocrine, and genetic variants should be considered.

Prostate-specific antigen nadir and testosterone level at prostate-specific antigen failure following radiation and androgen suppression therapy for unfavorable-risk prostate cancer and the risk of all-cause and prostate cancer-specific mortality.

BACKGROUND: Although both PSA nadir (PSAn) and testosterone levels at PSA failure are known prognostic factors in men undergoing radiation therapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC), it is unclear whether their prognostic significance is independent or overlapping. METHODS: Seventy-five men treated with RT with or without 6 months of ADT for unfavorable-risk nonmetastatic PC enrolled in 2 prospective clinical trials between 1986 and 2001 formed the study cohort. Competing risks and Cox multivariable regression were used to assess whether low versus normal serum testosterone at the time of PSA failure and higher PSAn after initial therapy were independently associated with the risk of PC-specific (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM) adjusting for PC prognostic factors. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 15.34 years (interquartile range, 6.66-16.88 years), there were 53 deaths (73.3%): 30 (56.6%) were from PC. Low testosterone at PSA failure was significantly associated with an increased risk of PCSM (adjusted HR [AHR], 7.77; 95% CI, 1.14-52.99; P = .04) and ACM (AHR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.01-8.96; P = .05), as was higher PSAn (PCSM AHR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P < .01; ACM AHR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07; P < .01), although the prognostic significance of PSAn was only noted in men with a normal testosterone at PSA failure. CONCLUSIONS: Low testosterone level at PSA failure in high-risk patients with PC treated with RT is associated with increased PCSM and ACM risk. In men with normal testosterone levels at the time of PSA failure, an elevated PSAn was associated with worse PCSM and ACM risk. LAY SUMMARY: This study investigates whether the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir and normal versus low testosterone at the time of PSA failure provide mutually exclusive or overlapping prognostic information following treatment with radiation and androgen deprivation therapy for unfavorable-risk patients with prostate cancer using data from 2 prospective clinical trials. It was found that both provided prognostic information; however, higher PSA nadir was only found to be of prognostic significance in men with normal testosterone levels at PSA failure.

Clinicopathological and molecular characteristics of prostate cancer diagnosed in young men aged up to 45 years.

AIMS: To characterise and compare the poorly understood clinicopathological and molecular characteristics of prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa) in very young patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared the clinicopathological and molecular characteristics of PCa diagnosed in 90 patients aged ≤45 years with those of PCa diagnosed in 200 patients of typical screening age (i.e. 60-65 years). Patients diagnosed at a younger age had a higher frequency of a family history of PCa and lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels than those diagnosed at regular screening age. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical stage or pathological characteristics of the core biopsy specimens between the groups. Young patients had a higher frequency of Grade Group 1 disease at radical prostatectomy. A subset of 13 aggressive PCa cases from young patients underwent successful DNA-based next-generation sequencing. In all, 46.2% (6/13) had TMPRSS2 rearrangements and 23.1% (3/13) had relevant pathogenic variants in DNA damage repair genes, including a mismatch repair-deficient case with biallelic inactivation of MLH1. No statistically significant differences were observed in PCa-specific recurrence/progression between the younger and older patients, including after adjustment for clinical stage, PSA level, and Grade Group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the clinicopathological and molecular features of PCa diagnosed in young patients were comparable to those of PCa diagnosed in patients of screening age. Early-onset PCa cases were not enriched in any of the known molecular PCa subtypes in this small series.

Progress and controversies: Radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Radiation therapy remains a standard treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. Alone or in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy, it represents a curative treatment and has been shown to prolong survival in selected populations. In this article, the authors review recent advances in prostate radiation-treatment techniques, photon versus proton radiation, modification of treatment fractionation, and brachytherapy-all focusing on disease control and the impact on morbidity. Also discussed are refinements in the risk stratification of men with prostate cancer and how these are better for matching patients to appropriate treatment, particularly around combined androgen-deprivation therapy. Many of these advances have cost and treatment burden implications, which have significant repercussions given the prevalence of prostate cancer. The discussion includes approaches to improve value and future directions for research.

Prostate cancer incidence across stage, NCCN risk groups, and age before and after USPSTF Grade D recommendations against prostate-specific antigen screening in 2012.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the extent to which US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2012 Grade D recommendations against prostate-specific antigen screening may have impacted recent prostate cancer disease incidence patterns in the United States across stage, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk groups, and age groups. METHODS: SEER*Stat version 8.3.4 was used to calculate annual prostate cancer incidence rates from 2010 to 2015 for men aged ≥50 years according to American Joint Committee on Cancer stage at diagnosis (localized vs metastatic), NCCN risk group (low vs unfavorable [intermediate or high-risk]), and age group (50-74 years vs ≥75 years). Age-adjusted incidences per 100,000 persons with corresponding year-by-year incidence ratios (IRs) were calculated using the 2000 US Census population. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2015, the incidence (per 100,000 persons) of localized prostate cancer decreased from 195.4 to 131.9 (Ptrend  < .001) and from 189.0 to 123.4 (Ptrend  < .001) among men aged 50-74 and ≥75 years, respectively. The largest relative year-by-year decline occurred between 2011 and 2012 in NCCN low-risk disease (IR, 0.77 [0.75-0.79, P < .0001] and IR 0.68 [0.62-0.74, P < .0001] for men aged 50-74 and ≥75 years, respectively). From 2010-2015, the incidence of metastatic disease increased from 6.2 to 7.1 (Ptrend  < .001) and from 16.8 to 22.6 (Ptrend  < .001) among men aged 50-74 and ≥75 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This report illustrates recent prostate cancer "reverse migration" away from indolent disease and toward more aggressive disease beginning in 2012. The incidence of localized disease declined across age groups from 2012 to 2015, with the greatest relative declines occurring in low-risk disease. Additionally, the incidence of distant metastatic disease increased gradually throughout the study period.

Alcohol Use Among Patients With Cancer and Survivors in the United States, 2000-2017.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use is an established risk factor for several malignancies and is associated with adverse oncologic outcomes among individuals diagnosed with cancer. The prevalence and patterns of alcohol use among cancer survivors are poorly described. METHODS: We used the National Health Interview Survey from 2000 to 2017 to examine alcohol drinking prevalence and patterns among adults reporting a cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to define the association between demographic and socioeconomic variables and odds of self-reporting as a current drinker, exceeding moderate drinking limits, and engaging in binge drinking. The association between specific cancer type and odds of drinking were assessed. RESULTS: Among 34,080 survey participants with a known cancer diagnosis, 56.5% self-reported as current drinkers, including 34.9% who exceeded moderate drinking limits and 21.0% who engaged in binge drinking. Younger age, smoking history, and more recent survey period were associated with higher odds of current, exceeding moderate, and binge drinking (P<.001 for all, except P=.008 for excess drinking). Similar associations persisted when the cohort was limited to 20,828 cancer survivors diagnosed ≥5 years before survey administration. Diagnoses of melanoma and cervical, head and neck, and testicular cancers were associated with higher odds of binge drinking (P<.05 for all) compared with other cancer diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Most cancer survivors self-report as current alcohol drinkers, including a subset who seem to engage in excessive drinking behaviors. Given that alcohol intake has implications for cancer prevention and is a potentially modifiable risk factor for cancer-specific outcomes, the high prevalence of alcohol use among cancer survivors highlights the need for public health strategies aimed at the reduction of alcohol consumption.

A Bayesian multi-risks survival (MRS) model in the presence of double censorings.

Semi-competing risks data include the time to a nonterminating event and the time to a terminating event, while competing risks data include the time to more than one terminating event. Our work is motivated by a prostate cancer study, which has one nonterminating event and two terminating events with both semi-competing risks and competing risks present as well as two censoring times. In this paper, we propose a new multi-risks survival (MRS) model for this type of data. In addition, the proposed MRS model can accommodate noninformative right-censoring times for nonterminating and terminating events. Properties of the proposed MRS model are examined in detail. Theoretical and empirical results show that the estimates of the cumulative incidence function for a nonterminating event may be biased if the information on a terminating event is ignored. A Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling algorithm is also developed. Our methodology is further assessed using simulations and also an analysis of the real data from a prostate cancer study. As a result, a prostate-specific antigen velocity greater than 2.0 ng/mL per year and higher biopsy Gleason scores are positively associated with a shorter time to death due to prostate cancer.

Association Between African American Race and Clinical Outcomes in Men Treated for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer With Active Surveillance.

Importance: There is concern that African American men with low-risk prostate cancer may harbor more aggressive disease than non-Hispanic White men. Therefore, it is unclear whether active surveillance is a safe option for African American men. Objective: To compare clinical outcomes of African American and non-Hispanic White men with low-risk prostate cancer managed with active surveillance. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study in the US Veterans Health Administration Health Care System of African American and non-Hispanic White men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2015, and managed with active surveillance. The date of final follow-up was March 31, 2020. Exposures: Active surveillance was defined as no definitive treatment within the first year of diagnosis and at least 1 additional surveillance biopsy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Progression to at least intermediate-risk, definitive treatment, metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and all-cause mortality. Results: The cohort included 8726 men, including 2280 African American men (26.1%) (median age, 63.2 years) and 6446 non-Hispanic White men (73.9%) (median age, 65.5 years), and the median follow-up was 7.6 years (interquartile range, 5.7-9.9; range, 0.2-19.2). Among African American men and non-Hispanic White men, respectively, the 10-year cumulative incidence of disease progression was 59.9% vs 48.3% (difference, 11.6% [95% CI, 9.2% to 13.9%); P < .001); of receipt of definitive treatment, 54.8% vs 41.4% (difference, 13.4% [95% CI, 11.0% to 15.7%]; P < .001); of metastasis, 1.5% vs 1.4% (difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -0.4% to 0.6%]; P = .49); of prostate cancer-specific mortality, 1.1% vs 1.0% (difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -0.4% to 0.6%]; P = .82); and of all-cause mortality, 22.4% vs 23.5% (difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -0.9% to 3.1%]; P = 0.09). Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of men with low-risk prostate cancer followed up for a median of 7.6 years, African American men, compared with non-Hispanic White men, had a statistically significant increased 10-year cumulative incidence of disease progression and definitive treatment, but not metastasis or prostate cancer-specific mortality. Longer-term follow-up is needed to better assess the mortality risk.

Conservative management of low-risk prostate cancer among young versus older men in the United States: Trends and outcomes from a novel national database.

BACKGROUND: Management for men aged ≤55 years with low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) is debated given quality-of-life implications with definitive treatment versus the potential missed opportunity for cure with conservative management. The objective of this study was to define rates of conservative management for LRPC and associated short-term outcomes in young versus older men in the United States. METHODS: The nonpublic Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Prostate with Active Surveillance/Watchful Waiting (AS/WW) Database identified 50,302 men who were diagnosed with LRPC from 2010 through 2015. AS/WW rates in the United States were stratified by age (≤55 vs ≥56 years). Prostate cancer-specific mortality and overall mortality were defined by initial management type (AS/WW vs definitive treatment [referent]) and age. RESULTS: AS/WW utilization increased from 8.61% (2010) to 34.56% (2015) among men aged ≤55 years (P for trend <0.001) and from 15.99% to 43.81% among men aged ≥56 years (P for trend <.001). Among patients who had ≤2 positive biopsy cores, AS/WW rates increased from 12.90% to 48.78% for men aged ≤55 years and from 21.85% to 58.01% for men aged ≥56 years. Among patients who had ≥3 positive biopsy cores, AS/WW rates increased from 3.89% to 22.45% for men aged ≤55 years and from 10.05% to 28.49% for men aged ≥56 years (all P for trend <.001). Five-year prostate cancer-specific mortality rates were <0.30% across age and initial management type subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: AS/WW rates quadrupled for patients aged ≤55 years from 2010 to 2015, with favorable short-term outcomes. These findings demonstrate the short-term safety and increasing acceptance of AS/WW for both younger and older patients. However, there are still higher absolute rates of AS/WW in older patients (P < .001), suggesting some national ambivalence toward AS/WW in younger patients.

Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy after Prostatectomy: ASTRO/AUA Guideline Amendment 2018-2019.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate newly-published literature into the original ASTRO/AUA Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy after Prostatectomy Guideline and to provide an updated clinical framework for clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The original systematic review yielded 294 studies published between January 1990 and December 2012. In April 2018, the guideline underwent an amendment and incorporated 155 references that were published from January 1990 through December 2017. Two new key questions were added. One on the use of genomic classifiers and the other on the treatment of oligo-metastases with radiation post-radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: A new statement on the use of hormone therapy with salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy was added and long-term data was used to update an existing statement on adjuvant radiotherapy. The balance of the guideline statements were re-affirmed and references were added to the existing literature base. A discussion on the use of genomic classifiers as a risk stratification tool was added to the future research discussion. No relevant data on oligo-metastases was found. CONCLUSIONS: Hormone therapy should be offered to patients who have had radical prostatectomy and who are candidates for salvage radiotherapy. The clinician should discuss possible short- and long-term side effects with the patient as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to use hormone therapy should be made by the patient and a multi-disciplinary team of providers with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status.

Combined External Beam Radiation Therapy and Brachytherapy versus Radical Prostatectomy with Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Gleason 9-10 Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: It remains controversial whether external beam radiation therapy with a brachytherapy boost provides oncologic outcomes equivalent to those of radical prostatectomy with or without adjuvant radiation therapy in men with Gleason 9-10 prostate cancer. We compared external beam radiation therapy plus brachytherapy to radical prostatectomy plus adjuvant radiation therapy for Gleason 9-10 prostate cancer in terms of overall survival and prostate cancer specific mortality in 2 large national databases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the NCDB (National Cancer Database) and the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) database, we identified 4,367 and 2,276 patients, respectively, diagnosed with clinical T1-T3N0M0, Gleason 9-10, prostate specific antigen 0 to 40 ng/ml prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy plus brachytherapy or radical prostatectomy plus adjuvant radiation therapy. We compared overall survival and prostate cancer specific mortality using inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling after accounting for clinical and demographic factors. RESULTS: Median followup in the NCDB and SEER cohorts was 6.0 years and 5.8 years, respectively. In the NCDB cohort there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival between radical prostatectomy plus adjuvant radiation therapy vs external beam radiation therapy plus brachytherapy (86.7% vs 87.0%, AHR 1.10, 95% CI 0.95-1.27, p=0.220). Results were unchanged when including only patients who received androgen deprivation therapy. In the SEER cohort there was no difference in 5-year prostate cancer specific mortality (6.0% vs 5.7%, AHR 1.22, 95% CI 0.0.88-1.71, p=0.234). There was no significant interaction between patient age (65 years or greater vs less than 65) and treatment modality in the NCDB or SEER cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In men with Gleason 9-10 prostate cancer multimodality surgical therapy is equivalent to external beam radiation therapy plus brachytherapy.

Prostate Cancer, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations regarding diagnosis, risk stratification and workup, treatment options for localized disease, and management of recurrent and advanced disease for clinicians who treat patients with prostate cancer. The portions of the guidelines included herein focus on the roles of germline and somatic genetic testing, risk stratification with nomograms and tumor multigene molecular testing, androgen deprivation therapy, secondary hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.

Impact of time to testosterone rebound and comorbidity on the risk of cause-specific mortality in men with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Herein, the authors evaluated how the time to testosterone rebound (TTR) after radiotherapy (RT) and 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) impacted the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and cardiovascular-specific mortality (CVM) among men with varying comorbidity extent. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2001, a total of 206 men who were randomized to receive RT either alone or with 6 months of ADT for unfavorable-risk PC and who had a comorbidity score assigned using the Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 metric comprised the study cohort. Multivariable competing risk regression was used to evaluate the impact of and possible interaction between comorbidity and TTR on PCSM and CVM. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 18.19 years, 30 men (18.6%), 39 men (24.2%), and 92 men (57.1%), respectively, had died of PC, CV disease, or other causes. As TTR increased, PCSM significantly decreased in men with no or minimal (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.53, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.34-0.84 [P =.007]) and moderate to severe (AHR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14-0.99 [P = .048]) comorbidity. However, increasing TTR significantly increased the risk of CVM among men with moderate to severe comorbidity (AHR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.40-2.49 [P <.001]), but not those with no or minimal comorbidity (AHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.57-1.29 [P =.46]), leading to a significant interaction between TTR and comorbidity (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study indicate that considering an intermittent course of ADT such that the TTR approaches 18 months, instead of continuous long-term administration of ADT, in men with moderate to severe comorbidity and high-risk PC may reduce the increased risk of CVM without increasing the risk of PCSM. Cancer 2018;124:1391-9. © 2018 American Cancer Society.