ABSTRACT
There is a long history of curative treatment of prostate cancer. However, as prostate cancer often grows very slowly, and symptoms do not have time to develop during a person's lifetime, a more tentative approach has become more and more common in many cases. This may be through either watchful waiting or active surveillance. In the first case palliative hormonal treatment is given in the case of progression, in the latter curative treatment would be the choice. When treatment is deemed necessary for localized disease, surgery and radiotherapy are considered equivalent in terms of efficacy and overall risk of side effects. For locally advanced disease, radiotherapy is the recommended first-hand choice outside the SPCG 15 study. Focal treatment, which may lead to less side effects than surgery or radiotherapy, is not recommended outside trial settings due to lack of long-term follow-up data.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Watchful Waiting , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatectomy , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/adverse effects , Palliative CareABSTRACT
We designed a nationwide study to investigate the association between socioeconomic factors (household income and education) and different aspects of prostate cancer care, considering both individual- and neighbourhood-level variables. Data were obtained from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), a research database with data from several national health care registers including clinical characteristics and treatments for nearly all men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden. Four outcomes were analysed: use of pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 2018-2020 (n = 11,843), primary treatment of high-risk non-metastatic disease in 2016-2020 (n = 6633), rehabilitation (≥2 dispensed prescriptions for erectile dysfunction within 1 year from surgery in 2016-2020, n = 6505), and prostate cancer death in 7770 men with high-risk non-metastatic disease diagnosed in 2010-2016. Unadjusted and adjusted odds and hazard ratios (OR/HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Adjusted odds ratio (ORs) comparing low versus high individual education were 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.83) for pre-biopsy MRI, 0.66 (0.54-0.81) for primary treatment, and 0.82 (0.69-0.97) for rehabilitation. HR gradients for prostate cancer death were significant on unadjusted analysis only (low vs. high individual education HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17-1.70); co-variate adjustments markedly attenuated the gradients (low vs. high individual education HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.35). Generally, neighbourhood-level analyses showed weaker gradients over the socioeconomic strata, except for pre-biopsy MRI. Socioeconomic factors influenced how men were diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden but had less influence on subsequent specialist care. Neighbourhood-level socioeconomic data are more useful for evaluating inequality in diagnostics than in later specialist care.
Subject(s)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms , Socioeconomic Factors , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/rehabilitation , Sweden/epidemiology , Aged , Middle Aged , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Registries , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
Importance: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proposed to enhance the benefit-to-harm ratio of prostate cancer screening, but data on repeated screening outcomes are lacking. Objective: To describe outcomes of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening with MRI and prostate biopsies at repeat screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis examined the population-based, screen-by-invitation STHLM3-MRI randomized clinical trial, which recruited Swedish men aged 50 to 74 years. Men were eligible for repeat screening at 2 to 3 years if they had PSA levels of 1.5 ng/mL or greater at trial inclusion, were randomized to the MRI-targeted group (including screening using biomarkers and MRI), and were not diagnosed with prostate cancer after the first screening round. Repeat screening was performed between November 10, 2021, and February 20, 2023. Data analysis was performed between May and August 2023. Intervention: Participants underwent blood sampling, including PSA testing. A biparametric MRI scan was performed if PSA levels were 3 ng/mL or greater, and men with lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3 or greater were referred for targeted and systematic biopsies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score of ≥3 + 4). Secondary outcomes included the proportion of men with clinically insignificant cancer (Gleason score of 6), the number of elevated PSA tests, MRI scans, and biopsy procedures. Results: Of 7609 men from the first screening round, 2078 (27.3%) were eligible for and were invited for rescreening. Among the invitees, 1500 (72.2%) participated. Their median age was 67 (IQR, 61-72) years. Of 1094 men with PSA levels between 1.5 and 2.9 ng/mL in the first screening round, 326 (29.8%) had levels of 3 ng/mL or greater in the second round. Overall, 667 men (44.5%) had PSA levels of 3 ng/mL or greater: 617 underwent MRI (92.5%), revealing 51 (7.6%) with equivocal lesions (PI-RADS score of 3) and 33 (4.9%) with suspicious lesions (PI-RADS score of ≥4). Only 10 of 383 men (2.6%) with a prior negative MRI result had a lesion with a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater. Among the 1500 rescreened men, 48 (3.2%) had a Gleason score of 3 + 4 or greater, including 19 (1.3%) with a score of 4 + 3 or greater and 11 (0.7%) with a score of 6. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the STHLM3-MRI randomized clinical trial, cancer detection during the second screening round in biennial PSA and MRI-based prostate cancer screening was limited, and the detection of low-grade tumors remained low. A substantial proportion of men exhibited elevated PSA levels during rescreening, and a considerable portion of MRI scans performed lacked lesions suggestive of cancer. Future studies should explore strategies to reduce MRI-related resource use. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03377881.
Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Prostatic Neoplasms , Aged , Humans , Male , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Data on functional and psychological side effects following curative treatment for prostate cancer are lacking from large, contemporary, unselected, population-based cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To assess urinary symptoms, bowel disturbances, erectile dysfunction (ED), and quality of life (QoL) 12 mo after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiotherapy (RT) using patient-reported outcome measures in the Swedish prostate cancer database. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a nationwide, population-based, cohort study in Sweden of men who underwent primary RARP or RT between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Absolute proportions and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression, with adjustment for clinical characteristics. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 2557 men underwent RARP and 1741 received RT. Men who underwent RT were older (69 vs 65 yr) and had more comorbidities at baseline. After RARP, 13% of men experienced incontinence, compared to 6% after RT. The frequency of urinary bother was similar, at 18% after RARP and 18% after RT. Urgency to defecate was reported by 14% of men after RARP and 34% after RT. At 1 yr, 73% of men had ED after RARP, and 77% after RT. High QoL was reported by 85% of men after RARP and 78% of men after RT. On multivariable regression analysis, RT was associated with lower risks of urinary incontinence (OR 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.33), urinary bother (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.95), and ED (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.65), but higher risk of bowel symptoms (OR 2.86, 95% CI 2.42-3.39). QoL was higher after RARP than after RT (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term specific side effects after curative treatment for prostate cancer significantly differed between RARP and RT in this large and unselected cohort. Nevertheless, the risk of urinary bother was lower after RT, while higher QoL was common after RARP. PATIENT SUMMARY: In our study of patients treated for prostate cancer, urinary bother and overall quality of life are comparable at 1 year after surgical removal of the prostate in comparison to radiotherapy, despite substantial differences in other side effects.
Subject(s)
Erectile Dysfunction , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prostatectomy , Prostatic Neoplasms , Quality of Life , Registries , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Aged , Middle Aged , Erectile Dysfunction/etiology , Erectile Dysfunction/epidemiology , Sweden/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Time Factors , Urinary Incontinence/etiology , Urinary Incontinence/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The European Union recently recommended evaluation of the feasibility of organised prostate cancer screening. In Sweden, regional population-based organised prostate cancer testing (OPT) programmes were introduced in 2020. OBJECTIVE: To describe initial participation rates and diagnostic outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The three most populated Swedish regions invited all men aged 50 yr to OPT by a letter in 2020-2022. Men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥3 ng/ml were referred for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). PSA assays differed across regions. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 1-3 and PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm3 or PI-RADS 4-5 were referred for a biopsy. Data were obtained from the Swedish Register for Organised Prostate Cancer Testing. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall and regional participation rates, PSA distributions, PI-RADS score distributions, cancer detection, and treatment were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 23 855 (35%) of 68 060 invited men participated; 696 (2.9%) had PSA ≥3 ng/ml, and of them, 306 (44%) had a biopsy indication and 221 (32%) had a biopsy. On biopsy, 93 (42%) had Gleason grade group ≥2 (0.39% of PSA-tested men) and 44 (20%) Gleason grade group 1 cancer. Most men with cancer had treatment with curative intent (70%) or were under active surveillance (28%). Across regions, proportions of men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml ranged from 2.3% to 4.0%, and those with PI-RADS score 4-5 ranged from 12% to 21%. A limitation is that results are applicable only to first testing of men in their early 50s. CONCLUSIONS: The OPT programmes are feasible with good compliance to the diagnostic pathway. The use of MRI and PSA density avoided a biopsy for over half of the men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml. Inter-regional differences in diagnostic outcomes show a need for standardisation of the diagnostic pathway's components. PATIENT SUMMARY: We report the diagnostic outcomes of inviting 68 000 50-yr-old men to organised prostate cancer testing.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Middle Aged , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Early Detection of Cancer , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Prostate/pathology , Image-Guided Biopsy/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among patients with localized prostate cancer, however up to 35% of patients will experience biochemical recurrence, often treated with salvage radiotherapy. The objective of the study was to investigate long-term effects of salvage radiotherapy. METHODS: A prospective, controlled, non-randomized trial at 14 Swedish center's including 4,003 patients scheduled for radical prostatectomy 2008-2011. A target trial emulation approach was used to identify eligible patients that was treated with salvage radiotherapy. The control group received no salvage radiotherapy. Outcomes were assessed by patient questionnaires on ordinal scales and statistical group comparisons were made using ordered logit regression with adjustment for baseline outcome and confounding factors. The primary endpoints were bowel, urinary and sexual function and bothering due to dysfunction at 8 years. RESULTS: Eleven percent (330/3,139) of the analyzed study population received salvage radiotherapy. Fecal leakage, leakage of mucus and hematochezia were more common after receiving salvage radiotherapy compared with the control group; 4.5% versus 2.6% odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]): (1.90 [1.38; 2.62]), 6.8% versus 1.5% 4.14 (2.98; 5.76) and 8.6% versus 1.2% 4.14 (2.98; 5.76), respectively. Urinary incontinence, erectile dysfunction and hematuria were more common after receiving salvage radiotherapy, 34% versus 23% 2.23 (2.65; 3.00), 65% versus 57% 1.65 (1.18; 2.29) and 16% versus 1.6% 11.17 (5.68; 21.99), respectively. CONCLUSION: Salvage radiotherapy was associated with increased risk for fecal leakage, hematochezia, urinary incontinence and hematuria. Our results emphasize the importance of selecting patients for salvage radiotherapy to avoid overtreatment and to give high quality pre-treatment information to ensure patients' preparedness for late side-effects.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Urinary Incontinence , Male , Humans , Follow-Up Studies , Prospective Studies , Hematuria/etiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatectomy/methods , Urinary Incontinence/epidemiology , Urinary Incontinence/etiology , Salvage Therapy/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Calmangafodipir (CaM, PledOx) demonstrated efficacy in preventing patient-reported chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in a randomized phase 2 study in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The Preventive Treatment of OxaLiplatin Induced peripherAl neuRopathy (POLAR) program aimed to assess efficacy and safety of CaM in the prevention of CIPN in patients treated with oxaliplatin in adjuvant (POLAR-A, ClinicalTrials.gov.NCT04034355) or metastatic (POLAR-M, ClinicalTrials.gov.NCT03654729) settings. METHODS: Two randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials investigated patient-reported, moderate-to-severe CIPN 9 months after beginning folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin therapy with or without CaM. In POLAR-A, patients with stage III or high-risk stage II colorectal cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive CaM 5 µmol/kg or placebo. In POLAR-M, patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive CaM 5 µmol/kg, CaM 2 µmol/kg, or placebo. RESULTS: POLAR-A (n = 301) and POLAR-M (n = 291) were terminated early following unexpected hypersensitivity reactions in CaM-treated patients. In a combined analysis of month 9 CIPN (primary endpoint) data from both trials (CaM 5 µmol/kg, n = 175; placebo, n = 176), 54.3% of patients in the CaM group had moderate-to-severe CIPN compared with 40.3% in the placebo group. The estimated relative risk for moderate-to-severe CIPN at month 9 was 1.37 (95% confidence interval = 1.01 to 1.86; P = .045). A higher proportion of patients experienced serious hypersensitivity reactions across both trials with CaM treatment (3.6%) than with placebo (0.8%). CONCLUSION: The POLAR clinical studies failed to meet their primary endpoint. These results highlight the challenges of targeting oxidative stress for preventing CIPN in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Oxaliplatin/adverse effects , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/chemically induced , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/drug therapyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between surgeon volume and urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: A total of 8326 men in The National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden (NPCR) underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) between 2017 and 2019 of whom 56% (4668/8 326) had responded to a questionnaire one year after RARP. The questionnaire included the question: 'How much urine leakage do you experience?' with the response alternatives 'Not at all', 'A little', defined as continence and 'Moderately', 'Much/Very much' as incontinence. Association between incontinence and mean number of RARPs/year/surgeon was analysed with multivariable logistic regression including age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), PSA, prostate volume, number of biopsy cores with cancer, cT stage, Gleason score, lymph node dissection, nerve sparing intent and response rate to the questionnaire. RESULTS: 14% (659/4 668) of the men were incontinent one year after RARP. There was no statistically significant association between surgeon volume and incontinence. Older age (>75 years vs. < 65 years, OR 2.29 [95% CI 1.48-3.53]), higher CCI (CCI 2+ vs. CCI 0, OR 1.37 [95% CI 1.04-1.80]) and no nerve sparing intent (no vs. yes OR 1.53 [95% CI 1.26-1.85]) increased risk of incontinence. There were large differences in the proportion of incontinent men between surgeons with similar annual volumes, which remained after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of association between surgeon volume and incontinence and the wide range in outcome between surgeons with similar volumes underline the importance of individual feedback to surgeons on functional results.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Surgeons , Urinary Incontinence , Male , Humans , Prostate/pathology , Sweden/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome , Urinary Incontinence/epidemiology , Urinary Incontinence/etiology , Prostatectomy/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: There is now an unprecedented amount of evidence to consider when revising prostate cancer guidelines. We believe that there is a value in publishing summaries of national clinical guidelines in English for others to read and comment on. METHODS: This is part 2 of a summary of the Swedish prostate cancer guidelines that were published in June 2022. This part covers recurrence after local treatment and management of metastatic and castration resistant disease. Part 1 covers early detection, diagnostics, staging, patient support and management of non-metastatic disease. RESULTS: The 2022 Swedish guidelines include several new recommendations. Among these is a recommendation of a period of observation with repeated PSA tests for patients with approximately 10 years' life expectancy who experience a BCR more than 2-5 years after radical prostatectomy, to allow for estimating the PSA doubling time before deciding whether to give salvage radiotherapy or not. Recent results from the PEACE-1 trial led to the recommendation of triple-treatment with a GnRH agonist, abiraterone plus prednisolone and 6 cycles of docetaxel for patients with high-volume metastatic disease who are fit for chemotherapy. The Swedish guidelines differ from the European ones by having more restrictive recommendations about genetic testing of and high-dose zoledronic acid or denosumab treatment for men with metastatic prostate cancer, and by recommending considering bicalutamide monotherapy for selected patients with low-volume metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: The 2022 Swedish prostate cancer guidelines include several new recommendations and some that differ from the European guidelines.
Subject(s)
Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Denosumab/therapeutic use , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Orchiectomy , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Sweden , Zoledronic Acid/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: There is now an unprecedented amount of evidence to consider when revising prostate cancer guidelines. We believe that there is a value in publishing summaries of national clinical guidelines in English for others to read and comment on. METHODS: This is part 1 of a summary of the Swedish prostate cancer guidelines that were published in June 2022. It covers the early detection, diagnostics, staging, patient support and management of the non-metastatic disease. Part 2 covers recurrence after local treatment and management of the metastatic disease. RESULTS: The 2022 Swedish guidelines include several new recommendations: rectal iodine-povidone to reduce post-biopsy infections, external beam radiation with focal boost to the tumour, use of a pre-rectal spacer to reduce rectal side effects after external beam radiotherapy in some expert centres, 6 months' concomitant and adjuvant rather than neoadjuvant and concomitant hormonal treatment together with radiotherapy for unfavourable intermediate and high-risk disease, and adjuvant abiraterone plus prednisolone together with a GnRH agonist for a subgroup of men with very high-risk disease. The Swedish guidelines differ from the European by having more restrictive recommendations regarding genetic testing and pelvic lymph node dissection, the risk group classification, recommending ultra-hypofractionated (7 fractions) external radiotherapy for intermediate and selected high-risk cancers, by not recommending any hormonal treatment together with radiotherapy for favourable intermediate-risk disease, and by recommending bicalutamide monotherapy instead of a GnRH agonist for some patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 2022 Swedish prostate cancer guidelines include several new recommendations and some that differ from the European guidelines.
Subject(s)
Iodine , Prostatic Neoplasms , Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone , Humans , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Povidone , Prednisolone , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , SwedenABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Differences in outcome after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer can partly be explained by intersurgeon differences, where degree of experience is one important aspect. This study aims to define the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) regarding oncological and functional outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Out of 4003 enrolled patients in the LAPPRO trial, 3583 met the inclusion criteria, of whom 885 were operated on by an open technique. In total, 2672 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer from seven Swedish centres were operated on by RALP and followed for 8 years (LAPPRO trial). Oncological outcomes were pathology-reported surgical margins and biochemical recurrence at 8 years. Functional outcomes included patient-reported urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction at 3, 12 and 24 months. Experience was surgeon-reported experience before and during the study. The relationship between surgeon experience and functional outcomes and surgical margin status was analysed by mixed-effects logistic regression. Biochemical recurrence was analysed by Cox regression, with robust standard errors. RESULTS: The learning curve for positive surgical margins was relatively flat, with rates of 21% for surgeons who had performed 0-74 cases and 24% for surgeons with > 300 cases. Biochemical recurrence at 4 years was 11% (0-74 cases) and 13% (> 300 cases). Incontinence was stable over the learning curve, but erectile function improved at 2 years, from 38% (0-74 cases) to 53% (> 300 cases). CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the learning curve for surgeons performing RALP showed that erectile function improved with increasing number of procedures, which was not the case for oncological outcomes.
Subject(s)
Erectile Dysfunction , Laparoscopy , Prostatic Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Robotics , Urinary Incontinence , Erectile Dysfunction/epidemiology , Erectile Dysfunction/etiology , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Learning Curve , Male , Margins of Excision , Prospective Studies , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Treatment Outcome , Urinary Incontinence/epidemiology , Urinary Incontinence/etiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among patients with localised prostate cancer. Evidence on whether different surgical techniques can affect mortality rates is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate functional and oncological outcomes 8 yr after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 4003 patients in a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial comparing RALP and RRP in 14 Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011. Data for functional outcomes were assessed via validated patient questionnaires administered preoperatively and at 12 and 24 mo and 8 yr after surgery. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was urinary incontinence. Functional outcomes at 8 yr were analysed using the modified Poisson regression approach. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Urinary incontinence was not significantly different at 8 yr after surgery between RALP and RRP (27% vs 29%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.23). Erectile dysfunction was significantly lower in the RALP group (66% vs 70%; aRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) was significantly lower in the RALP group at 8 yr after surgery (40/2699 vs 25/885; aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.93). Differences in oncological outcomes were mainly seen in the group with high D'Amico risk, with a lower risk of positive surgical margins (21% vs 34%), biochemical recurrence (51% vs 69%), and PCSM (14/220 vs 11/77) for RALP versus RRP. The main limitation is the nonrandomised design. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective multicentre controlled trial, PCSM at 8 yr after surgery was lower for RALP in comparison to RRP. A causal relationship between surgical technique and mortality cannot be inferred, but the result confirms that RALP is oncologically safe. Taken together with better short-term results reported elsewhere, our findings confirm that implementation of RALP may continue. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study comparing two surgical techniques for removal of the prostate for localised prostate cancer shows that a robot-assisted minimally invasive technique is safe in the long term. Together with previous results showing some better short-term effects with this approach, our findings support continued use of robot-assisted surgery.
Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Aged , Erectile Dysfunction/etiology , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications , Prospective Studies , Prostate , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Urinary Incontinence/etiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduces prostate cancer mortality but can lead to adverse outcomes. We aimed to compare a traditional screening approach with a diagnostic strategy of blood-based risk prediction combined with MRI-targeted biopsies. METHODS: We did a prospective, population-based, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial (STHLM3-MRI) in Stockholm county, Sweden. Men aged 50-74 years were randomly selected by Statistics Sweden and invited by mail to participate in screening; those with an elevated risk of prostate cancer, defined as either a PSA of 3 ng/mL or higher or a Stockholm3 score of 0·11 or higher were eligible for randomisation. Men with a previous prostate cancer diagnosis, who had undergone a prostate biopsy within 60 days before the invitation to participate, with a contraindication for MRI, or with severe illness were excluded. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:3) using computer-generated blocks of five, stratified by clinically significant prostate cancer risk, to receive either systematic prostate biopsies (standard group) or biparametric MRI followed by MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in MRI-positive participants (experimental group). The primary outcome was the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at prostate biopsy, defined as a Gleason score of 3 + 4 or higher. We used a margin of 0·78 to assess non-inferiority for the primary outcome. Key secondary outcome measures included the proportion of men with clinically insignificant prostate cancer (defined as a Gleason score of 3 + 3), and the number of any prostate MRI and biopsy procedures done. We did two comparisons: Stockholm3 (using scores of 0·11 and 0·15 as cutoffs) versus PSA in the experimental group (paired analyses) and PSA plus standard biopsy versus Stockholm3 plus MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy (unpaired, randomised analyses). All analyses were intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03377881. FINDINGS: Between Feb 5, 2018, and March 4, 2020, 49 118 men were invited to participate, of whom 12 750 were enrolled and provided blood specimens, and 2293 with elevated risk were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=1372) or the standard group (n=921). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer was 0·76 (95% CI 0·72-0·80) for Stockholm3 and 0·60 (0·54-0·65) for PSA. In the experimental group, a Stockholm3 of 0·11 or higher was non-inferior to a PSA of 3 ng/mL or higher for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (227 vs 192; relative proportion [RP] 1·18 [95% CI 1·09-1·28], p<0·0001 for non-inferiority), and also detected a similar number of low-grade prostate cancers (50 vs 41; 1·22 [0·96-1·55], p=0·053 for superiority) and was associated with more MRIs and biopsies. Compared with PSA of 3 ng/mL or higher, a Stockholm3 of 0·15 or higher provided identical sensitivity to detect clinically significant cancer, and led to fewer MRI procedures (545 vs 846; 0·64 [0·55-0·82]) and fewer biopsy procedures (311 vs 338; 0·92 (0·86-1·03). Compared with screening using PSA and systematic biopsies, a Stockholm3 of 0·11 or higher combined with MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies was associated with higher detection of clinically significant cancers (227 [3·0%] men tested vs 106 [2·1%] men tested; RP 1·44 [95% CI 1·15-1·81]), lower detection of low-grade cancers (50 [0·7%] vs 73 [1·4%]; 0·46 [0·32-0·66]), and led to fewer biopsy procedures. Patients randomly assigned to the experimental group had a lower incidence of prescription of antibiotics for infection (25 [1·8%] of 1372 vs 41 [4·4%] of 921; p=0·0002) and a lower incidence of admission to hospital (16 [1·2%] vs 31 [3·4%]; p=0·0003) than those in the standard group. INTERPRETATION: The Stockholm3 test can inform risk stratification before MRI and targeted biopsies in prostate cancer screening. Combining the Stockholm3 test with an MRI-targeted biopsy approach for prostate cancer screening decreases overdetection while maintaining the ability to detect clinically significant cancer. FUNDING: The Swedish Cancer Society, the Swedish Research Council, and Stockholm City Council.
Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Biomarkers, Tumor/blood , Humans , Image-Guided Biopsy , Intention to Treat Analysis , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Prospective Studies , Prostate/diagnostic imaging , Prostate/pathology , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/blood , ROC Curve , Random Allocation , Risk Assessment , Sweden/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Reports on possible benefits for continence with nerve-sparing (NS) radical prostatectomy have expanded the indications beyond preservation of erectile function. It is unclear whether NS surgery affects oncological outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the degree of NS during radical prostatectomy influences oncological outcomes. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Of 4003 patients enrolled in a prospective, controlled trial comparing open and robotic radical prostatectomy during 2008-2011, we evaluated 2401 patients who received robotic radical prostatectomy at seven Swedish centres. Patients were followed for 8 yr. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data for recurrence and positive surgical margin status were assessed using validated patient questionnaires, patient interviews, and clinical record forms before and at 3, 12, and 24 mo and 6 and 8 yr after surgery. Cox and logistic regressions were used to model the effect on recurrence and positive surgical margins (PSM), respectively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 481 men had PSM and 467 experienced recurrence during follow-up. Median follow-up for men without recurrence was 6.6 yr. There were no statistically significant differences in recurrence rate between degrees of NS. The PSM rate was significantly higher with a higher degree of NS: interfascial NS, odds ratio (OR) 2.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69-3.16); intrafascial NS, OR 3.23 (95% CI 2.17-4.80). Recurrence rates were higher for patients with pT2 disease and PSM (hazard ratio [HR] 3.32, 95% CI 2.43-4.53) than for patients with pT3 disease without PSM (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.66-2.62). The lack of central review of pathological specimens is a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: A higher degree of NS significantly increased the risk of PSM but did not significantly increase the risk of cancer recurrence. Combined with the known functional benefits of NS surgery, these results underscore the need to identify an individualised balance. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report we looked at the effect of a nerve-sparing approach during removal of the prostate on cancer outcomes for patients having robot-assisted surgery at seven Swedish hospitals. We found that a high degree of nerve-sparing increased the rate of cancer positivity at the margins of surgical specimens and that positive surgical margins increased the risk of recurrence of prostate cancer.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: High rates of overdiagnosis are a critical barrier to organized prostate cancer screening. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy has shown the potential to address this challenge, but the implications of its use in the context of organized prostate cancer screening are unknown. METHODS: We conducted a population-based noninferiority trial of prostate cancer screening in which men 50 to 74 years of age from the general population were invited by mail to participate; participants with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of 3 ng per milliliter or higher were randomly assigned, in a 2:3 ratio, to undergo a standard biopsy (standard biopsy group) or to undergo MRI, with targeted and standard biopsy if the MRI results suggested prostate cancer (experimental biopsy group). The primary outcome was the proportion of men in the intention-to-treat population in whom clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥7) was diagnosed. A key secondary outcome was the detection of clinically insignificant cancers (Gleason score 6). RESULTS: Of 12,750 men enrolled, 1532 had PSA levels of 3 ng per milliliter or higher and were randomly assigned to undergo biopsy: 603 were assigned to the standard biopsy group and 929 to the experimental biopsy group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, clinically significant cancer was diagnosed in 192 men (21%) in the experimental biopsy group, as compared with 106 men (18%) in the standard biopsy group (difference, 3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1 to 7; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The percentage of clinically insignificant cancers was lower in the experimental biopsy group than in the standard biopsy group (4% [41 participants] vs. 12% [73 participants]; difference, -8 percentage points; 95% CI, -11 to -5). CONCLUSIONS: MRI with targeted and standard biopsy in men with MRI results suggestive of prostate cancer was noninferior to standard biopsy for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in a population-based screening-by-invitation trial and resulted in less detection of clinically insignificant cancer. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; STHLM3-MRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03377881.).
Subject(s)
Biopsy/methods , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Prostate/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Prostate/diagnostic imaging , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Few studies have investigated the association between surgical volume and outcome of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in an unselected cohort. We sought to investigate the association between surgical volume with peri-operative and short-term outcomes in a nation-wide, population-based study group. METHODS: 9,810 RARP's registered in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden (2015-2018) were included. Associations between outcome and volume were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression including age, PSA-density, number of positive biopsy cores, cT stage, Gleason score, and extent of lymph node dissection. RESULTS: Surgeons and hospitals in the highest volume group compared to lowest group had shorter operative time; surgeon (OR 9.20, 95% CI 7.11-11.91), hospital (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.53-3.06), less blood loss; surgeon (OR 2.58. 95% CI 2.07-3.21) hospital (no difference), more often nerve sparing intention; surgeon (OR 2.89, 95% CI 2.34-3.57), hospital (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.66-2.44), negative margins; surgeon (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.54-2.35), hospital (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.53). There was wide range in outcome between hospitals and surgeons with similar volume that remained after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: High surgeon and hospital volume were associated with better outcomes. The range in outcome was wide in all volume groups, which indicates that factors besides volume are of importance. Registration of surgical performance is essential for quality control and improvement.
Subject(s)
Prostatectomy/instrumentation , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Aged , Hospitals, High-Volume , Hospitals, Low-Volume , Humans , Lymph Node Excision , Male , Margins of Excision , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Operative Time , Perioperative Period , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Surgeons , Sweden , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The first case of COVID-19 in Sweden was diagnosed in late January 2020, the first recommendations against the spread of the virus were released in mid-March, and the peak of the first wave of the pandemic was reached in March-June. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess the short-term effects of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, staging, and treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data in the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) of Sweden on newly diagnosed PCa cases and on the number of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed between 18 March 2020 and 2 June 2020 were compared with those in the corresponding time periods in 2017-2019, as reported until January 31 of the year after each study period. RESULTS: During the study period in 2020, 36% fewer PCa cases were registered in NPCR compared with the corresponding time period in previous years: 1458 cases in 2020 vs a mean of 2285 cases in 2017-2019. The decrease in new PCa registrations was more pronounced in men above age 75 years, down 51%, than in men aged 70-75, down 37%, and in men below age 70, down 28%. There was no decrease in the number of radical prostatectomies and number of radical radiotherapy courses increased by 32%. CONCLUSIONS: During the peak of the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of men diagnosed with PCa in Sweden decreased by one third compared with previous years, whereas there was no decrease in the number of curative treatments.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Age Factors , Aged , Catchment Area, Health/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Prostatectomy/statistics & numerical data , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Radiotherapy/statistics & numerical data , Registries , SARS-CoV-2 , Sweden/epidemiologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate urinary continence (UC) recovery and oncological outcomes in different risk-groups after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed 2650 men with prostate cancer from seven open (n = 805) and seven robotic (n = 1845) Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011 in a prospective non-randomised trial, LAPPRO. UC recovery was defined as change of pads less than once in 24 h. Information was collected through validated questionnaires. Rate of positive surgical margins (PSM) and biochemical recurrence (BCR), defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 0.25 mg/ml, were recorded. We stratified patients into two risk groups (low-intermediate and high risk) based on the D'Amico risk classification system. RESULT: Among men with high-risk prostate cancer, we found significantly higher rates of UC recovery up to 24 months after RRP compared to RALP (66.1% vs 60.5%) RR 0.85 (CI 95% 0.73-0.99) while PSM was more frequent after RRP compared to RALP (46.8% vs 23.5%) RR 1.56 (CI 95% 1.10-2.21). In the same group no significant difference was seen in BCR. Overall, however, BCR was significantly more common after RRP compared to RALP at 24 months (9.8% vs 6.6%) RR 1.43 (Cl 95% 1.08-1.89). The limitations of this study are its non-randomized design and the relatively short time of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that men with high-risk tumour operated with open surgery had better urinary continence recovery but with a higher risk of PSM than after robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. No significant difference was seen in biochemical recurrence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN06393679.