Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part III: Salvage Therapy After Radiotherapy or Focal Therapy, Pelvic Nodal Recurrence and Oligometastasis, and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part III of a three-part series focusing on evaluation and management of suspected non-metastatic recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, evaluation and management of regional recurrence, management for molecular imaging metastatic recurrence, and future directions. Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous and deliberate efforts for multidisciplinary care in prostate cancer will be required to optimize and improve the oncologic and functional outcomes of patients treated with salvage therapies in the future.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part I: Introduction and Treatment Decision-Making at the Time of Suspected Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part I of a three-part series focusing on treatment decision-making at the time of suspected biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic BCR after RP and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing work in the area of diagnostic tools (particularly imaging), biomarkers, radiation delivery, and biological manipulation with the evolving armamentarium of therapeutic agents will undoubtedly present new opportunities for patients to experience long-term control of their cancer while minimizing toxicity.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part II: Treatment Delivery for Non-metastatic Biochemical Recurrence After Primary Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part II of a three-part series focusing on treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing and personalizing the approach to salvage therapy remains an ongoing area of work in the field of genitourinary oncology and represents an area of research and clinical care that requires well-coordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts.

Isolating the Drivers of Racial Inequities in Prostate Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Black individuals in the United States are less likely than White individuals to receive curative therapies despite a 2-fold higher risk of prostate cancer death. While research has described treatment inequities, few studies have investigated underlying causes. METHODS: We analyzed a cohort of 40,137 Medicare beneficiaries (66 and older) linked to the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry who had clinically significant, non-metastatic (cT1-4N0M0, grade group 2-5) prostate cancer (diagnosed 2010-2015). Using the Kitagawa-Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, we assessed the contributions of patient health and health care delivery on the racial difference in localized prostate cancer treatments (radical prostatectomy or radiation). Patient health consisted of comorbid diagnoses, tumor characteristics, SEER site, diagnosis year, and age. Health care delivery was captured as a prediction model with these health variables as predictors of treatment, reflecting current treatment patterns. RESULTS: A total of 72.1% and 78.6% of Black and White patients received definitive treatment, respectively, a difference of 6.5 percentage points. An estimated 15% [95% confidence interval (CI): 6-24] of this treatment difference was explained by measured differences in patient health, leaving the remaining estimated 85% (95% CI: 74-94) attributable to a potentially broad range of health care delivery factors. Limitations included insufficient data to explore how specific health care delivery factors, including structural racism and social determinants, impact differential treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show the inadequacy of patient health differences as an explanation of the treatment inequity. IMPACT: Investing in studies and interventions that support equitable health care delivery for Black individuals with prostate cancer will contribute to improved outcomes.

Prostate cancer screening in African American men: a review of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in African American men, yet prostate cancer screening regimens in this group are poorly guided by existing evidence, given underrepresentation of African American men in prostate cancer screening trials. It is critical to optimize prostate cancer screening and early detection in this high-risk group because underdiagnosis may lead to later-stage cancers at diagnosis and higher mortality while overdiagnosis may lead to unnecessary treatment. METHODS: We performed a review of the literature related to prostate cancer screening and early detection specific to African American men to summarize the existing evidence available to guide health-care practice. RESULTS: Limited evidence from observational and modeling studies suggests that African American men should be screened for prostate cancer. Consideration should be given to initiating screening of African American men at younger ages (eg, 45-50 years) and at more frequent intervals relative to other racial groups in the United States. Screening intervals can be optimized by using a baseline prostate-specific antigen measurement in midlife. Finally, no evidence has indicated that African American men would benefit from screening beyond 75 years of age; in fact, this group may experience higher rates of overdiagnosis at older ages. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base for prostate cancer screening in African American men is limited by the lack of large, randomized studies. Our literature search supported the need for African American men to be screened for prostate cancer, for initiating screening at younger ages (45-50 years), and perhaps screening at more frequent intervals relative to men of other racial groups in the United States.

Chronic Glucocorticoid Use and Risk for Advanced Prostate Cancer at Presentation: A SEER-Medicare Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Examine the relationship between exposure to systemic glucocorticoids (steroids) and advanced prostate cancer (PCa) at presentation. Prior work suggested that steroid use may be associated with increased PCa risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried the linked SEER-Medicare database (2004-2015) to identify PSA screened patients diagnosed with PCa. Criteria for screening included a PSA lab test or DRE exam in both the 12 month and 13 to 36 month periods prior to diagnosis of PCa. Steroid exposure was determined using Medicare Part D and groups were divided based on duration of use in the 3 years prior to diagnosis: controls with no exposure, <30 days, 30 days - 1 year, 1 to 2 years, and >2+ years. Advanced PCa was defined as systemic metastases or regional lymph node metastasis at presentation. Risk estimates for advanced PCa at presentation for steroid exposure groups vs. controls were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 22,920 PSA screened patients diagnosed with PCa of which 29% used glucocorticoids in the exposure period. The mean (SD) duration for glucocorticoid use (in days) among all steroid users was 76.7 days (192.1). On univariable and multivariable analyses, > 2 years of steroid exposure was associated with significantly increased risk for advanced PCa (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.35-3.14 and OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.12-2.69, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this population-based PSA-screened cohort, prolonged steroid use was associated with increased risk of advanced PCa at diagnosis. With the widespread use of glucocorticoids, it is important to consider the role steroids may play in PCa pathogenesis.

Determining clinical perspectives and strategies for improving enrollment of minoritized communities in prostate cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Black men and other minoritized populations have represented 4-5% or less of participants in most practice-informing clinical trials. This study sought to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of clinicians around equity and inclusion in prostate cancer clinical trial initiatives in the United States. METHODS: An anonymous, web-based questionnaire was administered via REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) with questions focused on inclusivity of minoritized populations with respect to race and ethnicity in prostate cancer clinical trials research. The survey link was distributed across the United States via several professional organizations, prostate cancer groups, and social media. Responses were analyzed both quantitatively (descriptive statistics) and qualitatively (thematic analysis). RESULTS: Overall, 131 respondents completed the survey (70% self-identified as White, 17% as Asian, and 6% as Black). Most respondents practiced in an urban setting (89%). Of those who engaged in outreach with minoritized communities during the trial design process, 69% observed improved enrollment of minoritized populations. However, 18% of respondents noted that outreach alone does not overcome existing structural barriers to participation in clinical trials. Thematic analysis identified four key areas to address for improving equity: structural, health system, trial-/study-specific, and relationship-/engagement-related factors. CONCLUSION: Study participants demonstrated a knowledge of the importance of improving equity in prostate cancer clinical trials research. Designing trials that reduce issues associated with access and improving community outreach were emphasized as key focus areas for reducing health disparities in prostate cancer clinical trials research.

Racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality: a model-based decomposition of contributing factors.

To investigate the relative contributions of natural history and clinical interventions to racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality in the United States, we extended a model that was previously calibrated to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) incidence rates for the general population and for Black men. The extended model integrated SEER data on curative treatment frequencies and cancer-specific survival. Starting with the model for all men, we replaced up to 9 components with corresponding components for Black men, projecting age-standardized mortality rates for ages 40-84 years at each step. Based on projections in 2019, the increased frequency of developing disease, more aggressive tumor features, and worse cancer-specific survival in Black men diagnosed at local-regional and distant stages explained 38%, 34%, 22%, and 8% of the modeled disparity in mortality. Our results point to intensified screening and improved care in Black men as priority areas to achieve greater equity.

Inequities in Definitive Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer Among Those With Clinically Significant Mental Health Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with mental health disorders are at risk for receiving inequitable cancer treatment, likely resulting from various structural, social, and health-related factors. This study aims to assess the relationship between mental health disorders and the use of definitive treatment in a population-based cohort of those with localized, clinically significant prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study analysis in SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare (2004-2015). History of a mental health disorder was defined as presence of specific ICD (International Classification of Diseases)-9 or ICD-10 diagnostic codes in the 2 years preceding cancer diagnosis. Descriptive statistics were performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and χ2 testing. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between mental health disorders and definitive treatment utilization (defined as surgery or radiation). RESULTS: Of 101,042 individuals with prostate cancer, 7,945 (7.8%) had a diagnosis of a mental health disorder. They were more likely to be unpartnered, have a lower socioeconomic status, and less likely to receive definitive treatment (61.8% vs 68.2%, P < .001). Definitive treatment rates were >66%, 62.8%, 60.3%, 58.2%, 54.3%, and 48.1% for post-traumatic stress disorder, depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, substance abuse disorder, and schizophrenia, respectively. After adjusting for age, race and ethnicity, marital status and socioeconomic status, history of a mental health disorder was associated with decreased odds of receiving definitive treatment (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with mental health disorders and prostate cancer represent a vulnerable population; careful attention to clinical and social needs is required to support appropriate use of beneficial treatments.

Racial and sex differences in tumor genomics in urothelial carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Differences in bladder cancer outcomes have been demonstrated by sex and race/ethnicity, with studies showing a higher burden of adverse outcomes among women and racially minoritized populations. Despite these epidemiologic differences, populations with disproportionally adverse outcomes are often underrepresented in genomic cohorts. This exclusion impacts the accuracy and generalizability of genomic studies in bladder cancer and has the potential to widen disparities by sex and/or race/ethnicity. BASIC PROCEDURES: We analyzed pooled somatic mutational data from publicly available cohorts in the cBioPortal open access platform. FINDINGS: A total of 796 unique patients were identified. Average age for the cohort was 67 years (range: 25-98 years), 188 (24%) were female, and the majority were White (n = 423, 85% among those who report race). Median total mutation count was 91 (IQR: 20, 202) per patient. We used multivariable logistic regression to independently evaluate the association between race/sex and mutation status in each of 122 genes of interest, identified from TCGA, adjusting for age and bladder cancer invasive status. In adjusted analyses, male sex was associated with increased risk of mutation in ARID1A, CHD6, and NCOR1 compared with female sex. White race was associated with increased risk of mutation in ARID1A, EP300, PIK3CA, and TP53 and decreased risk of mutation in HRAS compared with non-White race. CONCLUSIONS: These differences highlight the importance of enriching cohorts for female and non-White patients in genomic studies and clinical trials, especially as we test the use of molecular biomarkers to personalize care for patients with bladder cancer.

Disparities in prostate cancer.

Despite substantial advances in early detection/prevention and treatments, and improved outcomes in recent decades, prostate cancer continues to disproportionately affect Black men and is the secondleading cause of cancer death in this subgroup. Black men are substantially more likely to develop prostate cancer and are twice as likely to die from the disease compared with White men. In addition, Black men are younger at diagnosis and face a higher risk of aggressive disease relative to White men. Striking racial disparities endure along the continuum of prostate cancer care, including screening, genomic testing, diagnostic procedures, and treatment modalities. The underlying causes of these inequalities are complex and multifactorial and involve biological factors, structural determinants of equity (i.e., public policy, structural and systemic racism, economic policy), social determinants of health (including income, education, and insurance status, neighborhood/physical environment, community/social context, and geography), and health care factors. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial disparities in prostate cancer and to propose actionable recommendations to help address these inequities and narrow the racial gap.

Analysis of evolutionary dynamics and clonal architecture in prostate cancer.

The extent to which clinical and genomic characteristics associate with prostate cancer clonal architecture, tumor evolution, and therapeutic response remains unclear. Here, we reconstructed the clonal architecture and evolutionary trajectories of 845 prostate cancer tumors with harmonized clinical and molecular data. We observed that tumors from patients who self-reported as Black had more linear and monoclonal architectures, despite these men having higher rates of biochemical recurrence. This finding contrasts with prior observations relating polyclonal architecture to adverse clinical outcomes. Additionally, we utilized a novel approach to mutational signature analysis that leverages clonal architecture to uncover additional cases of homologous recombination and mismatch repair deficiency in primary and metastatic tumors and link the origin of mutational signatures to specific subclones. Broadly, prostate cancer clonal architecture analysis reveals novel biological insights that may be immediately clinically actionable and provide multiple opportunities for subsequent investigation. Statement of significance: Tumors from patients who self-reported as Black demonstrate linear and monoclonal evolutionary trajectories yet experience higher rates of biochemical recurrence. In addition, analysis of clonal and subclonal mutational signatures identifies additional tumors with potentially actionable alterations such as deficiencies in mismatch repair and homologous recombination.

Racial inequities in the quality of surgical care among Medicare beneficiaries with localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: US Black men are twice as likely to die from prostate cancer as men of other races. Lower quality care may contribute to this higher death rate. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained for men in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer (cT1-4N0/xM0/x) and managed primarily by radical prostatectomy (2005-2015). Surgical volume was determined for facility and surgeon. Relationships between race, surgeon and/or facility volume, and characteristics of treating facility with survival (all-cause and cancer-specific) were assessed using multivariable Cox regression and competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Black men represented 6.7% (n = 2123) of 31,478 cohort. They were younger at diagnosis, had longer time from diagnosis to surgery, lower socioeconomic status, higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and higher comorbid status compared with men of other races (p < .001). They were less likely to receive care from a surgeon or facility in the top volume percentile (p < .001); less likely to receive surgical care at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center and more likely seen at a minority-serving hospital; and less likely to travel ≥50 miles for surgical care. On multivariable analysis stratified by surgical volume, Black men receiving care from a surgeon or facility with lower volumes demonstrated increased risk of prostate cancer mortality (hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-2.69) adjusting for age, clinical stage, PSA, and comorbidity index. CONCLUSIONS: Black Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer more commonly receive care from surgeons and facilities with lower volumes, likely affecting surgical quality and outcomes. Access to high-quality prostate cancer care may reduce racial inequities in disease outcomes, even among insured men. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Black men are twice as likely to die of prostate cancer than other US men. Lower quality care may contribute to higher rates of prostate cancer death. We used surgical volume to evaluate the relationship between race and quality of care. Black Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer more commonly received care from surgeons and facilities with lower volumes, correlating with a higher risk of prostate cancer death and indicating scarce resources for care. Access to high-quality prostate cancer care eases disparities in disease outcomes. Patient-centered interventions that increase access to high-quality care for Black men with prostate cancer are needed.

Estimating the Number of Men Living with Metastatic Prostate Cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic prostate cancer (MPC) includes metastases detected at diagnosis (de novo) and those occurring after diagnosis with early-stage disease (recurrent). Cancer registries collect data only on de novo MPC, providing a partial picture of the burden of MPC. We use cancer registry data to estimate the number of men living with MPC in the United States including both de novo and recurrent cases. METHODS: We apply a back-calculation method to estimate MPC incidence and prevalence from U.S. prostate cancer mortality and de novo MPC relative survival for cases diagnosed between 2000 and 2017 in 18 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We hold overall prostate cancer mortality and MPC survival constant for future prevalence projections. RESULTS: On January 1, 2018, we estimated 120,400 U.S. men living with MPC (45% de novo, 55% recurrent). The age-adjusted prevalence in 2018 for Black men was over double that of White men (137.1 vs. 62.2 per 100,000 men). By 2030, 192,500 men are expected to be living with MPC, with the increase being driven by population growth projections. CONCLUSIONS: The number of men living with MPC in the United States exceeds 100,000 and represents a small fraction of the >3 million men living with a prior diagnosis of prostate cancer. IMPACT: Relatively similar fractions of de novo and recurrent MPC among prevalent cases highlight opportunities for management of localized disease in reducing the MPC burden. Changes in diagnostic technologies could lead to greater growth in MPC cases in the United States than projected. See related commentary by Stopsack et al., p. 585.

Does Clinical Evidence of Heterogeneity Impact Treatment Selection? A Case Study of Abiraterone for Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Two pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrate that abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AAP) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly extends the survival of men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) compared with ADT alone. Their subgroup analyses indicate that the survival benefit is significant for younger men but not older men. We aimed to assess whether publication of the RCTs was associated with differential real-world AAP utilization by age groups. METHODS: Using TriNetX electronic medical records data collected from 43 healthcare organizations across the United States, we performed a difference-in-differences event study among men with newly diagnosed mHSPC observed from June 2014 to June 2019. Eligible subjects were identified based on a comprehensive published algorithm. We analyzed the change in utilization rate of AAP before versus after publication of the RCTs among men aged <70 years versus ≥70 years, adjusting for demographic factors and clinical conditions. RESULTS: Our study included 6,888 men with newly diagnosed mHSPC with 12,738 observations, of whom 46% were aged <70 years. The prepublication trends of AAP utilization were similar between the age groups, whereas publication of the RCTs was associated with a 3.5% higher adjusted uptake rate of AAP among younger men (95% CI, 1.2%-5.8%) relative to older men. This estimate reflects an uptake rate nearly 3 times higher than would have been expected had younger men followed the same utilization trends as older men. The estimates remained consistent throughout the postpublication period. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that publication of the RCTs was associated with faster uptake of AAP among younger versus older men with newly diagnosed mHSPC, despite the absence of clinical guidance for differential treatment selection. This finding highlights the importance of confirmatory studies among older men, considering the uncertainties of subgroup analyses in RCTs.