ProtecT trial: What's new after 15 years of follow-up: Re: Hamdy FC and colleagues; N Engl J Med. 2023 Apr 27.

Recent results of ProtecT trial published after 15 years of follow-up demonstrate the absence of difference in prostate cancer-specific survival between active monitoring, radiotherapy, or prostatectomy for PSA-detected, localized prostate cancer patients. These results definitively confirm the essential role of active surveillance as the gold standard for men with low-risk and highly selected intermediate-risk prostate cancer. It underlines the importance of shared-decision making process with patients.

Aggregation-Induced Enhanced Emission of Tetraphenylethene-phenylalanine Hybrids: Synthesis and Characterization.

Aggregation-induced emitting (AIE) luminophores are sensitive and easy-to-handle types of probes that allow driving a stimulus-responsive off/on optical tool through the manipulation of the aggregation behavior. In this work, tetraphenylethene (TPE)-phenylalanine derivatives, characterized by strong aggregation-induced luminescence, were obtained through Suzuki-Miyaura cross-coupling reactions. The reaction proved to be straightforwardly applicable in the single amino acid synthesis as well as in the late-stage peptide functionalization by means of both the classical solution-phase reaction and solid-phase synthesis. A comprehensive structural and analytical investigation highlighted the features driving the self-assembly process and its relationship to AIE efficiency. In particular, we showed that the simple slight (asymmetric) extension of the TPE π-systems results in more efficient and brighter emissions, with respect to the simple TPE system itself.

Efficacy and Safety of Radiotherapy Plus Relugolix in Men With Localized or Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Combination androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy is commonly used for patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist relugolix with radiotherapy for treating prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter post hoc analysis of patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy in 2 randomized clinical trials (a phase 2 trial of relugolix vs degarelix, and a subset of the phase 3 HERO trial of relugolix vs leuprolide acetate) included men who were receiving radiotherapy and short-term (24 weeks) ADT (n = 103) from 2014 to 2015 and men receiving radiotherapy and longer-term (48 weeks) ADT (n = 157) from 2017 to 2019. The data were analyzed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients receiving short-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (320-mg loading dose) or degarelix, 80 mg, 4-week depot (240-mg loading dose) for 24 weeks with 12 weeks of follow-up. Patients receiving longer-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (360-mg loading dose) or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks, with up to 90 days of follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: Castration rate (testosterone level <50 ng/dL [to convert to nmol/L, multiply by 0.0347) at all scheduled visits between weeks 5 and 25 for patients receiving short-term ADT and weeks 5 and 49 for patients receiving longer-term ADT. Results: Of 260 patients (38 Asian [14.6%], 23 Black or African American [8.8%], 21 Hispanic [8.1%], and 188 White [72.3%] individuals), 164 (63.1%) received relugolix. Relugolix achieved castration rates of 95% (95% CI, 87.1%-99.0%) and 97% (95% CI, 90.6%-99.0%) among patients receiving short-term and longer-term ADT, respectively. Twelve weeks post-short-term relugolix, 34 (52%) achieved testosterone levels to baseline or more than 280 ng/dL. Ninety days post longer-term ADT, mean (SD) testosterone levels were 310.5 (122.4) (106.7) ng/dL (relugolix; n = 15) vs 53.0 ng/dL (leuprolide acetate; n = 8) among the subset assessed for testosterone recovery. Castration resistance-free survival was not statistically different between the relugolix and leuprolide acetate cohorts (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.35-2.72; P = .62). Adverse events grade 3 or greater for short-term or longer-term relugolix (headache, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation) were uncommon (less than 5%). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of these 2 randomized clinical trials suggest that relugolix rapidly achieves sustained castration in patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy. No new safety concerns were identified when relugolix was used with radiotherapy.

Impact of Relugolix Versus Leuprolide on the Quality of Life of Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Results from the Phase 3 HERO Study.

BACKGROUND: Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, demonstrated testosterone suppression to castrate levels in men with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) in the HERO study. Since advanced PCa and its treatments can impact patients' daily life, it is imperative to understand the impact of systemic therapy on patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL). OBJECTIVE: To report the HRQOL for patients on relugolix compared with those on leuprolide in on-treatment and testosterone recovery periods of the HERO study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase 3 randomized controlled study was conducted in 934 patients with advanced PCa. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent 2:1 randomization and received relugolix 120 mg orally once daily or leuprolide 3-mo injections for 48 wk. Testosterone recovery was evaluated in a patient subset. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: HRQOL evaluations were based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Prostate Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) during treatment and testosterone recovery phases. In a post hoc analysis, predictors of HRQOL deterioration were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: No statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in changes from baseline to the end of treatment in either the EORTC QLQ-C30 or the EORTC QLQ-PR25 instrument. During the testosterone recovery phase, hormonal treatment-related symptoms scores were lower for relugolix than for leuprolide, suggesting a lower burden of hormone-related symptoms associated with a treatment that has more rapid testosterone recovery after treatment cessation. Limitations include low patient numbers in the testosterone recovery group. CONCLUSIONS: Oral relugolix is a therapeutic option with similar patient-reported HRQOL to leuprolide, providing an oral option for androgen deprivation therapy associated with a more rapid testosterone reduction. PATIENT SUMMARY: In men with advanced prostate cancer, relugolix had similar health-related quality of life to leuprolide.

Tetraphenylethylene-Based Photoluminescent Self-Assembled Nanoparticles: Preparation and Biological Evaluation.

The conjugation of tetraphenylethylene (TPE) with podophyllotoxin, N-desacetylthiocolchicine, and cabazitaxel through a sebacic acid linker led to the formation of fluorescent nanoparticles. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) and photoluminescence spectroscopy were used for the identification and characterization of the fluorescent nanoparticles. The biological evaluation was determined in three human ovarian (KURAMOCHI, OVCAR3, OVSAHO) and three human breast (MCF7, SKBR 3, and MDA-MB231) cancer cell lines. In the case of cabazitaxel, the nanoparticles maintained the activity of the parent drug, at the low nanomolar range, while exhibiting high blue fluorescence. The internalization of the fluorescent NPs into cells was detected using immunofluorescence assay.

Relugolix vs. Leuprolide Effects on Castration Resistance-Free Survival from the Phase 3 HERO Study in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Background: Relugolix is an oral GnRH receptor antagonist approved for men with advanced prostate cancer. Relugolix treatment has demonstrated an ability to lower testosterone to sustained castration levels in the phase 4 HERO study. Herein, we describe the results of a secondary endpoint of castration resistance-free survival (CRFS) during 48 weeks of treatment and profile patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Methods: Subjects were 2:1 randomized to either relugolix 120 mg orally once daily (after a single 360 mg loading dose) or 3-monthly injections of leuprolide for 48 weeks. CRFS, defined as the time from the date of first dose to the date of confirmed prostate-specific antigen progression while castrated or death due to any reason was conducted in the metastatic disease population and the overall modified intention-to-treat (mITT) populations. Results: The CRFS analysis (mITT population) included 1074 men (relugolix: n = 717; leuprolide: n = 357) with advanced prostate cancer as well as 434 men (relugolix: n = 290; leuprolide: n = 144) with metastatic prostate cancer. In the metastatic disease populations, CRFS rates were 74.3% (95% CI: 68.6%, 79.2%) and 75.3% (95% CI: 66.7%, 81.9%) in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively (hazard ratio: 1.03 [0.68, 1.57]; p = 0.84) at week 48. Results in the overall mITT population were similar to the metastatic population. No new safety findings were identified. Conclusions: In men with metastatic disease or in the overall population of the HERO study, CRFS assessed during the 48-week treatment with relugolix was not significantly different than standard-of-care leuprolide. Relugolix had similar efficacy for men with/without CRFS progression events.

ESTRO ACROP consensus recommendation on the target volume definition for radiation therapy of macroscopic prostate cancer recurrences after radical prostatectomy.

Background: The European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) panel on prostate bed delineation reflected on macroscopic local recurrences in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT), a challenging situation without standardized approach, and decided to propose a consensus recommendation on target volume selection and definition. Methods: An ESTRO ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 12 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in two separate clinically relevant scenarios: a local recurrence at the seminal vesicle bed and one apically at the level of the anastomosis. Both recurrences were prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-avid and had an anatomical correlate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: Contouring of the two cases confirmed considerable variation among the panelists. Finally, however, a consensus recommendation could be agreed upon. Firstly, it was proposed to always delineate the entire prostate bed as clinical target volume and not the local recurrence alone. The panel judged the risk of further microscopic disease outside of the visible recurrence too high to safely exclude the rest of the prostate bed from the CTV. A focused, "stereotactic" approach should be reserved for re-irradiation after previous PORT. Secondly, the option of a focal boost on the recurrence was discussed. Conclusion: Radiation oncologists are increasingly confronted with macroscopic local recurrences visible on imaging in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy. It was recommended to always delineate and irradiate the entire prostate bed, and not the local recurrence alone, whatever the exact location of that recurrence. Secondly, specific dose-escalation on the macroscopic recurrence should only be considered if an anatomic correlate is visible. Such a focal boost is probably feasible, provided that OAR constraints are prioritized. Possible dose is also dependent on the location of the recurrence. Its potential benefit should urgently be investigated in prospective clinical trials.

The importance of anchoring ligands of binuclear sensitizers on electron transfer processes and photovoltaic action in dye-sensitized solar cells.

The relatively low photon-to-current conversion efficiency of dye-sensitized solar cells is their major drawback limiting widespread application. Light harvesting, followed by a series of electron transfer processes, is the critical step in photocurrent generation. An in-depth understanding and fine optimization of those processes are crucial to enhance cell performance. In this work, we synthesize two new bi-ruthenium sensitizers with extended anchoring ligands to gain insight into underlying processes determining photovoltaic action mechanisms. The structure of the compounds has been confirmed, and their properties have been thoroughly examined by various techniques such as NMR, IR, elemental analysis UV-Vis, cyclic voltammetry, and electroabsorption. The experimental characterization has been supported and developed via extensive quantum-chemical calculations, giving a broad view of the presented molecules' properties. Finally, the DSSC devices have been assembled utilizing obtained dyes. The photovoltaic and EIS measurements, combined with performed calculations and fundamental dyes characterization, unraveled an intramolecular electron transfer as an initial step of the electron injection process at the dye/semiconductor interface. The overall photovoltaic action mechanism has been discussed. Our study demonstrates the significance of the anchoring group architecture in the molecular design of new sensitizers for DSSC applications.

Visible Light-Promoted ß-Functionalization of Carbonyl Compounds in the Presence of Organic Dyes.

Herein, we investigate the use of organic photocatalysts in the visible light-promoted ß-functionalization of carbonyl compounds. In particular, we studied the addition of aliphatic aldehydes to α,ß-unsaturated compounds (ß-Michael addition), and the reaction of cyclic ketones with either ketones (ß-aldol condensation) or imines (ß-Mannich reaction). Among the dyes tested, donor-acceptor cyanoarenes gave the best results, promoting the transformations of interest in moderate to good yields. The reaction scope was investigated on substrates with different steric and electronic properties. Fluorescence quenching analysis (Stern-Volmer experiments) led us to propose for these reactions a reductive quenching mechanism involving a transient 5πe- activation mode.

ESTRO ACROP guideline on prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Purpose/Objective: Radiotherapy to the prostate bed is a potentially curative salvage option after radical prostatectomy. Although prostate bed contouring guidelines are available in the literature, important variabilities exist. The objective of this work is to provide a contemporary consensus guideline for prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy. Methods: An ESTRO-ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 11 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in 3 separate clinically relevant scenarios: adjuvant radiation, salvage radiation with PSA progression, and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA. These cases focused on the presence of positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension, and seminal vesicles involvement. None of the cases had radiographic evidence of local recurrence on imaging. A single computed tomography (CT) dataset was shared via FALCON platform and contours were performed using EduCaseTM software. Contours were analyzed qualitatively using heatmaps which provided a visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively analyzed using Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficients. Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed. Results: The mean CTV for the adjuvant case was 76 cc (SD = 26.6), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 51.80 cc (SD = 22.7), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 57.63 cc (SD = 25.2). Compared to the median, the mean Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficient for the adjuvant case was 0.60 (SD 0.10), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 0.58 (SD = 0.12), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 0.60 (SD = 0.11). A heatmap for each clinical scenario was generated. The group agreed to proceed with a uniform recommendation for all cases, independent of the radiotherapy timing. Several controversial areas of the prostate bed CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences where the panel achieved consensus on the prostate bed CTV to be used as a novel guideline for postoperative prostate cancer radiotherapy. Conclusion: Variability was observed in a group formed by experienced genitourinary radiation oncologists and a radiologist. A single contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in prostate bed delineation, independent of the indication.There is important variability in existing contouring guidelines for postoperative prostate bed (PB) radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy. This work aimed at providing a contemporary consensus guideline for PB delineation. An ESTRO ACROP consensus panel including radiation oncologists and a radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, delineated the PB CTV in 3 scenarios: adjuvant RT, salvage RT with PSA progression, and salvage RT with persistently elevated PSA. None of the cases had evidence of local recurrence. Contours were analysed qualitatively using heatmaps for visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively using Sorensen-Dice coefficient. Case-specific questionnaires were also discussed via e-mails and videoconferences for consensus. Several controversial areas of the PB CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences. Finally, a contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in PB delineation, independent of the indication.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. TWITTER SUMMARY: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

Impact of Concomitant Prostate Cancer Medications on Efficacy and Safety of Relugolix Versus Leuprolide in Men With Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: To characterize the impact of concomitant prostate cancer treatments with the use of relugolix, the oral GnRH receptor antagonist, in advanced prostate cancer, a subgroup and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses of the HERO study was undertaken. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 934 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive relugolix 120 mg orally once daily or leuprolide injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks. In the setting of rising PSA, patients could receive enzalutamide or docetaxel 2 months after study initiation. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (<50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety parameters. Subgroups analyzed included patients with or without concomitant enzalutamide or docetaxel. A sensitivity analysis of the primary endpoint was performed excluding patients who received concomitant therapies that may affect testosterone. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses of 20 participants in the relugolix treatment group assessed the net effect of enzalutamide on exposure to relugolix. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients (13.4%) took concomitant therapies that could impact testosterone levels. Enzalutamide (n = 23) was the most frequently used therapy in the relugolix (2.7%) and leuprolide groups (1.9%). Docetaxel (n = 13) was used by 1.3% and 1.6% of patients in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively. All other relevant concomitant therapy were used in <1% of population. Sensitivity analysis showed concomitant therapy did not impact the testosterone levels. Castration rates were similar with and without concomitant use of enzalutamide or docetaxel. No clinically relevant differences in adverse events were observed between subgroups in either treatment group. No differences in relugolix Ctrough or testosterone concentrations were observed, suggesting that any induction or inhibition properties of enzalutamide on relugolix metabolism result in a neutral net effect on relugolix exposure and testosterone suppression. CONCLUSION: Treatment with relugolix was associated with similar efficacy and safety profiles with and without concomitant enzalutamide or docetaxel. Standard-of-care use of relugolix in combination with these agents is supported by these data.

Sparkling Organic Phosphorescence from Fluorinated Tetrathia[7]helicenes: Synthesis and Photophysical, Electrochemical and Computational Studies.

Structure-property correlations in the thiahelicene family are often not trivial beacuse most of the functional groups present on the helical scaffold modify the conjugation size of the π-system. Selecting fluorine-containing groups to provide strong inductive effects without interacting with low-lying orbitals of the system could be the way to overcome the issue. Here we report a study on three fluorine-functionalized tetrathia[7]helicenes, highlighting interesting correlations between the position of the functional groups and the conjugated skeleton properties. Helicenes Heli-F2 and Heli-CF-F2 were prepared by photoinduced isomerization-electrocyclization (the Mallory photocyclization) of the corresponding fluorinated benzodithienyl-ethenes Alk-F2 and Alk-CF-F2, which were prepared in high yields through stereo-conservative Stille reaction. Notably these helicenes were found to display green phosphorescence around 530-550 nm, and the studies suggest an efficient spin-orbit coupling mechanism in these high-energy triplet nonplanar conjugated molecules. Both helicenes and their precursors were thoroughly characterized by means of optical and electrochemical measurements, while DFT calculations enable a rationale on their structure-property correlations to be defined.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for kidney cancer. Where do we stand?

At present, surgery is still the gold standard for the local treatment of renal cancer. Nonetheless, in several clinical scenarios, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) also known as stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is emerging as a highly effective ablative technique in fragile patients and those with significant comorbidities, as well as in cases where percutaneous therapy (cryoablation or radiofrequency) is not viable. However, considering the intrinsic radioresistance of renal tumors, the optimal treatment schemes have not been established. In oligometastatic patients, it has been reported that the control of the oligometastases can be a potentially curable approach. Being a technique than can be administered exclusively or in combination with systemic therapy, treatment individualization based on patient characteristics is key. Another scenario under investigation is oligoprogression, where SBRT offers the possibility of delaying further lines of systemic therapy by eliminating subclones of resistant tumor with ablative doses, with the additional opportunity of stimulating the immune system (immunomodulatory role). In this review, we have conducted an analysis of recently published studies that test the role of this technique in different clinical scenarios of this disease. We have found promising results that make SBRT a potent therapeutic approach with low toxicity. We also comment on ongoing studies that will generate the necessary evidence needed for the implementation of this technique in our daily clinical practice.

Outcomes following brachytherapy boost for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: A retrospective bicenter study by the SFRO brachytherapy group.

INTRODUCTION: Radiotherapy dose escalation improves biochemical control in intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy boost was shown to further improve biochemical control compared to radiotherapy alone in three randomized trials. The SFRO brachytherapy group sought to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of BT-boost for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer in real life, and to determine prognostic factors for efficacy and toxicity. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted, including all patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer treated with a combination of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and high dose-rate brachytherapy boost (HDR-BB), from 2006 until December 2019 at two centers. Patient characteristics, initial disease, treatment and follow-up were collected. RESULTS: 709 patients from two centers were analyzed given a short follow-up in the other centers. Out of those, 277 were intermediate risk (170 favorable and 107 unfavorable) and 432 were high risk. The median EBRT and HDR-BB doses were 46 Gy (35-50) and 14 Gy (10-20). After a median follow-up of 62 months, biochemical control at 5 years was 87.5 % for the overall population, 91 % and 85 % for intermediate- and high-risk cancers, respectively. At 5 years, biochemical and clinical relapse-free survival, metastasis-free survival and local control rates were 83 %, 90 % and 97 % respectively. 5-years overall survival was 94 %. Late grade 2 or higher GU or GI toxicity was found in 36 patients (5 %) and 9 patients (1.3 %). CONCLUSION: This bicenter analysis shows the efficacy and tolerability of HDR-BB as a complement to external radiotherapy. Further improvements such as combination with new hormonal agents or new brachytherapy-radiotherapy fractionation regimens are warranted to improve further the outcomes and therapeutic ratio.

The Changing Face of cN0M0 Prostate Cancer Being Found With pN+ After Surgery in the Contemporary Era: Results of an International European Survey on Disease Management.

INTRODUCTION: The urological community's opinion over the management of men being found with pathologically positive nodes (pN+) following radical prostatectomy (RP) performed with curative intent after preoperative negative conventional staging (cN0M0) has never been assessed. This remains crucial, especially considering the advent of novel imaging modalities. Our aim was to investigate the current opinion on management of pN+ cN0M0 prostate cancer (PCa) in the European urological community. METHODS: Following validation, a 31-item survey, complying with the Cherries checklist, was distributed using a web link from December 2021 to April 2022 to 10 urological societies mailing list. Social media (Twitter, Facebook) were also used. RESULTS: We received 253 replies. The majority were Urologists (96.8%), younger than 60 (90.5%); 5.2% did not have access to PET-scans; 78.9% believed pN+ is a multifaceted category; 10-years CSS was marked as 71 to 95% by 17.5%. Gold standard management was stated not being ADT by 80.8% and being RT±ADT by 52.3%. Early sRT±ADT was considered an option vs. aRT±ADT by 72.4%. In case of BCR 71% would perform and decide management based on PSMA-PET whilst 3.7% would not perform PSMA-PET. pN+ management is still unclear for 77.1%. On multivariate analysis PSMA-PET availability related to a lower and higher likelihood of considering aRT±ADT as standard and of considering early salvage versus aRT respectively (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The Urological community has an acceptable awareness of pN+ disease and management, although it may overestimate disease aggressiveness. The majority consider pN+ PCa as a multifaceted category and rely on a risk-adapted approach. Expectant compared to immediate upfront management and new imaging modalities are increasingly considered.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.