A Comparison of Globally Applied Prognostic Risk Groups and the Prevalence of Metastatic Disease on Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Various risk classification systems (RCSs) are used globally to stratify newly diagnosed patients with prostate cancer (PCa) into prognostic groups. OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive value of different prognostic subgroups (low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease) within the RCSs for detecting metastatic disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for primary staging, and to assess whether further subdivision of subgroups would be beneficial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with newly diagnosed PCa, in whom PSMA-PET/CT was performed between 2017 and 2022, were studied retrospectively. Patients were stratified into risk groups based on four RCSs: European Association of Urology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG), and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The prevalence of metastatic disease on PSMA-PET/CT was compared among the subgroups within the four RCSs. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 2630 men with newly diagnosed PCa were studied. Any metastatic disease was observed in 35% (931/2630) of patients. Among patients classified as having intermediate- and high-risk disease, the prevalence of metastases ranged from approximately 12% to 46%. Two RCSs further subdivided these groups. According to the NCCN, metastatic disease was observed in 5.8%, 13%, 22%, and 62% for favorable intermediate-, unfavorable intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk PCa, respectively. Regarding the CPG, these values were 6.9%, 13%, 21%, and 60% for the corresponding risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study underlines the importance of nuanced risk stratification, recommending the further subdivision of intermediate- and high-risk disease given the notable variation in the prevalence of metastatic disease. PSMA-PET/CT for primary staging should be reserved for patients with unfavorable intermediate- or higher-risk disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of various risk classification systems in patients with prostate cancer helps identify those at a higher risk of having metastatic disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary staging.

Using prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography to guide prostate biopsies and stage men at high-risk of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a diagnostic pathway in which prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is used as a single imaging modality is feasible to guide targeted biopsy and to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naïve men at high-risk of disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 60 men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 20-50 ng/mL underwent 18 F-PSMA(DCFPyL)-PET/CT prior to prostate biopsies in this prospective, non-randomised cohort study. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was not performed. Using a 12-segment mapping model of the prostate, PSMA-guided targeted biopsy was performed along with systematic biopsies. The detection rate of PCa and csPCa was assessed for combined systematic and targeted biopsy, and for targeted biopsy only. csPCa was defined as a prostate biopsy with an International Society of Uropathology (ISUP) Grade Group ≥2. RESULTS: Lesions suspicious for PCa in the prostate gland were observed on all PSMA-PET/CTs. A total of 27/60 men (45%) already had metastatic disease on staging 18 F-PSMA(DCFPyL)-PET/CT. Combined PSMA-guided targeted and systematic biopsies detected PCa in 56/60 (93.3%) patients, with 52 of them (92.9%) having csPCa. PSMA-guided targeted biopsy, if performed as a single biopsy modality, identified PCa in 52/60 men (86.7%) and in 27/27 men (100%) men with metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PSMA-driven single imaging modality pathway in biopsy-naïve men at high-risk of PCa, a substantial number of diagnostic MRI scans could be avoided while at the same time obtaining adequate targeting, staging, and detection of csPCa.

Cancer detection and complications of transperineal prostate biopsy with antibiotics when indicated.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate, including clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), in a large cohort of patients who underwent transperineal ultrasonography-guided systematic prostate biopsy (TPB-US) using a probe-mounted transperineal access system, with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) cognitive fusion in case of a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System grade 3-5 lesion, under local anaesthesia in an outpatient setting. Additionally, to compare the incidence of procedure-related complications with a cohort of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasonography-guided (TRB-US) and transrectal MRI-guided biopsies (TRB-MRI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an observational cohort study in men who underwent TPB-US prostate biopsy in a large teaching hospital. For each participant, prostate-specific antigen level, clinical tumour stage, prostate volume, MRI parameters, number of (targeted) prostate biopsies, biopsy International Society of Uropathology (ISUP) grade and procedure-related complications were assessed. csPCa was defined as ISUP grade ≥2. Antibiotic prophylaxis was only given in those with an increased risk of urinary tract infection. RESULTS: A total of 1288 TPB-US procedures were evaluated. The overall detection rate for PCa in biopsy-naive patients was 73%, and for csPCa it was 63%. The incidence of hospitalization was 1% in TPB-US (13/1288), compared to 4% in TRB-US (8/214) and 3% in TRB-MRI (7/219; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary combined systematic and target TPB-US with MRI cognitive fusion is easy to perform in an outpatient setting, with a high detection rate of csPCa and a low incidence of procedure-related complications.

Effect on Survival of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Alone Compared to Androgen Deprivation Therapy Combined with Concurrent Radiation Therapy to the Prostate in Patients with Primary Bone Metastatic Prostate Cancer in a Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial: Data from the HORRAD Trial.

BACKGROUND: The cornerstone of standard treatment for patients with primary bone metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Retrospective studies suggest a survival benefit for treatment of the primary prostatic tumour in mPCa, but to date, no randomised-controlled-trials (RCTs) have been published addressing this issue. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether overall survival is prolonged by adding local treatment of the primary prostatic tumour with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to ADT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The HORRAD trial is a multicentre RCT recruiting 432 patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20ng/ml and primary bone mPCa on bone scan between 2004 and 2014. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised to either ADT with EBRT (radiotherapy group) or ADT alone (control group). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoint was time to PSA progression. Crude and adjusted analyses were applied to evaluate treatment effect. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Median PSA level was 142ng/ml and 67% of patients had more than five osseous metastases. Median follow up was 47 mo. Median overall survival was 45 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 40.4-49.6) in the radiotherapy group and 43 mo (95% CI: 32.6-53.4) in the control group (p=0.4). No significant difference was found in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.70-1.14; p=0.4). Median time to PSA progression in the radiotherapy group was 15 mo (95% CI: 11.8-18.2), compared with 12 mo (95% CI: 10.6-13.4) in the control group. The crude HR (0.78; 95% CI: 0.63-0.97) was statistically significant (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The current RCT comparing ADT to ADT with EBRT to the prostate in patients with primary bone mPCa did not show a significant difference in overall survival, although the CI cannot exclude a substantial survival benefit. Further research is needed to confirm our findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study investigated the effect of adding radiation therapy to the prostate to hormonal therapy in prostate cancer patients with metastasis to the bone at diagnosis. In our patient group, additional radiotherapy did not improve overall survival. Further research is needed to confirm our findings. TWITTER SUMMARY: Adding radiotherapy to the prostate in patients with bone metastatic prostate cancer does not improve overall survival.

The survival paradox of elderly patients after major liver resections.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess the outcome of liver resections in the elderly in a matched control analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a prospective single center database of 628 patients, 132 patients were aged 60 years or over and underwent a primary major liver resection. Of these patients, 93 could be matched one-to-one with a control patient, aged less than 60 years, with the same diagnosis and the same type of liver resection. The mean age difference was 16.7 years. RESULTS: Patients over 60 years of age had a significantly higher American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade. All other demographics and operative characteristics were not different. In-hospital mortality and morbidity were higher in the patients over 60 years of age (11% versus 2%, p = 0.017 and 47% versus 31%, p = 0.024). One-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates in the patients over 60 years of age were 81%, 58%, and 42%, respectively, compared to 90%, 59%, and 42% in the control patients (p = 0.558). Unified model Cox regression analysis showed that resection margin status (hazard ratio 2.51) and ASA grade (hazard ratio 2.26), and not age, were determining factors for survival. CONCLUSION: This finding underlines the important fact that in patient selection for major liver resections, ASA grade is more important than patient age.