Socioeconomic inequality in prostate cancer diagnostics, primary treatment, rehabilitation, and mortality in Sweden.

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.

Accuracy of gross tumour volume delineation with [68Ga]-PSMA-PET compared to histopathology for high-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The delineation of intraprostatic lesions is vital for correct delivery of focal radiotherapy boost in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Errors in the delineation could translate into reduced tumour control and potentially increase the side effects. The purpose of this study is to compare PET-based delineation methods with histopathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 15 patients with confirmed high-risk PC intended for prostatectomy. [68Ga]-PSMA-PET/MR was performed prior to surgery. Prostate lesions identified in histopathology were transferred to the in vivo [68Ga]-PSMA-PET/MR coordinate system. Four radiation oncologists manually delineated intraprostatic lesions based on PET data. Various semi-automatic segmentation methods were employed, including absolute and relative thresholds, adaptive threshold, and multi-level Otsu threshold. RESULTS: The gross tumour volumes (GTVs) delineated by the oncologists showed a moderate level of interobserver agreement with Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.68. In comparison with histopathology, manual delineations exhibited the highest median DSC and the lowest false discovery rate (FDR) among all approaches. Among semi-automatic approaches, GTVs generated using standardized uptake value (SUV) thresholds above 4 (SUV > 4) demonstrated the highest median DSC (0.41), with 0.51 median lesion coverage ratio, FDR of 0.66 and the 95th percentile of the Hausdorff distance (HD95%) of 8.22 mm. INTERPRETATION: Manual delineations showed a moderate level of interobserver agreement. Compared to histopathology, manual delineations and SUV > 4 exhibited the highest DSC and the lowest HD95% values. The methods that resulted in a high lesion coverage were associated with a large overestimation of the size of the lesions.

Ki67 and prostate specific antigen are prognostic in metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: For metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with escalation therapy including docetaxel and/or androgen targeting drugs is the standard therapy. However, de-escalation is preferable to avoid unnecessary side effects, especially from docetaxel, but markers to identify these patients are lacking. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the potential of PSA and Ki67 immunoreactive scores as prognostic and treatment-predictive markers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prostate biopsies from 92 patients with metastatic hormone naïve PC (PSA > 80 ng/mL or clinical metastases) were immunohistochemically evaluated for PSA and Ki67. Gene expression analysis was performed with Clariom D microarrays to identify the phenotypic profile associated with the immunohistochemistry scores of biopsies. Cox regression analysis for progression free survival after ADT adjustment for age, ISUP, and serum PSA and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess prognostic values of Ki67, PSA, and the Ki67/PSA ratio. RESULTS: The immunohistochemical score for PSA was the strongest prognostic factor for progression-free and overall survival after ADT. Consequently, the ratio between Ki67 and PSA displayed a stronger prognostic value than Ki67 itself. Further, mRNA expression data analysis showed an association between high Ki67/PSA ratio, cell-cycle regulation, and DNA damage repair. In an exploratory sub-analysis of 12 patients treated with early docetaxel as addition to ADT and matched controls, a high Ki67/PSA ratio showed potential to identify those who benefit from docetaxel. CONCLUSION: PSA and Ki67 immunoreactive scores are prognostic in the metastatic hormone-sensitive setting, with PSA being superior. The combination of Ki67 and PSA did not give additional prognostic value. The results suggest immunohistochemical scoring of PSA to have potential to improve identification of patients responding well to ADT alone.

Risk of severe late toxicity after radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy - a nationwide study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the long-term risks of severe late toxicities for radiation therapy (RT) following radical prostatectomy (RP) in an unselected nationwide cohort, as severe side-effects are rare but may occur years later. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised all men undergoing RP between 1997 and 2016 in the Prostate Cancer database Sweden (PCBaSe) (n = 40 962). By (1:2) matching, two cohorts were created: 2789 men exposed to postoperative RT and 5578 unexposed men with comparable age, comorbidities, and year of surgery. Cumulative incidences and rate ratios were calculated for the following outcomes: symptoms and interventions of the urinary or intestinal tract demanding inpatient care, secondary malignancies, and non-prostate cancer mortality. RESULTS: The largest differences were seen for late toxicities affecting the urinary tract. The 10-year cumulative incidences among those exposed to postoperative RT vs the RP-only group were: 17.8% vs 10.5% for procedures of the urinary tract (difference 7.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.4 to 10.3; relative risk [RR] 1.74, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.05); 6.0% vs 1.2% for haematuria (difference 4.8%, 95% CI 3.1 to 6.5; RR 6.50, 95% CI 4.31 to 10.10); and 2.4% vs 1.1% for bladder cancer (difference 1.4%, 95% CI 0.4 to 2.3; RR 2.71, 95% CI 1.72 to 4.33). The groups were similar regarding intestinal toxicity, other secondary malignancies, and non-prostate cancer mortality. Adjustments for preoperative tumour risk factors did not importantly affect the rate ratios. CONCLUSION: Severe late toxicity after postoperative RT following RP predominately affects the bladder and can appear many years after RT.

Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYPO-RT-PC): patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The HYPO-RT-PC trial compared conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with localised prostate cancer. Ultra-hypofractionation was non-inferior to conventional fractionation regarding 5-year failure-free survival and toxicity. We aimed to assess whether patient-reported quality of life (QOL) differs between conventional fractionation and ultra-hypofractionation up to 6 years after treatment in the HYPO-RT-PC trial. METHODS: HYPO-RT-PC is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 12 centres (seven university hospitals and five county hospitals) in Sweden and Denmark. Inclusion criteria were histologically verified intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer (defined as T1c-T3a with one or two of the following risk factors: stage T3a; Gleason score ≥7; and prostate-specific antigen 10-20 ng/mL with no evidence of lymph node involvement or distant metastases), age up to 75 years, and WHO performance status 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to conventional fractionation (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks) or ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) via a minimisation algorithm with stratification by trial centre, T-stage, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen. QOL was measured using the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at baseline, the end of radiotherapy, months 3, 6, 12, and 24 after radiotherapy, every other year thereafter up to 10 years, and at 15 years. The primary endpoint (failure-free survival) has been reported elsewhere. Here we report QOL, a secondary endpoint analysed in the per-protocol population, up to 6 years after radiotherapy. The HYPO-RT-PC trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN45905321. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were enrolled and 1180 were randomly assigned (conventional fractionation n=591, ultra-hypofractionation n=589); 1165 patients (conventional fractionation n=582, ultra-hypofractionation n=583) were included in this QOL analysis. 158 (71%) of 223 patients in the conventional fractionation group and 146 (66%) of 220 in the ultra-hypofractionation group completed questionnaires at 6 years. The median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 25-72). In seven of ten bowel symptoms or problems the proportion of patients with clinically relevant deteriorations at the end of radiotherapy was significantly higher in the ultra-hypofractionation group than in the conventional fractionation group (stool frequency [p<0·0001], rush to toilet [p=0·0013], flatulence [p=0·0013], bowel cramp [p<0·0001], mucus [p=0·0014], blood in stool [p<0·0001], and limitation in daily activity [p=0·0014]). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with clinically relevant acute urinary symptoms or problems (total 14 items) and sexual functioning between the two treatment groups at end of radiotherapy. Thereafter, there were no clinically relevant differences in urinary, bowel, or sexual functioning between the groups. At the 6-year follow-up there was no difference in the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between the groups for overall urinary bother (43 [33%] of 132 for conventional fractionation vs 33 [28%] of 120 for ultra-hypofractionation; mean difference 5·1% [95% CI -4·4 to 14·6]; p=0·38), overall bowel bother (43 [33%] of 129 vs 34 [28%] of 123; 5·7% [-3·8 to 15·2]; p=0·33), overall sexual bother (75 [60%] of 126 vs 59 [50%] of 117; 9·1% [-1·4 to 19·6]; p=0·15), or global health/QOL (56 [42%] of 134 vs 46 [37%] of 125; 5·0% [-5·0 to 15·0]; p=0·41). INTERPRETATION: Although acute toxicity was higher for ultra-hypofractionation than conventional fractionation, this long-term patient-reported QOL analysis shows that ultra-hypofractionation was as well tolerated as conventional fractionation up to 6 years after completion of treatment. These findings support the use of ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer. FUNDING: The Nordic Cancer Union, the Swedish Cancer Society, and the Swedish Research Council.

Deep learning-based classification and structure name standardization for organ at risk and target delineations in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy (RT) datasets can suffer from variations in annotation of organ at risk (OAR) and target structures. Annotation standards exist, but their description for prostate targets is limited. This restricts the use of such data for supervised machine learning purposes as it requires properly annotated data. The aim of this work was to develop a modality independent deep learning (DL) model for automatic classification and annotation of prostate RT DICOM structures. Delineated prostate organs at risk (OAR), support- and target structures (gross tumor volume [GTV]/clinical target volume [CTV]/planning target volume [PTV]), along with or without separate vesicles and/or lymph nodes, were extracted as binary masks from 1854 patients. An image modality independent 2D InceptionResNetV2 classification network was trained with varying amounts of training data using four image input channels. Channel 1-3 consisted of orthogonal 2D projections from each individual binary structure. The fourth channel contained a summation of the other available binary structure masks. Structure classification performance was assessed in independent CT (n = 200 pat) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n = 40 pat) test datasets and an external CT (n = 99 pat) dataset from another clinic. A weighted classification accuracy of 99.4% was achieved during training. The unweighted classification accuracy and the weighted average F1 score among different structures in the CT test dataset were 98.8% and 98.4% and 98.6% and 98.5% for the MRI test dataset, respectively. The external CT dataset yielded the corresponding results 98.4% and 98.7% when analyzed for trained structures only, and results from the full dataset yielded 79.6% and 75.2%. Most misclassifications in the external CT dataset occurred due to multiple CTVs and PTVs being fused together, which was not included in the training data. Our proposed DL-based method for automated renaming and standardization of prostate radiotherapy annotations shows great potential. Clinic specific contouring standards however need to be represented in the training data for successful use. Source code is available at https://github.com/jamtheim/DicomRTStructRenamerPublic.

Marked response to cabazitaxel in prostate cancer xenografts expressing androgen receptor variant 7 and reversion of acquired resistance by anti-androgens.

BACKGROUND: Taxane treatment may be a suitable therapeutic option for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and high expression of constitutively active androgen receptor variants (AR-Vs). The aim of the study was to compare the effects of cabazitaxel and androgen deprivation treatments in a prostate tumor xenograft model expressing high levels of constitutively active AR-V7. Furthermore, mechanisms behind acquired cabazitaxel resistance were explored. METHODS: Mice were subcutaneously inoculated with 22Rv1 cells and treated with surgical castration (n = 7), abiraterone (n = 9), cabazitaxel (n = 6), castration plus abiraterone (n = 8), castration plus cabazitaxel (n = 11), or vehicle and/or sham operation (n = 23). Tumor growth was followed for about 2 months or to a volume of approximately 1000 mm3 . Two cabazitaxel resistant cell lines; 22Rv1-CabR1 and 22Rv1-CabR2, were established from xenografts relapsing during cabazitaxel treatment. Differential gene expression between the cabazitaxel resistant and control 22Rv1 cells was examined by whole-genome expression array analysis followed by immunoblotting, immunohistochemistry, and functional pathway analysis. RESULTS: Abiraterone treatment alone or in combination with surgical castration had no major effect on 22Rv1 tumor growth, while cabazitaxel significantly delayed and in some cases totally abolished 22Rv1 tumor growth on its own and in combination with surgical castration. The cabazitaxel resistant cell lines; 22Rv1-CabR1 and 22Rv1-CabR2, both showed upregulation of the ATP-binding cassette sub-family B member 1 (ABCB1) efflux pump. Treatment with ABCB1 inhibitor elacridar completely restored susceptibility to cabazitaxel, while treatment with AR-antagonists bicalutamide and enzalutamide partly restored susceptibility to cabazitaxel in both cell lines. The cholesterol biosynthesis pathway was induced in the 22Rv1-CabR2 cell line, which was confirmed by reduced sensitivity to simvastatin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Cabazitaxel efficiently inhibits prostate cancer growth despite the high expression of constitutively active AR-V7. Acquired cabazitaxel resistance involving overexpression of efflux transporter ABCB1 can be reverted by bicalutamide or enzalutamide treatment, indicating the great clinical potential for combined treatment with cabazitaxel and anti-androgens.

Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the HYPO-RT-PC randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer has gained increased attention due to its proposed high radiation-fraction sensitivity. Recent reports from studies comparing moderately hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy support the clinical use of moderate hypofractionation. To date, there are no published randomised studies on ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy. Here, we report the outcomes of the Scandinavian HYPO-RT-PC phase 3 trial with the aim to show non-inferiority of ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 non-inferiority trial done in 12 centres in Sweden and Denmark, we recruited men up to 75 years of age with intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer and a WHO performance status between 0 and 2. Patients were randomly assigned to ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) or conventional fractionated radiotherapy (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks). No androgen deprivation therapy was allowed. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure, analysed in the per-protocol population. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4% at 5 years, corresponding to a critical hazard ratio (HR) limit of 1·338. Physician-recorded toxicity was measured according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) morbidity scale and patient-reported outcome measurements with the Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) questionnaire. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN45905321. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were randomly assigned to conventional fractionation (n=602) or ultra-hypofractionation (n=598), of whom 1180 (591 conventional fractionation and 589 ultra-hypofractionation) constituted the per-protocol population. 1054 (89%) participants were intermediate risk and 126 (11%) were high risk. Median follow-up time was 5·0 years (IQR 3·1-7·0). The estimated failure-free survival at 5 years was 84% (95% CI 80-87) in both treatment groups, with an adjusted HR of 1·002 (95% CI 0·758-1·325; log-rank p=0·99). There was weak evidence of an increased frequency of acute physician-reported RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group at end of radiotherapy (158 [28%] of 569 patients vs 132 [23%] of 578 patients; p=0·057). There were no significant differences in grade 2 or worse urinary or bowel late toxicity between the two treatment groups at any point after radiotherapy, except for an increase in urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared to the conventional fractionation group at 1-year follow-up (32 [6%] of 528 patients vs 13 [2%] of 529 patients; (p=0·0037). We observed no differences between groups in frequencies at 5 years of RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity (11 [5%] of 243 patients for the ultra-hypofractionation group vs 12 [5%] of 249 for the conventional fractionation group; p=1·00) and bowel toxicity (three [1%] of 244 patients vs nine [4%] of 249 patients; p=0·14). Patient-reported outcomes revealed significantly higher levels of acute urinary and bowel symptoms in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared with the conventional fractionation group but no significant increases in late symptoms were found, except for increased urinary symptoms at 1-year follow-up, consistent with the physician-evaluated toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy is non-inferior to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high risk prostate cancer regarding failure-free survival. Early side-effects are more pronounced with ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation whereas late toxicity is similar in both treatment groups. The results support the use of ultra-hypofractionation for radiotherapy of prostate cancer. FUNDING: The Nordic Cancer Union, the Swedish Cancer Society, and the Swedish Research Council.

Re-treatment with radium-223: 2-year follow-up from an international, open-label, phase 1/2 study in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) is approved for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), symptomatic bone metastases, and no visceral disease using a dosing regimen of 6 injections (55 kBq/kg intravenously; 1 injection every 4 weeks). Early results from international, open-label, phase 1/2 study NCT01934790 showed that re-treatment with radium-223 was well tolerated with favorable effects on disease progression. Here we report safety and efficacy findings from 2-year follow-up of the radium-223 re-treatment study. METHODS: Patients with CRPC and bone metastases who completed 6 initial radium-223 injections with no disease progression in bone and later progressed were eligible for radium-223 re-treatment (up to 6 additional radium-223 injections), provided that hematologic parameters were adequate and chemotherapy had not been administered after the initial course of radium-223. Concomitant cytotoxic agents were not allowed during re-treatment but were allowed at the investigator's discretion during follow-up; other concomitant agents for prostate cancer (including abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide) were allowed at investigator's discretion. The primary objective was safety. Exploratory objectives included time to radiographic bone progression, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), time to total alkaline phosphatase (tALP), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, overall survival (OS), time to first symptomatic skeletal event (SSE), and SSE-free survival, all calculated from re-treatment start. Evaluation of safety and exploratory efficacy objectives included active 2-year follow-up. Safety results from active follow-up and updated efficacy are reported. RESULTS: Overall, 44 patients were re-treated with radium-223; 29 (66%) completed all 6 injections, and 34 (77%) entered 2-year active follow-up, during which no new safety concerns and no serious drug-related adverse events were noted. rPFS events (progression or death) occurred in 19 (43%) of 44 patients; median rPFS was 9.9 months. Radiographic bone progression occurred in 5 (11%) of 44 patients. Median OS was 24.4 months. Median times to first SSE and SSE-free survival were 16.7 and 12.8 months, respectively. Median time to tALP progression was not reached; median time to PSA progression was 2.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Re-treatment with radium-223 in this selected patient population was well tolerated, led to minimal hematologic toxicity, and provided continued disease control in bone at 2-year follow-up.

Platelets harbor prostate cancer biomarkers and the ability to predict therapeutic response to abiraterone in castration resistant patients.

BACKGROUND: Novel therapies for castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) have been introduced in the clinic with possibilities for individualized treatment plans. Best practice of those expensive drugs requires predictive biomarker monitoring. This study used circulating biomarker analysis to follow cancer-derived transcripts implicated in therapy resistance. METHOD: The isolated platelet population of blood samples and digital-PCR were used to identify selected biomarker transcripts in patients with CRPC prior chemo- or androgen synthesis inhibiting therapy. RESULTS: Fifty patients received either docetaxel (n = 24) or abiraterone (n = 26) therapy, with therapy response rates of 54% and 48%, respectively. Transcripts for the PC-associated biomarkers kallikrein-related peptidase-2 and -3 (KLK2, KLK3), folate hydrolase 1 (FOLH1), and neuropeptide-Y (NPY) were uniquely present within the platelet fraction of cancer patients and not detected in healthy controls (n = 15). In the abiraterone treated cohort, the biomarkers provided information on therapy outcome, demonstrating an association between detectable biomarkers and short progression free survival (PFS) (FOLH1, P < 0.01; KLK3, P < 0.05; and NPY, P < 0.05). Patients with biomarker-negative platelets had the best outcome, while FOLH1 (P < 0.05) and NPY (P = 0.05) biomarkers provided independent predictive information in a multivariate analysis regarding PFS. KLK2 (P < 0.01), KLK3 (P < 0.001), and FOLH1 (P < 0.05) biomarkers were associated with short overall survival (OS). Combining three biomarkers in a panel (KLK3, FOLH1, and NPY) made it possible to separate long-term responders from short-term responders with 87% sensitivity and 82% specificity. CONCLUSION: Analyzing tumor-derived biomarkers in platelets of CRPC patients enabled prediction of the outcome after abiraterone therapy with higher accuracy than baseline serum PSA or PSA response.

U-CAN: a prospective longitudinal collection of biomaterials and clinical information from adult cancer patients in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Progress in cancer biomarker discovery is dependent on access to high-quality biological materials and high-resolution clinical data from the same cases. To overcome current limitations, a systematic prospective longitudinal sampling of multidisciplinary clinical data, blood and tissue from cancer patients was therefore initiated in 2010 by Uppsala and Umeå Universities and involving their corresponding University Hospitals, which are referral centers for one third of the Swedish population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with cancer of selected types who are treated at one of the participating hospitals are eligible for inclusion. The healthcare-integrated sampling scheme encompasses clinical data, questionnaires, blood, fresh frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue specimens, diagnostic slides and radiology bioimaging data. RESULTS: In this ongoing effort, 12,265 patients with brain tumors, breast cancers, colorectal cancers, gynecological cancers, hematological malignancies, lung cancers, neuroendocrine tumors or prostate cancers have been included until the end of 2016. From the 6914 patients included during the first five years, 98% were sampled for blood at diagnosis, 83% had paraffin-embedded and 58% had fresh frozen tissues collected. For Uppsala County, 55% of all cancer patients were included in the cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Close collaboration between participating hospitals and universities enabled prospective, longitudinal biobanking of blood and tissues and collection of multidisciplinary clinical data from cancer patients in the U-CAN cohort. Here, we summarize the first five years of operations, present U-CAN as a highly valuable cohort that will contribute to enhanced cancer research and describe the procedures to access samples and data.

[Drastic changes in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer]. / Behandling av metastaserad prostatacancer.

The treatment of metastatic prostate  cancer has seen drastic changes in the recent years with more intense treatment at initial diagnose. The new standard is combination therapy with castration as the backbone and the addition of new hormonal therapies with or without chemotherapy. For patients with minimal metastatic spread it is also recommended to give radiotherapy to the primary tumour. Since many patients now can look forward to longer survival it is paramount to take care of the side-effects of the treatments, where focus is on cardiovascular disease and bone health management. Precision medicine has started also in prostate cancer; testing of BRCA1/2 mutation is mandatory for treatment with PARP inhibitors.

Uptake of doublet therapy for de novo metastatic castration sensitive prostate cancer: a population-based drug utilisation study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated prolonged survival with new upfront treatments in addition to standard androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We describe patient characteristics, time trends and regional differences in uptake of these new treatment strategies in clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This descriptive study consisted of men registered in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden from 1 January 2018 to 31 March 2022 with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer defined by the presence of metastases on imaging at the time of diagnosis. Life expectancy was calculated based on age, Charlson Comorbidity Index and a Drug Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Within 6 months from diagnosis, 57% (1,677/2,959) of men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer and more than 3 years of life expectancy had received docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide and/or radiotherapy. Over time, there was a 2-fold increase in uptake of any added treatment, mainly driven by a 6-fold increase in use of abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide, with little change in use of other treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Slightly more than half of men diagnosed with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer and a life expectancy of at least 3 years received additions to standard ADT as recommended by national guidelines in 2019-2022 in Sweden. There was a 2-fold increase in use of these treatments during the study period; however, efforts to further increase adherence to guidelines are warranted.

A randomised, double-blind, dose-finding, phase II multicentre study of ODX in the treatment of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and skeletal metastases.

AIMS: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ODX, a novel, cytotoxic, bone-targeting drug candidate, in castration-resistant prostate cancer bone metastatic disease. METHODS: Patients with progressive disease were randomised to ten cycles of ODX, intravenous infusion Q2W (3, 6, and 9 mg/kg, respectively). The primary objective was to assess the relative change from baseline in bone alkaline phosphatase (B-ALP) and serum-aminoterminal-propeptide of Type I procollagen (S-P1NP) at 12 weeks. The inclusion criteria selected were broad, and a double-blind design was used to ensure objective recruitment of patients for the assessment of efficacy. None of the patients received bone-protecting agents during the ODX treatment period. RESULTS: Fifty-five 21,20 and 14) patients were randomised to ODX (3, 6 and 9 mg/kg), respectively. The lower number of patients in arm 3 was due to too low a recruitment rate towards the end of the study. The median treatment time were 14, 13 and 14 weeks, respectively. The decrease in B-ALP at 12 weeks in study arms 3, 6 and 9 mg/kg was seen in 6/15 (40%), 8/12 (67%) and 5/12 (42%) patients, respectively, whereas the corresponding numbers for P1NP were 8/15 (53%), 8/12 (67%), and 4/12 (33%), respectively. The median decrease in B-ALP and P1NP at 12 weeks for study arms 3, 6 and 9 mg/kg were 37%, 14% and 43%, respectively, and 51%, 40% and 64%, respectively. The decrease in serum C-terminal telopeptide at 12 weeks was seen in the vast majority of patients and in about one-third of patients in bone scan index. ODX was well tolerated, and no drug-related serious adverse events occurred. There were no significant differences between study arms regarding efficacy and safety. CONCLUSIONS: ODX was well tolerated and demonstrated inhibitory effects on markers related to the vicious cycle in bone at all three doses. The reduction in metastatic burden, assessed with bone scan index, supports this finding. Studies with continued ODX treatment until disease progression are being planned (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02825628).

Hyaluronic acid spacer in prostate cancer radiotherapy: dosimetric effects, spacer stability and long-term toxicity and PRO in a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Perirectal spacers may be beneficial to reduce rectal side effects from radiotherapy (RT). Here, we present the impact of a hyaluronic acid (HA) perirectal spacer on rectal dose as well as spacer stability, long-term gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity and patient-reported outcome (PRO). METHODS: In this phase II study 81 patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer received transrectal injections with HA before external beam RT (78 Gy in 39 fractions). The HA spacer was evaluated with MRI four times; before (MR0) and after HA-injection (MR1), at the middle (MR2) and at the end (MR3) of RT. GI and GU toxicity was assessed by physician for up to five years according to the RTOG scale. PROs were collected using the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Registry and Prostate cancer symptom scale questionnaires. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in rectal V70% (54.6 Gy) and V90% (70.2 Gy) between MR0 and MR1, as well as between MR0 to MR2 and MR3. From MR1 to MR2/MR3, HA thickness decreased with 28%/32% and CTV-rectum space with 19%/17% in the middle level. The cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GI toxicity at 5 years was 5% and the proportion of PRO moderate or severe overall bowel problems at 5 years follow-up was 12%. Cumulative late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity at 5 years was 12% and moderate or severe overall urinary problems at 5 years were 10%. CONCLUSION: We show that the HA spacer reduced rectal dose and long-term toxicity.

Histopathology-validated lesion detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer with mpMRI, [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11-PET and [ 11 C]Acetate-PET.

OBJECTIVE: PET/CT and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) are important diagnostic tools in clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC). The aim of this study was to compare csPC detection rates with [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11-PET (PSMA)-PET, [ 11 C]Acetate (ACE)-PET, and mpMRI with histopathology as reference, to identify the most suitable imaging modalities for subsequent hybrid imaging. An additional aim was to compare inter-reader variability to assess reproducibility. METHODS: During 2016-2019, all study participants were examined with PSMA-PET/mpMRI and ACE-PET/CT prior to radical prostatectomy. PSMA-PET, ACE-PET and mpMRI were evaluated separately by two observers, and were compared with histopathology-defined csPC. Statistical analyses included two-sided McNemar test and index of specific agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-five study participants were included, with 130 histopathological intraprostatic lesions >0.05 cc. Of these, 32% (42/130) were classified as csPC with ISUP grade ≥2 and volume >0.5 cc. PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed no difference in performance ( P  = 0.48), with mean csPC detection rate of 70% (29.5/42) and 74% (31/42), respectively, while with ACE-PET the mean csPC detection rate was 37% (15.5/42). Interobserver agreement was higher with PSMA-PET compared to mpMRI [79% (26/33) vs 67% (24/38)]. Including all detected lesions from each pair of observers, the detection rate increased to 90% (38/42) with mpMRI, and 79% (33/42) with PSMA-PET. CONCLUSION: PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed high csPC detection rates and superior performance compared to ACE-PET. The interobserver agreement indicates higher reproducibility with PSMA-PET. The combined result of all observers in both PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed the highest detection rate, suggesting an added value of a hybrid imaging approach.

Health-related Quality of Life in Intermediate- or High-risk Patients Treated With Radical External Radiotherapy and Adjuvant Docetaxel for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Phase III SPCG-13 Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The goal of this study was to investigate whether health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was affected in patients with high- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer treated with docetaxel following radiation therapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 376 patients treated with RT and androgen deprivation were randomized to receive 6 cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 (N=188, Arm A) or surveillance (N=188, Arm B). FACT-P HRQoL questionnaires were gathered at baseline, six months and 1, 2 and 4 years after randomization. The data were analysed using analysis of covariance. RESULTS: FACT-P scores decreased in Arm A at the end of treatment and remained unchanged in Arm B (p<0.0001). The HRQoL scores in Arm A matched Arm B in the 1-year follow-up (p=0.0528) and remained similar in further follow-up. CONCLUSION: Docetaxel transiently decreased HRQoL during chemotherapy but not after treatment for up to four years of follow-up.

The Swedish national guidelines on prostate cancer, part 1: early detection, diagnostics, staging, patient support and primary management of non-metastatic disease.

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.

Clinical and biological relevance of the transcriptomic-based prostate cancer metastasis subtypes MetA-C.

To improve treatment of metastatic prostate cancer, the biology of metastases needs to be understood. We recently described three subtypes of prostate cancer bone metastases (MetA-C), based on differential gene expression. The aim of this study was to verify the clinical relevance of these subtypes and to explore their biology and relations to genetic drivers. Freshly-frozen metastasis samples were obtained as hormone-naive (n = 17), short-term castrated (n = 21), or castration-resistant (n = 65) from a total of 67 patients. Previously published sequencing data from 573 metastasis samples were also analyzed. Through transcriptome profiling and sample classification based on a set of predefined MetA-C-differentiating genes, we found that most metastases were heterogeneous for the MetA-C subtypes. Overall, MetA was the most common subtype, while MetB was significantly enriched in castration-resistant samples and in liver metastases, and consistently associated with poor prognosis. By gene set enrichment analysis, the phenotype of MetA was described by high androgen response, protein secretion and adipogenesis, MetB by high cell cycle activity and DNA repair, and MetC by epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and inflammation. The MetB subtype demonstrated single nucleotide variants of RB transcriptional corepressor 1 (RB1) and loss of 21 genes at chromosome 13, including RB1, but provided independent prognostic value to those genetic aberrations. In conclusion, a distinct set of gene transcripts can be used to classify prostate cancer metastases into the subtypes MetA-C. The MetA-C subtypes show diverse biology, organ tropism, and prognosis. The MetA-C classification may be used independently, or in combination with genetic markers, primarily to identify MetB patients in need of complementary therapy to conventional androgen receptor-targeting treatments.