Non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer: a call for improved guidance on clinical management.

BACKGROUND Guidelines on the clinical management of non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) generally focus on the need to continue androgen deprivation therapy and enrol patients into clinical trials of investigational agents. This guidance reflects the lack of clinical trial data with established agents in the nmCRPC patient population and the need for trials of new agents. AIM To review the evidence base and consider ways of improving the management of nmCRPC. CONCLUSION Upon the development of castrate resistance, it is essential to rule out the presence of metastases or micrometastases by optimising the use of bone scans and possibly newer procedures and techniques. When nmCRPC is established, management decisions should be individualised according to risk, but risk stratification in this diverse population is poorly defined. Currently, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and PSA doubling time remain the best method of assessing the risk of progression and response to treatment in nmCRPC. However, optimising imaging protocols can also help assess the changing metastatic burden in patients with CRPC. Clinical trials of novel agents in nmCRPC are limited and have problems with enrolment, and therefore, improved risk stratification and imaging may be crucial to the improved management. The statements presented in this paper, reflecting the views of the authors, provide a discussion of the most recent evidence in nmCRPC and provide some advice on how to ensure these patients receive the best management available. However, there is an urgent need for more data on the management of nmCRPC.

Older patients with low Charlson score and high-risk prostate cancer benefit from radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION The aim of the study was to identify the appropriate level of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in older patients (>70 years) with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) to achieve survival benefit following radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 1008 older patients (>70 years) who underwent RP with pelvic lymph node dissection for high-risk prostate cancer (preoperative prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL or clinical stage ≥T2c or Gleason ≥8) from 14 tertiary institutions between 1988 and 2014. The study population was further grouped into CCI < 2 and ≥2 for analysis. Survival rate for each group was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method and competitive risk Fine-Gray regression to estimate the best explanatory multivariable model. Area under the curve (AUC) and Akaike information criterion were used to identify ideal 'Cut off' for CCI. RESULTS The clinical and cancer characteristics were similar between the two groups. Comparison of the survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier curve between two groups for non-cancer death and survival estimations for 5 and 10 years shows significant worst outcomes for patients with CCI ≥ 2. In multivariate model to decide the appropriate CCI cut-off point, we found CCI 2 has better AUC and p value in log rank test. CONCLUSION Older patients with fewer comorbidities harboring high-risk PCa appears to benefit from RP. Sicker patients are more likely to die due to non-prostate cancer-related causes and are less likely to benefit from RP.