Impact of age and comorbidities on long-term survival of patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional competing-risks analysis

Survival after surgical treatment using competing-risk analysis has been previously examined in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). However, the combined effect of age and comorbidities has not been assessed in patients with high-risk PCa who might have heterogeneous rates of competing mortality despite the presence of aggressive disease.

Outcome predictors of radical prostatectomy followed by adjuvant androgen deprivation in patients with clinical high risk prostate cancer and pT3 surgical margin positive disease

Patients with high risk prostate cancer with pT3 tumor and positive surgical margins have a high risk of biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Predictors of cancer related death in this patient group are necessary.

The role of adjuvant hormonal treatment after surgery for localized high-risk prostate cancer: results of a matched multiinstitutional analysis

Introduction. To assess the role of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in high-risk prostate cancer patients (PCa) after surgery. Materials and Methods. The analysis case matched 172 high-risk PCa patients with positive section margins or non-organ confined disease and negative lymph nodes to receive adjuvant ADT (group 1, n = 86) or no adjuvant ADT (group 2, n = 86). Results. Only 11.6% of the patients died, 2.3% PCa related. Estimated 5-10-year clinical progression-free survival was 96.9% (94.3%) for group 1 and 73.7% (67.0%) for group 2, respectively. Subgroup analysis identified men with T2/T3a tumors at low-risk and T3b margins positive disease at higher risk for progression. Conclusion. Patients with T2/T3a tumors are at low-risk for metastatic disease and cancer-related death and do not need adjuvant ADT. We identified men with T3b margin positive disease at highest risk for clinical progression. These patients benefit from immediate adjuvant ADT.

Radical prostatectomy in very high-risk localized prostate cancer: long-term outcomes and outcome predictors

The objective of this study was to present the long-term outcomes and determine outcome predictors in very high-risk (cT3b-T4) prostate cancer (PCa) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

Debulking surgery in the setting of very high-risk prostate cancer scenarios

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Nowadays radical prostatectomy (RP) is considered an effective treatment in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) and the indications for a surgical approach are expanding, even in cases of very high PSA or node-positive disease. We explored the outcomes of debulking surgery in the setting of these very high-risk PCa patients, in order to assess its feasibility. This review confirms the important role achieved by surgery in the complex setting of patients with very high-risk PCA. Excellent survival rates have been reported, even when PSA exceeds 100 ng/mL. The completion of RP with lymphadenectomy might give a survival benefit in patients who were found intraoperatively to be node-positive. Furthermore, salvage RP confirmed to be the most effective treatment option after RT failure. On the contrary, up-to-date surgery of isolated nodal recurrences has shown only little benefit. Finally, there is no evidence supporting the efficacy of debulking surgery in metastatic or in hormone-refractory tumours. An accurate selection of the patient is essential.

[How should hormone therapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer be continued?]

After an average of 18-36 months under androgen suppression therapy by surgical castration, LHRH, and steroidal or non-steroidal antiandrogens, almost all patients with metastatic prostate cancer show PSA progression as a sign of androgen-independent but still androgen-sensitive tumor growth. Our understanding and the treatment of such castration-resistant prostate cancer has changed markedly. The introduction of new drugs like abiraterone and MDV3100 has shown that prostate cancer progression even in the"hormone-refractory" stage is driven by androgen receptor signaling. Based on this information the question of whether androgen deprivation therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer should be continued or not is still of relevance. This review gives a critical overview of the literature and current guideline recommendations.

Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer

The current role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with high-risk disease remains controversial.

Sense and nonsense of an extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer

Lymph node metastases associated with prostate cancer (PCa) has been shown to be a poor prognostic factor. The role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) itself in relation to survival remains unclear, however. A Medline search was conducted to address this issue. The following conclusions were drawn. Only recently, improved survival due to completion of radical prostatectomy (RP) (compared to abandoning RP) in known or presumed lymph-node-positive patients has been shown. Lymph node sampling can only be considered representative if an adequate number of nodes is removed. While several authors have suggested that a therapeutic benefit in patients undergoing RP is not provided by PLND, the reliability of these studies is uncertain. Contrary to this, several studies have indicated the possibility of long-term survival even in the presence of limited lymph node metastases. The role and timing of initiation of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients who have node-positive disease after RP is controversial. Recent studies suggest that delaying ADT may not adversely impact survival.

Is Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Necessary in Patients with a Serum PSA<10ng/ml Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer?

OBJECTIVE: Controversy persists concerning the role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in patients with preoperative PSA values <10ng/ml undergoing treatment for prostate cancer with a curative intent. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of lymph node metastasis in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: Patients with clinically localized prostate cancer and a serum PSA<10ng/ml, without neoadjuvant hormonal or radiotherapy, with negative staging examinations who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy with bilateral extended PLND and with >/=10 lymph nodes detected by the pathologist in the surgical specimen, were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients with a median serum PSA of 6.7ng/ml (range 0.4-9.98) and a median age of 62 years (range 44-76) were evaluated. A median of 20 (range 10-72) nodes were removed per patient. Positive nodes were found in 26 of 231 patients (11%), the majority of which (81%) had a Gleason score >/=7 in the surgical specimen. Of the patients with a Gleason score >/=7 in the prostatectomy specimen 25% had positive nodes, whereas only 3% with a Gleason score prostate cancer, a serum PSA<10ng/ml and a Gleason score >/=7 in the prostatectomy specimen was 25% after extended PLND. It seems that in this patient group extended PLND, including removal of nodes along the internal iliac vessels, is warranted.

Differential expression of TGFbeta-stimulated clone 22 in normal prostate and prostate cancer

The transforming growth factor-beta (TGFbeta) superfamily and its downstream effector genes are key regulators of epithelial homeostasis. Altered expression of these genes may be associated with malignant transformation of the prostate gland. The cDNA array analysis of differential expression of the TGFbeta superfamily and functionally related genes between patient-matched noncancerous prostate (NP) and prostate cancer (PC) bulk tissue specimens highlighted two genes, namely TGFbeta-stimulated clone-22 (TSC-22) and Id4. Verification of their mRNA expression by real-time PCR in patient-matched NP and PC bulk tissue, in laser-captured pure epithelial and cancer cells and in NP and PC cell lines confirmed TSC-22 underexpression, but not Id4 overexpression, in PC and in human PC cell lines. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that TSC-22 protein expression in NP is restricted to the basal cells and colocalizes with the basal cell marker cytokeratin 5. In contrast, all matched PC samples lack TSC-22 immunoreactivity. Likewise, PC cell lines do not show detectable TSC-22 protein expression as shown by immunoblotting. TSC-22 should be considered as a novel basal cell marker, potentially useful for studying lineage determination within the epithelial compartment of the prostate. Conversely, lack of TSC-22 seems to be a hallmark of malignant transformation of the prostate epithelium. Accordingly, TSC-22 immunohistochemistry may prove to be a diagnostic tool for discriminating benign lesions from malignant ones of the prostate. The suggested tumour suppressor function of TSC-22 warrants further investigation on its role in prostate carcinogenesis and on the TSC-22 pathway as a candidate therapeutic target in PC.

Prostate specific antigen expression does not necessarily correlate with prostate cancer cell growth

PURPOSE: The antiproliferative effects of pharmacological agents used for androgen ablative therapy in prostate cancer, including goserelin, bicalutamide and cyproterone acetate (Fluka Chemie, Buchs, Switzerland), were tested in vitro. It was determined whether they affected prostate specific antigen mRNA and protein expression independent of growth inhibition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Goserelin, bicalutamide (AstraZeneca, Zug, Switzerland) and cyproterone acetate were added to prostate specific antigen expressing, androgen dependent LNCaP and androgen independent C4-2 cell line (Urocor, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma) cultures. Proliferation was determined by the 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazoliumbromide assay (Roche, Mannheim, Germany). Prostate specific antigen mRNA expression was assessed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Secreted prostate specific antigen protein levels were quantified by microparticle enzyme-immunoassay. RESULTS: Goserelin inhibited cell growth and prostate specific antigen protein secretion in LNCaP and C4-2 cells. Prostate specific antigen mRNA expression was not decreased. Bicalutamide did not affect cell growth or prostate specific antigen mRNA expression in LNCaP or C4-2 cells, although it significantly decreased prostate specific antigen protein secretion in LNCaP and to a lesser extent in C4-2 cells. Cyproterone acetate decreased the growth of C4-2 but not of LNCaP cells. It did not affect prostate specific antigen mRNA or protein expression in either cell line. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate specific antigen expression does not necessarily correlate with cell growth. Without a substantial effect on cell growth bicalutamide lowers prostate specific antigen synthesis, whereas cyproterone acetate decreases cell growth with no effect on prostate specific antigen secretion. Prostate specific antigen expression may be influenced by growth inhibition but also by altered mRNA and protein levels depending on the agent, its concentration and the cell line evaluated. For interpreting clinical trials prostate specific antigen is not necessarily a surrogate end point marker for a treatment effect on prostate cancer cell growth.

Immediate or deferred androgen deprivation for patients with prostate cancer not suitable for local treatment with curative intent: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Trial 30891

PURPOSE: This study (EORTC 30891) attempted to demonstrate equivalent overall survival in patients with localized prostate cancer not suitable for local curative treatment treated with immediate or deferred androgen ablation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 985 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer T0-4 N0-2 M0 to receive androgen deprivation either immediately (n = 493) or on symptomatic disease progression or occurrence of serious complications (n = 492). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. Median age was 73 years (range, 52 to 81). At a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 541 of 985 patients had died, mostly of prostate cancer (n = 193) or cardiovascular disease (n = 185). The overall survival hazard ratio was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.48; noninferiority P > .1) favoring immediate treatment, seemingly due to fewer deaths of nonprostatic cancer causes (P = .06). The time from randomization to progression of hormone refractory disease did not differ significantly, nor did prostate-cancer specific survival. The median time to the start of deferred treatment after study entry was 7 years. In this group 126 patients (25.6%) died without ever needing treatment (44% of the deaths in this arm). CONCLUSION: Immediate androgen deprivation resulted in a modest but statistically significant increase in overall survival but no significant difference in prostate cancer mortality or symptom-free survival. This must be weighed on an individual basis against the adverse effects of life-long androgen deprivation, which may be avoided in a substantial number of patients with a deferred treatment policy.