1
|
Calleris G, Filleron T, Kesch C, Roubaud G, Pradère B, Cabarrou B, Malavaud B, Roupret M, Mourey L, Ploussard G. Surgery with or Without Darolutamide in High-risk and/or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: The SUGAR (CCAFU-PR2) Phase 2 Trial Rationale and Protocol. Eur Urol Oncol 2024; 7:494-500. [PMID: 37806843 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/25/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients frequently experience recurrence and progression after radical prostatectomy (RP). Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has not demonstrated a clear oncological benefit and is not currently recommended. OBJECTIVE The SUGAR trial is the first phase 2, randomised, controlled, multicentre, noncommercial, open-label study investigating single-agent perioperative darolutamide compared with the standard of care (ie, upfront RP, without neoadjuvant ADT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS SUGAR aims to randomise 240 men affected by nonmetastatic PCa, with the major eligibility criteria being International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥4, seminal vesicle invasion at magnetic resonance imaging and/or clinically node-positive disease. Patients in the experimental arm will undergo neoadjuvant darolutamide monotherapy, RP, and adjuvant darolutamide, completing 9 mo of treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint is noncurable recurrence-free survival, an innovative and clinically meaningful measure; the secondary endpoints encompass safety; recurrence-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival; pathological response; and quality of life. A predictive biomarker analysis will also be performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Initial data suggest that intensified neoadjuvant treatment with androgen receptor signalling inhibitors (ARSIs) is associated with a sustained pathological response and may improve outcomes, via tumour downstaging and micrometastasis eradication. ARSI monotherapy could further enhance tolerability. CONCLUSIONS SUGAR will provide efficacy and safety information on perioperative darolutamide monotherapy compared with upfront RP, in a contemporary high-risk PCa population undergoing surgery. PATIENT SUMMARY The on-going SUGAR clinical trial evaluates 9 mo of darolutamide treatment in addition to radical prostatectomy, in men affected by prostate cancer with specific high-risk characteristics. It investigates whether this hormonal treatment can lower the rates of noncurable recurrences, maintaining a favourable tolerability profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giorgio Calleris
- Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France; Department of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, Città della Salute e della Scienza and University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Thomas Filleron
- Biostatistics & Health Data Science Unit, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Claudia Kesch
- Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France; Department of Urology and West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | | | - Benjamin Pradère
- Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France
| | - Bastien Cabarrou
- Biostatistics & Health Data Science Unit, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Bernard Malavaud
- Surgery Department, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Morgan Roupret
- GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Urology Research Group and Urology Department, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Loic Mourey
- Oncology Department, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Guillaume Ploussard
- Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France; Surgery Department, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ravi P, Xie W, Buyse M, Halabi S, Kantoff PW, Sartor O, Attard G, Clarke N, D'Amico A, Dignam J, James N, Fizazi K, Gillessen S, Parulekar W, Sandler H, Spratt DE, Sydes MR, Tombal B, Williams S, Sweeney CJ. Refining Risk Stratification of High-risk and Locoregional Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials. Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02380-7. [PMID: 38777647 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Revised: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Radiotherapy (RT) and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ltADT; 18-36 mo) is a standard of care in the treatment of high-risk localized/locoregional prostate cancer (HRLPC). We evaluated the outcomes in patients treated with RT + ltADT to identify which patients have poorer prognosis with standard therapy. METHODS Individual patient data from patients with HRLPC (as defined by any of the following three risk factors [RFs] in the context of cN0 disease-Gleason score ≥8, cT3-4, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] >20 ng/ml, or cN1 disease) treated with RT and ltADT in randomized controlled trials collated by the Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate group. The outcome measures of interest were metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), time to metastasis, and prostate cancer-specific mortality. Multivariable Cox and Fine-Gray regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for the three RFs and cN1 disease. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 3604 patients from ten trials were evaluated, with a median PSA value of 24 ng/ml. Gleason score ≥8 (MFS HR = 1.45; OS HR = 1.42), cN1 disease (MFS HR = 1.86; OS HR = 1.77), cT3-4 disease (MFS HR = 1.28; OS HR = 1.22), and PSA >20 ng/ml (MFS HR = 1.30; OS HR = 1.21) were associated with poorer outcomes. Adjusted 5-yr MFS rates were 83% and 78%, and 10-yr MFS rates were 63% and 53% for patients with one and two to three RFs, respectively; corresponding 10-yr adjusted OS rates were 67% and 60%, respectively. In cN1 patients, adjusted 5- and 10-yr MFS rates were 67% and 36%, respectively, and 10-yr OS was 47%. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS HRLPC patients with two to three RFs (and cN0) or cN1 disease had the poorest outcomes on RT and ltADT. This will help in counseling patients treated in routine practice and in guiding adjuvant trials in HRLPC. PATIENT SUMMARY Radiotherapy and long-term hormone therapy are standard treatments for high-risk and locoregional prostate cancer. In this report, we defined prognostic groups within high-risk/locoregional prostate cancer and showed that outcomes to standard therapy are poorest in those with two or more "high-risk" factors or evidence of lymph node involvement. Such patients may therefore be the best candidates for intensification of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Praful Ravi
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Wanling Xie
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Marc Buyse
- International Drug Development Institute, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium
| | | | - Philip W Kantoff
- Convergent Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, USA; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | - Noel Clarke
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Anthony D'Amico
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Nicholas James
- The Institute of Cancer Research & The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Karim Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Daniel E Spratt
- University Hospitals Siedman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Matthew R Sydes
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Christopher J Sweeney
- South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nyame YA, Gore JL, Lin DW. Putting patients first to redefine prostate cancer classifications. J Natl Cancer Inst 2023; 115:1249-1251. [PMID: 37463855 PMCID: PMC10637029 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djad124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2023] [Accepted: 06/22/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Yaw A Nyame
- Department of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - John L Gore
- Department of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Daniel W Lin
- Department of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cano Garcia C, Wenzel M, Piccinelli ML, Hoeh B, Landmann L, Tian Z, Humke C, Incesu RB, Köllermann J, Wild PJ, Würnschimmel C, Graefen M, Tilki D, Karakiewicz PI, Kluth LA, Chun FKH, Mandel P. External Tertiary-Care-Hospital Validation of the Epidemiological SEER-Based Nomogram Predicting Downgrading in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:diagnostics13091614. [PMID: 37175005 PMCID: PMC10178748 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13091614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2023] [Revised: 04/06/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
We aimed to externally validate the SEER-based nomogram used to predict downgrading in biopsied high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) in a contemporary European tertiary-care-hospital cohort. We relied on an institutional tertiary-care database to identify biopsied high-risk prostate cancer patients in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) who underwent RP between January 2014 and December 2022. The model's downgrading performance was evaluated using accuracy and calibration. The net benefit of the nomogram was tested with decision-curve analyses. Overall, 241 biopsied high-risk prostate cancer patients were identified. In total, 51% were downgraded at RP. Moreover, of the 99 patients with a biopsy Gleason pattern of 5, 43% were significantly downgraded to RP Gleason pattern ≤ 4 + 4. The nomogram predicted the downgrading with 72% accuracy. A high level of agreement between the predicted and observed downgrading rates was observed. In the prediction of significant downgrading from a biopsy Gleason pattern of 5 to a RP Gleason pattern ≤ 4 + 4, the accuracy was 71%. Deviations from the ideal predictions were noted for predicted probabilities between 30% and 50%, where the nomogram overestimated the observed rate of significant downgrading. This external validation of the SEER-based nomogram confirmed its ability to predict the downgrading of biopsy high-risk prostate cancer patients and its accurate use for patient counseling in high-volume RP centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristina Cano Garcia
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada
| | - Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Mattia Luca Piccinelli
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada
- Department of Urology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), 20141 Milan, Italy
| | - Benedikt Hoeh
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Lea Landmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada
| | - Clara Humke
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Reha-Baris Incesu
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Jens Köllermann
- Dr. Senckenberg Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Frankfurt, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Peter J Wild
- Dr. Senckenberg Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Frankfurt, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- LOEWE Center Frankfurt Cancer Institute (FCI), Goethe University Frankfurt, 60439 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | | | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0A9, Canada
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, 39120 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Chierigo F, Flammia RS, Sorce G, Hoeh B, Hohenhorst L, Panunzio A, Tian Z, Saad F, Graefen M, Gallucci M, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Chun FK, Shariat SF, Antonelli A, Guano G, Mantica G, Borghesi M, Suardi N, Terrone C, Karakiewicz PI. The association of type and number of high-risk criteria with cancer-specific mortality in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Curr Urol 2023. [DOI: 10.1097/cu9.0000000000000188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
|
6
|
Chierigo F, Flammia RS, Sorce G, Hoeh B, Hohenhorst L, Tian Z, Saad F, Graefen M, Gallucci M, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Chun FKH, Shariat SF, Guano G, Mantica G, Borghesi M, Suardi N, Terrone C, Karakiewicz PI. The association of type and number of high-risk criteria with cancer specific mortality in prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. Prostate 2023; 83:695-700. [PMID: 36919872 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24505] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2022] [Revised: 10/06/2022] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 03/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To assess the association between of type and number of D'Amico high-risk criteria (DHRCs) with rates of cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with external beam radiotherapy (RT). METHODS In the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2016), we identified 34,908 RT patients with at least one DHRCs, namely prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20 ng/dL (hrPSA), biopsy Grade Group (hrGG) 4-5, clinical T stage (hrcT) ≥T2c. Multivariable Cox regression models (CRM), as well as competing risks regression (CRR) model, which further adjust for other cause mortality, tested the association between DHRCs and 5-year CSM. RESULTS Of 34,908 patients, 14,777 (42%) exclusively harbored hrGG, 5641 (16%) hrPSA, 4390 (13%) had hrcT. Only 8238 (23.7%) harbored any combination of two DHRCs and 1862 (5.3%) had all three DHRCs. Five-year CSM rates ranged from 2.4% to 5.0% when any individual DHRC was present (hrcT, hrPSA, hrGG, in that order), versus 5.2% to 10.5% when two DHRCs were present (hrPSA+hrcT, hrcT+hrGG, hrPSA+hrGG, in that order) versus 14.4% when all three DHRCs were identified. In multivariable CRM hazard ratios relative to hrcT ranged from 1.07 to 1.76 for one DHRC, 2.20 to 3.83 for combinations of two DHRCs, and 5.11 for all three DHRCs. Multivariable CRR yielded to virtually the same results. CONCLUSIONS Our study indicates a stimulus-response effect according to the type and number of DHRCs. This indicates potential for risk-stratification within HR PCa patients that could be applied in clinical decision making to increase or reduce treatment intensity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Chierigo
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Rocco Simone Flammia
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Gabriele Sorce
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Benedikt Hoeh
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Lukas Hohenhorst
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Marcus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Michele Gallucci
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Giovanni Guano
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Guglielmo Mantica
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Marco Borghesi
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Nazareno Suardi
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Carlo Terrone
- IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Spohn SKB, Draulans C, Kishan AU, Spratt D, Ross A, Maurer T, Tilki D, Berlin A, Blanchard P, Collins S, Bronsert P, Chen R, Pra AD, de Meerleer G, Eade T, Haustermans K, Hölscher T, Höcht S, Ghadjar P, Davicioni E, Heck M, Kerkmeijer LGW, Kirste S, Tselis N, Tran PT, Pinkawa M, Pommier P, Deltas C, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Wiegel T, Zilli T, Tree AC, Qiu X, Murthy V, Epstein JI, Graztke C, Gao X, Grosu AL, Kamran SC, Zamboglou C. Genomic Classifiers in Personalized Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy Approaches: A Systematic Review and Future Perspectives Based on International Consensus. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022:S0360-3016(22)03691-4. [PMID: 36596346 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.12.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 12/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ≥75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and systemic therapy. The expert consensus points out future directions for GC research in the management of PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simon K B Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
| | - Cédric Draulans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium; Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, Belgium
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Daniel Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UH Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University
| | - Ashley Ross
- Department of Urology, Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Tobias Maurer
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Alejandro Berlin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, and Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network. Toronto, Canada
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Paris-Saclay University, Villejuif, France
| | - Sean Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC
| | - Peter Bronsert
- Institute for Surgical Pathology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Ronald Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, Kansas
| | - Alan Dal Pra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine
| | - Gert de Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium; Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, Belgium
| | - Thomas Eade
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Karin Haustermans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium; Department of Oncology, KU Leuven, Belgium
| | - Tobias Hölscher
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan Höcht
- Xcare Practices Dept. Radiotherapy, Saarlouis, Germany
| | - Pirus Ghadjar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
| | | | - Matthias Heck
- Department of Urology, Rechts der Isar Medical Center, Technical University of Munich, Germany
| | - Linda G W Kerkmeijer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Simon Kirste
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Nikolaos Tselis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Phuoc T Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland
| | - Michael Pinkawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MediClin Robert Janker Klinik Bonn, Germany
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | - Constantinos Deltas
- Molecular Medicine Research Center and Laboratory of Molecular and Medical Genetics, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | | | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Alison C Tree
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden Hospital and the Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Xuefeng Qiu
- Department of Urology, Medical School of Nanjing University, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - Vedang Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ACTREC, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National University, India
| | - Jonathan I Epstein
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Christian Graztke
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Xin Gao
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Anca L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Sophia C Kamran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Oncology Center, European University of Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sorce G, Hoeh B, Flammia RS, Chierigo F, Hohenhorst L, Panunzio A, Nimer N, Tian Z, Gandaglia G, Tilki D, Terrone C, Gallucci M, Chun FKH, Antonelli A, Saad F, Shariat SF, Montorsi F, Briganti A, Karakiewicz PI. Rates of metastatic prostate cancer in newly diagnosed patients: Numbers needed to image according to risk level. Prostate 2022; 82:1210-1218. [PMID: 35652586 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 05/07/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The numbers needed to image to identify pelvic lymph node and/or distant metastases in newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) patients according to risk level are unknown. METHODS Relying on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (2010-2016), we tabulated rates and proportions of patients with (a) lymph node or (b) distant metastases according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk level and calculated the number needed to image (NNI) for both endpoints. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS Of 145,939 newly diagnosed PCa patients assessable for analyses of pelvic lymph node metastases (cN1), 4559 (3.1%) harbored cN1 stage: 13 (0.02%), 18 (0.08%), 63 (0.3%), 512 (2.8%), and 3954 (14.9%) in low, intermediate favorable, intermediate unfavorable, high, and very high-risk levels. These resulted in NNI of 4619, 1182, 319, 35, and 7, respectively. Of 181,109 newly diagnosed PCa patients assessable for analyses of distant metastases (M1a-c ), 8920 (4.9%) harbored M1a-c stage: 50 (0.07%), 45 (0.1%), 161 (0.5%), 1290 (5.1%), and 7374 (22.0%) in low, intermediate favorable, intermediate unfavorable, high, and very high-risk. These resulted in NNI of 1347, 602, 174, 20, and 5, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Our observations perfectly validated the NCCN recommendations for imaging in newly diagnosed high and very high-risk PCa patients. However, in unfavorable intermediate-risk PCa patients, in whom bone and soft tissue imaging is recommended, the NNI might be somewhat elevated to support routine imaging in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriele Sorce
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Benedikt Hoeh
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Rocco S Flammia
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Lukas Hohenhorst
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Andrea Panunzio
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Nancy Nimer
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Michele Gallucci
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Alessandro Antonelli
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Praga, Czech Republic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Division of Urology, Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Polygenic risk score in prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2022; 32:466-471. [PMID: 35855560 DOI: 10.1097/mou.0000000000001029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW This study was conducted in order to review the outcomes regarding polygenic risk score (PRS) in prediction of prostate cancer (PCa). With the increasing proficiency of genetic analysis, assessment of PRS for prediction of PCa has been performed in numerous studies. Genetic risk prediction models for PCa that include hundreds to thousands of independent risk-associated variants are under development. For estimation of additive effect of multiple variants, the number of risk alleles carried by an individual is summed, and each variant is weighted according to its estimated effect size for generation of a PRS. RECENT FINDINGS Currently, regarding the accuracy of PRS alone, PCa detection rate ranged from 0.56 to 0.67. A higher rate of accuracy of 0.866-0.880 was observed for other models combining PRS with established clinical markers. The results of PRS from Asian populations showed a level of accuracy that is somewhat low compared with values from Western populations (0.63-0.67); however, recent results from Asian cohorts were similar to that of Western counterparts. Here, we review current PRS literature and examine the clinical utility of PRS for prediction of PCa. SUMMARY Emerging data from several studies regarding PRS in PCa could be the solution to adding predictive value to PCa risk estimation. Although commercial markers are available, development of a large-scale, well validated PRS model should be undertaken in the near future, in order to translate hypothetical scenarios to actual clinical practice.
Collapse
|
10
|
Flammia RS, Hoeh B, Sorce G, Chierigo F, Hohenhorst L, Tian Z, Goyal JA, Leonardo C, Briganti A, Graefen M, Terrone C, Saad F, Shariat SF, Montorsi F, Chun FKH, Gallucci M, Karakiewicz PI. Contemporary seminal vesicle invasion rates in NCCN high-risk prostate cancer patients. Prostate 2022; 82:1051-1059. [PMID: 35403734 PMCID: PMC9325368 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24350] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2022] [Revised: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 03/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Contemporary seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) rates in National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN) high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients are not well known but essential for treatment planning. We examined SVI rates according to individual patient characteristics for purpose of treatment planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS Within Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2010-2015), 4975 NCCN high-risk patients were identified. In the development cohort (SEER geographic region of residence: South, North-East, Mid-West, n = 2456), we fitted a multivariable logistic regression model predicting SVI. Its accuracy, calibration, and decision curve analyses (DCAs) were then tested versus previous models within the external validation cohort (SEER geographic region of residence: West, n = 2519). RESULTS Out of 4975 patients, 28% had SVI. SVI rate ranged from 8% to 89% according to clinical T stage, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), biopsy Gleason Grade Group and percentage of positive biopsy cores. In the development cohort, these variables were independent predictors of SVI. In the external validation cohort, the current model achieved 77.6% accuracy vs 73.7% for Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) vs 68.6% for Gallina et al. Calibration was better than for the two alternatives: departures from ideal predictions were 6.0% for the current model vs 9.8% for MSKCC vs 38.5% for Gallina et al. In DCAs, the current model outperformed both alternatives. Finally, different nomogram cutoffs allowed to discriminate between low versus high SVI risk patients. CONCLUSIONS More than a quarter of NCCN high-risk PCa patients harbored SVI. Since SVI positivity rate varies from 8% to 89%, the currently developed model offers a valuable approach to distinguish between low and high SVI risk patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rocco S. Flammia
- Department of Maternal‐Child and Urological SciencesSapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I HospitalRomeItaly
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| | - Benedikt Hoeh
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
- Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital FrankfurtFrankfurt am MainGermany
| | - Gabriele Sorce
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Department of UrologyUrological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilanItaly
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated SciencesUniversity of GenovaGenovaItaly
| | - Lukas Hohenhorst
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
- Martini‐Klinik Prostate Cancer CenterUniversity Hospital Hamburg‐EppendorfHamburgGermany
| | - Zhen Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| | - Jordan A. Goyal
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| | - Costantino Leonardo
- Department of Maternal‐Child and Urological SciencesSapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I HospitalRomeItaly
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Department of UrologyUrological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilanItaly
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini‐Klinik Prostate Cancer CenterUniversity Hospital Hamburg‐EppendorfHamburgGermany
- Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital Hamburg‐EppendorfHamburgGermany
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| | - Shahrokh F. Shariat
- Department of UrologyWeill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkNew YorkUSA
- Department of UrologyUniversity of Texas SouthwesternDallasTexasUSA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of MedicineCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
- Department of Urology, Institute for Urology and Reproductive HealthSechenov UniversityMoscowRussia
- Department of Urology, Hourani Center for Applied Scientific ResearchAl‐Ahliyya Amman UniversityAmmanJordan
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer CenterMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Department of UrologyUrological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilanItaly
| | - Felix K. H. Chun
- Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital FrankfurtFrankfurt am MainGermany
| | - Michele Gallucci
- Department of Maternal‐Child and Urological SciencesSapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I HospitalRomeItaly
| | - Pierre I. Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of UrologyUniversity of Montréal Health CenterMontréalQuébecCanada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
CONTEMPORARY PATHOLOGICAL STAGE DISTRIBUTION AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY IN NORTH AMERICAN HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2022; 20:e380-e389. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2022.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2021] [Revised: 04/11/2022] [Accepted: 04/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
12
|
Wenzel M. Editorial Comment to Testicular cancer and YouTube: What do you expect from a social media platform? Int J Urol 2022; 29:691. [PMID: 35355319 DOI: 10.1111/iju.14886] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hoeh B, Würnschimmel C, Flammia RS, Horlemann B, Sorce G, Chierigo F, Tian Z, Saad F, Graefen M, Gallucci M, Briganti A, Terrone C, Shariat SF, Kluth LA, Mandel P, Chun FKH, Karakiewicz PI. Cancer-specific survival after radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy in high-risk and very high-risk African American prostate cancer patients. Prostate 2022; 82:120-131. [PMID: 34662443 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24253] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2021] [Revised: 09/14/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To test for differences in cancer-specific mortality (CSM) rates between radical prostatectomy (RP) vs external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk African American patients, as well as Johns Hopkins University (JHU) high-risk and very high-risk patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2010-2016), we identified 4165 NCCN high-risk patients, of whom 1944 (46.7%) and 2221 (53.3%) patients qualified for JHU high-risk or very high-risk definitions. Of all 4165 patients, 1390 (33.5%) were treated with RP versus 2775 (66.6%) with EBRT. Cumulative incidence plots and competing risks regression models addressed CSM before and after 1:1 propensity score matching between RP and EBRT NCCN high-risk patients. Subsequently, analyses were repeated separately in JHU high-risk and very high-risk subgroups. Finally, all analyses were repeated after landmark analyses were applied. RESULTS In the NCCN high-risk cohort, 5-year CSM rates for RP versus EBRT were 2.4 versus 5.2%, yielding a multivariable hazard ratio of 0.50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-0.84, p = 0.009) favoring RP. In JHU very high-risk patients 5-year CSM rates for RP versus EBRT were 3.7 versus 8.4%, respectively, yielding a multivariable hazard ratio of 0.51 (95% CI: 0.28-0.95, p = 0.03) favoring RP. Conversely, in JHU high-risk patients, no significant CSM difference was recorded between RP vs EBRT (5-year CSM rates: 1.3 vs 1.3%; multivariable hazard ratio: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.16-1.90, p = 0.3). Observations were confirmed in propensity score-matched and landmark analyses adjusted cohorts. CONCLUSIONS In JHU very high-risk African American patients, RP may hold a CSM advantage over EBRT, but not in JHU high-risk African American patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedikt Hoeh
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Christoph Würnschimmel
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Rocco S Flammia
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Benedikt Horlemann
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Gabriele Sorce
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Zhe Tian
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Fred Saad
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Michele Gallucci
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wenzel M, Preisser F, Hoeh B, Welte MN, Humke C, Wittler C, Würnschimmel C, Becker A, Karakiewicz PI, Chun FKH, Mandel P, Kluth LA. Influence of Biopsy Gleason Score on the Risk of Lymph Node Invasion in Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy. Front Surg 2021; 8:759070. [PMID: 34957202 PMCID: PMC8695544 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.759070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2021] [Accepted: 10/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the influence of biopsy Gleason score on the risk for lymph node invasion (LNI) during pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 684 patients, who underwent RP between 2014 and June 2020 due to PCa. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression, as well as binary regression tree models were used to assess the risk of positive LNI and evaluate the need of PLND in men with intermediate-risk PCa. Results: Of the 672 eligible patients with RP, 80 (11.9%) men harbored low-risk, 32 (4.8%) intermediate-risk with international society of urologic pathologists grade (ISUP) 1 (IR-ISUP1), 215 (32.0%) intermediate-risk with ISUP 2 (IR-ISUP2), 99 (14.7%) intermediate-risk with ISUP 3 (IR-ISUP3), and 246 (36.6%) high-risk PCa. Proportions of LNI were 0, 3.1, 3.7, 5.1, and 24.0% for low-risk, IR-ISUP1, IR-ISUP 2, IR-ISUP-3, and high-risk PCa, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, after adjustment for patient and surgical characteristics, IR-ISUP1 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.10, p = 0.03], IR-ISUP2 (HR 0.09, p < 0.001), and IR-ISUP3 (HR 0.18, p < 0.001) were independent predictors for lower risk of LNI, compared with men with high-risk PCa disease. Conclusions: The international society of urologic pathologists grade significantly influence the risk of LNI in patients with intermediate- risk PCa. The risk of LNI only exceeds 5% in men with IR-ISUP3 PCa. In consequence, the need for PLND in selected patients with IR-ISUP 1 or IR-ISUP2 PCa should be critically discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.,Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Felix Preisser
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Benedikt Hoeh
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Maria N Welte
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Clara Humke
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Clarissa Wittler
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Christoph Würnschimmel
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.,Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Becker
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Wenzel M, Würnschimmel C, Chierigo F, Tian Z, Shariat SF, Terrone C, Saad F, Tilki D, Graefen M, Banek S, Kluth LA, Mandel P, Chun FKH, Karakiewicz PI. Increased risk of postoperative in-hospital complications after radical prostatectomy in patients with prior organ transplant. Prostate 2021; 81:1294-1302. [PMID: 34516668 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24224] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Revised: 08/05/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To analyze postoperative, in-hospital, complication rates in patients with organ transplantation before radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS From National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2000-2015) prostate cancer patients treated with RP were abstracted and stratified according to prior organ transplant versus nontransplant. Multivariable logistic regression models predicted in-hospital complications. RESULTS Of all eligible 202,419 RP patients, 216 (0.1%) underwent RP after prior organ transplantation. Transplant RP patients exhibited higher proportions of Charlson comorbidity index ≥2 (13.0% vs. 3.0%), obesity (9.3% vs. 5.6%, both p < 0.05), versus to nontransplant RP. Of transplant RP patients, 96 underwent kidney (44.4%), 44 heart (20.4%), 40 liver (18.5%), 30 (13.9%) bone marrow, <11 lung (<5%), and <11 pancreatic (<5%) transplantation before RP. Within transplant RP patients, rates of lymph node dissection ranged from 37.5% (kidney transplant) to 60.0% (bone marrow transplant, p < 0.01) versus 51% in nontransplant patients. Regarding in-hospital complications, transplant patients more frequently exhibited, diabetic (31.5% vs. 11.6%, p < 0.001), major (7.9% vs. 2.9%) cardiac complications (3.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.01), and acute kidney failure (5.1% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001), versus nontransplant RP. In multivariable logistic regression models, transplant RP patients were at higher risk of acute kidney failure (odds ratio [OR]: 4.83), diabetic (OR: 2.81), major (OR: 2.39), intraoperative (OR: 2.38), cardiac (OR: 2.16), transfusion (OR: 1.37), and overall complications (1.36, all p < 0.001). No in-hospital mortalities were recorded in transplant patients after RP. CONCLUSIONS Of all transplants before RP, kidney ranks first. RP patients with prior transplantation have an increased risk of in-hospital complications. The highest risk, relative to nontransplant RP patients appears to acute kidney failure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mike Wenzel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Christoph Würnschimmel
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Department of Urology, Policlinico San Martino Hospital, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Department of Urology, Policlinico San Martino Hospital, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Severiné Banek
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Wenzel M, Siron N, Collà Ruvolo C, Nocera L, Würnschimmel C, Tian Z, Shariat SF, Saad F, Briganti A, Tilki D, Banek S, Kluth LA, Roos FC, Chun FKH, Karakiewicz PI. Temporal trends, tumor characteristics and stage-specific survival in penile non-squamous cell carcinoma vs. squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Causes Control 2021; 33:25-35. [PMID: 34476653 PMCID: PMC8738356 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-021-01493-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2021] [Accepted: 08/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare Cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in patients with Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) vs. non-SCC penile cancer, since survival outcomes may differ between histological subtypes. METHODS Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database (2004-2016), penile cancer patients of all stages were identified. Temporal trend analyses, cumulative incidence and Kaplan-Meier plots, multivariable Cox regression and Fine and Gray competing-risks regression analyses tested for CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC penile cancer patients. RESULTS Of 4,120 eligible penile cancer patients, 123 (3%) harbored non-SCC vs. 4,027 (97%) SCC. Of all non-SCC patients, 51 (41%) harbored melanomas, 42 (34%) basal cell carcinomas, 10 (8%) adenocarcinomas, eight (6.5%) skin appendage malignancies, six (5%) epithelial cell neoplasms, two (1.5%) neuroendocrine tumors, two (1.5%) lymphomas, two (1.5%) sarcomas. Stage at presentation differed between non-SCC vs. SCC. In temporal trend analyses, non-SCC diagnoses neither decreased nor increased over time (p > 0.05). After stratification according to localized, locally advanced, and metastatic stage, no CSM differences were observed between non-SCC vs. SCC, with 5-year survival rates of 11 vs 11% (p = 0.9) for localized, 33 vs. 37% (p = 0.4) for locally advanced, and 1-year survival rates of 37 vs. 53% (p = 0.9) for metastatic penile cancer, respectively. After propensity score matching for patient and tumor characteristics and additional multivariable adjustment, no CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC were observed. CONCLUSION Non-SCC penile cancer is rare. Although exceptions exist, on average, non-SCC penile cancer has comparable CSM as SCC penile cancer patients, after stratification for localized, locally invasive, and metastatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mike Wenzel
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor- Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
| | - Nicolas Siron
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Claudia Collà Ruvolo
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Luigi Nocera
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Christoph Würnschimmel
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Zhe Tian
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prag, Czech Republic
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Fred Saad
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Severine Banek
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor- Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor- Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Frederik C Roos
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor- Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor- Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Division of Urology, Cancer Prognostictables and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montréal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|