1
|
Shore ND, Moul JW, Pienta KJ, Czernin J, King MT, Freedland SJ. Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after primary definitive therapy: treatment based on risk stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27:192-201. [PMID: 37679602 PMCID: PMC11096125 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00712-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nearly one-third of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment. BCR increases the risk of distant metastasis and mortality in patients with prognostically unfavorable features. These patients are best managed with a tailored treatment strategy incorporating risk stratification using clinicopathological factors, next-generation imaging, and genomic testing. OBJECTIVE This narrative review examines the utility of risk stratification for the management of patients with BCR in the context of clinical trial data, referencing the latest recommendations by European and US medical societies. METHODS PubMed was searched for relevant studies published through May 21 2023 on treatment of patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). RESULTS European and US guidelines support the risk-stratified management of BCR. Post-RP, salvage EBRT (with or without androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) is an accepted treatment option for patients with BCR. Post-EBRT, local salvage therapies (RP, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate brachytherapy) have demonstrated comparable relapse-free survival rates but differing adverse event profiles, short and long term. Local salvage therapies should be used for local-only relapses while ADT should be considered for regional or distant relapses. In practice, patients often receive ADT, with varying guidance for intermittent ADT vs. continuous ADT, due to consideration of quality-of-life effects. CONCLUSIONS Despite a lack of consensus for BCR treatment among guideline associations and medical societies, risk stratification of patients is essential for personalized treatment approaches, as it allows for an informed selection of therapeutic strategies and estimation of adverse events. In lower-risk disease, observation is recommended while in higher-risk disease, after failed repeat local therapy, ADT and/or clinical trial enrollment may be appropriate. Results from ongoing clinical studies of patients with BCR should provide consensus for management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neal D Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Judd W Moul
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Johannes Czernin
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Martin T King
- Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Stephen J Freedland
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
- Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Weiner AB, Kakani P, Armstrong AJ, Bossi A, Cornford P, Feng F, Kanabur P, Karnes RJ, Mckay RR, Morgan TM, Schaeffer EM, Shore N, Tree AC, Spratt DE. Risk Stratification of Patients with Recurrence After Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2024:S0302-2838(24)02375-3. [PMID: 38782697 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.034] [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: 02/12/2024] [Revised: 04/04/2024] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic outcomes, risk factors that impact outcomes can vary significantly, necessitating avenues for risk stratification. We sought to identify prognostic risk factors at the time of recurrence after primary radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and prior to salvage treatment(s), associated with adverse oncologic outcomes. METHODS We performed a systematic review of prospective studies in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from January 1, 2000 to October 16, 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (CRD42023466330). We reviewed the factors associated with oncologic outcomes among patients with BCR after primary definitive treatment. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 37 studies were included (total n = 10 632), 25 after prostatectomy (total n = 9010) and 12 after radiotherapy (total n = 1622). Following recurrence after prostatectomy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include higher pathologic T stage and grade group, negative surgical margins, shorter prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT), higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) prior to salvage treatment, shorter time to recurrence, the 22-gene tumor RNA signature, and recurrence location on molecular imaging. After recurrence following radiotherapy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include a shorter time to recurrence, and shorter PSADT or higher PSA velocity. Grade group, T stage, and prior short-term hormone therapy (4-6 mo) were not clearly associated with adverse outcomes, although sample size and follow-up were generally limited compared with postprostatectomy data. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS This work highlights the recommendations and level of evidence for risk stratifying patients with PCa recurrence, and can be used as a benchmark for personalizing salvage treatment based on prognostics. PATIENT SUMMARY We summarize the data from previously reported clinical trials on the topic of which factors predict worse cancer outcomes for patients who recur with prostate cancer after their initial treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam B Weiner
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Institute for Precision Health, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Preeti Kakani
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Andrew J Armstrong
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancer, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Alberto Bossi
- Amethyst Radiotherapy Group, La Garenne Colombes, France
| | | | - Felix Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Pratik Kanabur
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Rana R Mckay
- Department of Medicine, Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Todd M Morgan
- Department of Urology, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Edward M Schaeffer
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Alison C Tree
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bologna E, Ditonno F, Licari LC, Franco A, Manfredi C, Mossack S, Pandolfo SD, De Nunzio C, Simone G, Leonardo C, Franco G. Tissue-Based Genomic Testing in Prostate Cancer: 10-Year Analysis of National Trends on the Use of Prolaris, Decipher, ProMark, and Oncotype DX. Clin Pract 2024; 14:508-520. [PMID: 38525718 PMCID: PMC10961791 DOI: 10.3390/clinpract14020039] [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: 01/27/2024] [Revised: 02/24/2024] [Accepted: 03/14/2024] [Indexed: 03/26/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate cancer (PCa) management is moving towards patient-tailored strategies. Advances in molecular and genetic profiling of tumor tissues, integrated with clinical risk assessments, provide deeper insights into disease aggressiveness. This study aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the pivotal genomic tests supporting PCa treatment decisions, analyzing-through real-world data-trends in their use and the growth of supporting literature evidence. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted using the extensive PearlDiver™ Mariner database, which contains de-identified patient records, in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were employed to identify patients diagnosed with PCa during the study period-2011 to 2021. We determined the utilization of primary tissue-based genetic tests (Oncocyte DX®, Prolaris®, Decipher®, and ProMark®) across all patients diagnosed with PCa. Subsequently, within the overall PCa cohort, patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) and received genetic testing postoperatively were identified. The yearly distribution of these tests and the corresponding trends were illustrated with graphs. RESULTS During the study period, 1,561,203 patients with a PCa diagnosis were recorded. Of these, 20,748 underwent tissue-based genetic testing following diagnosis, representing 1.3% of the total cohort. An increasing trend was observed in the use of all genetic tests. Linear regression analysis showed a statistically significant increase over time in the use of individual tests (all p-values < 0.05). Among the patients who underwent RP, 3076 received genetic analysis following surgery, representing 1.27% of this group. CONCLUSIONS Our analysis indicates a growing trend in the utilization of tissue-based genomic testing for PCa. Nevertheless, they are utilized in less than 2% of PCa patients, whether at initial diagnosis or after surgical treatment. Although it is anticipated that their use may increase as more scientific evidence becomes available, their role requires further elucidation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eugenio Bologna
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Ditonno
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
- Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, University of Verona, 37134 Verona, Italy
| | - Leslie Claire Licari
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Antonio Franco
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
- Department of Urology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, 00189 Rome, Italy;
| | - Celeste Manfredi
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
- Unit of Urology, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy
| | - Spencer Mossack
- Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA; (E.B.); (F.D.); (L.C.L.); (A.F.); (C.M.); (S.M.)
| | - Savio Domenico Pandolfo
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples “Federico II”, 80138 Naples, Italy;
| | - Cosimo De Nunzio
- Department of Urology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, 00189 Rome, Italy;
| | - Giuseppe Simone
- Department of Urology, “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, 00144 Rome, Italy; (G.S.); (C.L.)
| | - Costantino Leonardo
- Department of Urology, “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, 00144 Rome, Italy; (G.S.); (C.L.)
| | - Giorgio Franco
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, 00161 Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sciarra A, Santarelli V, Salciccia S, Moriconi M, Basile G, Santodirocco L, Carino D, Frisenda M, Di Pierro G, Del Giudice F, Gentilucci A, Bevilacqua G. How the Management of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Will Be Modified by the Concept of Anticipation and Incrementation of Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:764. [PMID: 38398155 PMCID: PMC10886975 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040764] [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: 01/02/2024] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary treatments for prostate cancer (PC) is an extremely heterogeneous phase and at least a stratification into low- and high-risk cases for early progression in metastatic disease is necessary. At present, PSA-DT represents the best parameter to define low- and high-risk BCR PC, but real precision medicine is strongly suggested to define tailored management for patients with BCR. Before defining management, it is necessary to exclude the presence of low-volume metastasis associated with PSA progression using new-generation imaging, preferably with PSMA PET/CT. Low-risk BCR cases should be actively observed without early systemic therapies. Early treatment of low-risk BCR with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can produce disadvantages such as the development of castration resistance before the appearance of metastases (non-metastatic castration-resistant PC). Patients with high-risk BCR benefit from early systemic therapy. Even with overall survival (OS) as the primary treatment endpoint, metastasis-free survival (MFS) should be used as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials, especially in long survival stages of the disease. The EMBARK study has greatly influenced the management of high-risk BCR, by introducing the concept of anticipation and intensification through the use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) and ADT combination therapy. In high-risk (PSA-DT ≤ 9 months) BCR cases, the combination of enzalutamide with leuprolide significantly improves MFS when compared to leuprolide alone, maintaining an unchanged quality of life in the asymptomatic phase of the disease. The possibility of using ARSIs alone in this early disease setting is suggested by the EMBARK study (arm with enzalutamide alone) with less evidence than with the intensification of the combination therapy. Continued use versus discontinuation of enzalutamide plus leuprolide intensified therapy upon reaching undetectable PSA levels needs to be better defined with further analysis. Real-world analysis must verify the significant results obtained in the context of a phase 3 study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Sciarra
- Department Materno Infantile e Scienze Urologiche, Sapienza University, Viale Policlinico 155, 00161 Rome, Italy; (V.S.); (S.S.); (M.M.); (G.B.); (L.S.); (D.C.); (M.F.); (G.D.P.); (F.D.G.); (A.G.); (G.B.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Adebahr S, Althaus A, Scharl S, Strouthos I, Farolfi A, Serani F, Lanzafame H, Trapp C, Koerber SA, Peeken JC, Vogel MME, Vrachimis A, Spohn SKB, Grosu AL, Kroeze SGC, Guckenberger M, Fanti S, Hruby G, Emmett L, Belka C, Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Henkenberens C, Aebersold DM, Wiegel T, Afshar-Oromieh A, Zamboglou C, Shelan M. The prognostic significance of a negative PSMA-PET scan prior to salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2024; 51:558-567. [PMID: 37736808 PMCID: PMC10774185 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-023-06438-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023]
Abstract
AIM The optimal management for early recurrent prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with negative prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography (PSMA-PET) scan is an ongoing subject of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of salvage radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with biochemical recurrence with negative PSMA PET finding. METHODS This retrospective, multicenter (11 centers, 5 countries) analysis included patients who underwent SRT following biochemical recurrence (BR) of PC after RP without evidence of disease on PSMA-PET staging. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), metastatic-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression assessed predefined predictors of survival outcomes. RESULTS Three hundred patients were included, 253 (84.3%) received SRT to the prostate bed only, 46 (15.3%) additional elective pelvic nodal irradiation, respectively. Only 41 patients (13.7%) received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Median follow-up after SRT was 33 months (IQR: 20-46 months). Three-year bRFS, MFS, and OS following SRT were 73.9%, 87.8%, and 99.1%, respectively. Three-year bRFS was 77.5% and 48.3% for patients with PSA levels before PSMA-PET ≤ 0.5 ng/ml and > 0.5 ng/ml, respectively. Using univariate analysis, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade > 2 (p = 0.006), metastatic pelvic lymph nodes at surgery (p = 0.032), seminal vesicle involvement (p < 0.001), pre-SRT PSA level of > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.004), and lack of concomitant ADT (p = 0.023) were significantly associated with worse bRFS. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards, seminal vesicle infiltration (p = 0.007), ISUP score >2 (p = 0.048), and pre SRT PSA level > 0.5 ng/ml (p = 0.013) remained significantly associated with worse bRFS. CONCLUSION Favorable bRFS after SRT in patients with BR and negative PSMA-PET following RP was achieved. These data support the usage of early SRT for patients with negative PSMA-PET findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Adebahr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Alexander Althaus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Sophia Scharl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Iosif Strouthos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Andrea Farolfi
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesca Serani
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Helena Lanzafame
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Christian Trapp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan A Koerber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Alexis Vrachimis
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, German Oncology Center, University Hospital of the European University, Limassol, Cyprus
- C.A.R.I.C. Cancer Research & Innovation Center, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Simon K B Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie G C Kroeze
- Radiation Oncology Center KSA-KSB, Canton Hospital of Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Stefano Fanti
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - George Hruby
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital - University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Louise Emmett
- Department of Theranostics and Nuclear medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- St Vincent's Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Henkenberens
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medical School Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Ali Afshar-Oromieh
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site DKTK-Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
- Berta-Ottenstein-Programme, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zheng K, Hai Y, Xi Y, Zhang Y, Liu Z, Chen W, Hu X, Zou X, Hao J. Integrative multi-omics analysis unveils stemness-associated molecular subtypes in prostate cancer and pan-cancer: prognostic and therapeutic significance. J Transl Med 2023; 21:789. [PMID: 37936202 PMCID: PMC10629187 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-023-04683-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2023] [Accepted: 10/29/2023] [Indexed: 11/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate cancer (PCA) is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, with limited treatment options in the advanced stages. The immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) of PCA results in lower sensitivity to immunotherapy. Although molecular subtyping is expected to offer important clues for precision treatment of PCA, there is currently a shortage of dependable and effective molecular typing methods available for clinical practice. Therefore, we aim to propose a novel stemness-based classification approach to guide personalized clinical treatments, including immunotherapy. METHODS An integrative multi-omics analysis of PCA was performed to evaluate stemness-level heterogeneities. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering was used to classify PCAs based on stemness signature genes. To make stemness-based patient classification more clinically applicable, a stemness subtype predictor was jointly developed by using four PCA datasets and 76 machine learning algorithms. RESULTS We identified stemness signatures of PCA comprising 18 signaling pathways, by which we classified PCA samples into three stemness subtypes via unsupervised hierarchical clustering: low stemness (LS), medium stemness (MS), and high stemness (HS) subtypes. HS patients are sensitive to androgen deprivation therapy, taxanes, and immunotherapy and have the highest stemness, malignancy, tumor mutation load (TMB) levels, worst prognosis, and immunosuppression. LS patients are sensitive to platinum-based chemotherapy but resistant to immunotherapy and have the lowest stemness, malignancy, and TMB levels, best prognosis, and the highest immune infiltration. MS patients represent an intermediate status of stemness, malignancy, and TMB levels with a moderate prognosis. We further demonstrated that these three stemness subtypes are conserved across pan-tumor. Additionally, the 9-gene stemness subtype predictor we developed has a comparable capability to 18 signaling pathways to make tumor diagnosis and to predict tumor recurrence, metastasis, progression, prognosis, and efficacy of different treatments. CONCLUSIONS The three stemness subtypes we identified have the potential to be a powerful tool for clinical tumor molecular classification in PCA and pan-cancer, and to guide the selection of immunotherapy or other sensitive treatments for tumor patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kun Zheng
- Department of Urology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200233, China
| | - Youlong Hai
- Department of Urology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200233, China
| | - Yue Xi
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, 250013, Shandong, China
| | - Yukun Zhang
- Beijing University of Chinese Medicine East Hospital, Zaozhuang Hospital, Zaozhuang, 277000, Shandong, China
| | - Zheqi Liu
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China
| | - Wantao Chen
- Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology & Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center of Stomatology, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200011, China
| | - Xiaoyong Hu
- Department of Urology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200233, China.
| | - Xin Zou
- Jinshan Hospital Center for Tumor Diagnosis & Therapy, Jinshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 201508, China.
- Department of Pathology, Jinshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 201508, China.
| | - Jie Hao
- Institute of Clinical Science, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ah-Thiane L, Sargos P, Chapet O, Jolicoeur M, Terlizzi M, Salembier C, Boustani J, Prevost C, Gaudioz S, Derashodian T, Palumbo S, De Hertogh O, Créhange G, Zilli T, Supiot S. Managing postoperative biochemical relapse in prostate cancer, from the perspective of the Francophone group of Urological radiotherapy (GFRU). Cancer Treat Rev 2023; 120:102626. [PMID: 37734178 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102626] [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: 06/12/2023] [Revised: 09/14/2023] [Accepted: 09/15/2023] [Indexed: 09/23/2023]
Abstract
Up to 50% of patients treated with radical surgery for localized prostate cancer may experience biochemical recurrence that requires appropriate management. Definitions of biochemical relapse may vary, but, in all cases, consist of an increase in a PSA without clinical or radiological signs of disease. Molecular imaging through to positron emission tomography has taken a preponderant place in relapse diagnosis, progressively replacing bone scan and CT-scan. Prostate bed radiotherapy is currently a key treatment, the action of which should be potentiated by androgen deprivation therapy. Nowadays perspectives consist in determining the best combination therapies, particularly thanks to next-generation hormone therapies, but not exclusively. Several trials are ongoing and should address these issues. We present here a literature review aiming to discuss the current management of biochemical relapse in prostate cancer after radical surgery, in lights of recent findings, as well as future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Loic Ah-Thiane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ICO René Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Bergonie Institute, Bordeaux, France
| | - Olivier Chapet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Marjory Jolicoeur
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charles Le Moyne Hospital, Montreal, Canada
| | - Mario Terlizzi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif, France
| | - Carl Salembier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Europe Hospitals Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jihane Boustani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU Besançon, Besançon, France
| | - Célia Prevost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Sonya Gaudioz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Talar Derashodian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sindi Ahluwalia Hawkins Centre, Kelowna, Canada
| | - Samuel Palumbo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU UCL Namur-Sainte Elisabeth, Namur, Belgium
| | - Olivier De Hertogh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHR Verviers East Belgium, Verviers, Belgium
| | - Gilles Créhange
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Curie Institute, Saint-Cloud, France
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ICO René Gauducheau, St-Herblain, France.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Spratt DE, Liu VYT, Michalski J, Davicioni E, Berlin A, Simko JP, Efstathiou JA, Tran PT, Sandler HM, Hall WA, Thompson DJS, Parliament MB, Dayes IS, Correa RJM, Robertson JM, Gore EM, Doncals DE, Vigneault E, Souhami L, Karrison TG, Feng FY. Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:370-377. [PMID: 37137444 PMCID: PMC10949135 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2022] [Revised: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Intermediate-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state with diverse treatment options. The 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) retrospectively has shown to improve risk stratification in these patients. We assessed the performance of the GC in men with intermediate-risk disease enrolled in NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26 with updated follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS After National Cancer Institute approval, biopsy slides were collected from NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26, a randomized phase 3 trial of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of radiation therapy without androgen deprivation therapy. RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor foci to generate the locked 22-gene GC model. The primary endpoint for this ancillary project was disease progression (composite of biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and use of salvage therapy). Individual endpoints were also assessed. Fine-Gray or cause-specific Cox multivariable models were constructed adjusting for randomization arm and trial stratification factors. RESULTS Two-hundred fifteen patient samples passed quality control for analysis. The median follow-up was 12.8 years (range, 2.4-17.7). On multivariable analysis, the 22-gene GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently prognostic for disease progression (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.26; P = .04), biochemical failure (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37; P < .001), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.55; P = .01), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (sHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76; P < .001). Ten-year distant metastasis in GC low-risk patients was 4% compared with 16% for GC high-risk patients. In patients with lower GC scores, the 10-year difference in metastasis-free survival rate between arms was -7%, compared with 21% for higher GC patients (P-interaction = .04). CONCLUSIONS This study represents the first validation of a biopsy-based gene expression classifier, assessing both its prognostic and predictive value, using data from a randomized phase 3 trial of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Decipher improves risk stratification and can aid in treatment decision-making in men with intermediate-risk disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio.
| | | | - Jeff Michalski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
| | | | - Alejandro Berlin
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jeffry P Simko
- Department of Pathology, UCSF Medical Center-Mount Zion, San Francisco, California
| | - Jason A Efstathiou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Phuoc T Tran
- Department of Pathology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Howard M Sandler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - William A Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | | | - Matthew B Parliament
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Ian S Dayes
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Hamilton Regional Cancer Centre, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - John M Robertson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health CCOP, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Elizabeth M Gore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Milwaukee VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | | | - Eric Vigneault
- Department of Radiation Oncology, CHU de Quebec Universite Laval, Quebec, Canada
| | - Luis Souhami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars Cancer Centre, McGill University, Quebec, Canada
| | - Theodore G Karrison
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Felix Y Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Champion A, Zwhalen DR, Oehler C, Taussky D, Kroeze SGC, Burger IA, Benzaquen D. Can PSMA PET/CT help in dose-tailoring in post-prostatectomy radiotherapy? Front Oncol 2023; 13:1268309. [PMID: 37799463 PMCID: PMC10548198 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1268309] [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: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 10/07/2023] Open
Abstract
There are few randomized trials to evaluate the use of PSMA-PET in the planning of post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. There are two unresolved questions 1) should we increase the dose to lesions visible on PSMA-PET 2) can we reduce dose in the case of a negative PSMA-PET. In this review, we summarize and discuss the available evidence in the literature. We found that in general, there seems to be an advantage for dose-increase, but ta large recent study from the pre-PSMA era didn't show an advantage for dose escalation. Retrospective studies have shown that conventional doses to PSMA-PET-positive lesions seem sufficient. On the other hand, in the case of a negative PSMA-PET, there is no evidence that dose-reduction is possible. In the future, the combination of PSMA-PET with genomic classifiers could help in better identify patients who might benefit from either dose- de-or -increase. We further need to identify intraindividual references to help identify lesions with higher aggressiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Christoph Oehler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Taussky
- Radiation Oncology, Hôpital de La Tour, Meyrin, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Stephanie G. C. Kroeze
- Department of Radiation Oncology Kantonsspital Aarau and Baden, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Irene A. Burger
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Jiang T, Valle LF, Kishan AU. Contemporary Evaluation of Salvage Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Radiotherapy Dose, Field Size, and Use of Hormone Therapy. Eur Urol 2023; 84:257-259. [PMID: 37246070 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Revised: 04/27/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Studies have provided high-level evidence on various aspects of salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy, including field design, dose and fractionation, and additional hormonal therapy regimens. For patients with higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at SRT, addition of hormonal therapy and pelvic nodal radiation will improve PSA-based endpoints. By contrast, dose escalation is not supported by level 1 evidence in this setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tommy Jiang
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Luca F Valle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, CA, USA
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Bitting RL, Wu Y, Somarelli JA, Proudfoot JA, Liu Y, Davicioni E, George DJ, Armstrong AJ. Transcriptomic Signatures Associated With Outcomes in Recurrent Prostate Cancer Treated With Salvage Radiation, Androgen-Deprivation Therapy, and Enzalutamide: Correlative Analysis of the STREAM Trial. JCO Precis Oncol 2023; 7:e2300214. [PMID: 37595184 PMCID: PMC10581641 DOI: 10.1200/po.23.00214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2023] [Revised: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 08/20/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Men with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP) may progress despite radiation and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Tissue-based transcriptomic signatures can identify who may benefit from a more aggressive systemic approach. METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective phase II multicenter trial of enzalutamide, ADT, and salvage radiotherapy in men with rising PSA after RP. Tumor tissue was analyzed using the Decipher platform for gene expression, including a novel prostate subtyping classifier, PTEN loss, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and ADT response. Cox models were used to associate signature scores with progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Of the 38 men enrolled, 31 had tissue with sufficient-quality RNA for genomic analysis. Luminal differentiated (LD) subtype tumors had the longest 3-year PFS at 89% compared with 19% in the luminal proliferating subtype. Men with signatures of PTEN loss (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.64; P = .01) or HRD (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.39; P = .009) had worse PFS, while those with higher ADT response signature scores (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.94; P = .01) were associated with improved PFS. Analysis of these signatures in a large cohort (n = 5,330) of RP samples from patients with biochemical recurrence found that these signatures provide complementary information related to outcomes with salvage radiation. CONCLUSION Despite aggressive systemic therapy with salvage radiation, nearly 50% of high-risk men relapse within 3 years. We show that LD and higher ADT sensitivity tumors had favorable outcomes. Those with a luminal proliferating subtype, PTEN loss, and/or HRD signatures had poor outcomes despite ADT/radiation and enzalutamide and may benefit from alternative approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rhonda L. Bitting
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC
| | - Yuan Wu
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC
| | - Jason A. Somarelli
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC
| | | | - Yang Liu
- Veracyte, Inc, San Francisco, CA
| | | | - Daniel J. George
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sutera P, Skinner H, Witek M, Mishra M, Kwok Y, Davicioni E, Feng F, Song D, Nichols E, Tran PT, Bergom C. Histology Specific Molecular Biomarkers: Ushering in a New Era of Precision Radiation Oncology. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:232-242. [PMID: 37331778 PMCID: PMC10446901 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/20/2023]
Abstract
Histopathology and clinical staging have historically formed the backbone for allocation of treatment decisions in oncology. Although this has provided an extremely practical and fruitful approach for decades, it has long been evident that these data alone do not adequately capture the heterogeneity and breadth of disease trajectories experienced by patients. As efficient and affordable DNA and RNA sequencing have become available, the ability to provide precision therapy has become within grasp. This has been realized with systemic oncologic therapy, as targeted therapies have demonstrated immense promise for subsets of patients with oncogene-driver mutations. Further, several studies have evaluated predictive biomarkers for response to systemic therapy within a variety of malignancies. Within radiation oncology, the use of genomics/transcriptomics to guide the use, dose, and fractionation of radiation therapy is rapidly evolving but still in its infancy. The genomic adjusted radiation dose/radiation sensitivity index is one such early and exciting effort to provide genomically guided radiation dosing with a pan-cancer approach. In addition to this broad method, a histology specific approach to precision radiation therapy is also underway. Herein we review select literature surrounding the use of histology specific, molecular biomarkers to allow for precision radiotherapy with the greatest emphasis on commercially available and prospectively validated biomarkers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip Sutera
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Heath Skinner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Matthew Witek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mark Mishra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Young Kwok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Felix Feng
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Medicine and Urology, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Daniel Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elizabeth Nichols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Phuoc T. Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Carmen Bergom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Desai NB, Dal Pra A, Chua MLK, Berlin A. Passing the Kool-Aid Point: mRNA Expression-Based Risk Classifiers in Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Making. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 116:530-532. [PMID: 37270247 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Accepted: 12/04/2022] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Neil B Desai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas.
| | - Alan Dal Pra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida
| | - Melvin L K Chua
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore & Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Alejandro Berlin
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Padayachee J, Chaudhary S, Shim B, So J, Lim R, Raman S. Utilizing clinical, pathological and radiological information to guide postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2023; 23:293-305. [PMID: 36795862 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2023.2181795] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/18/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A detectable and rising PSA following radical prostatectomy is indicative of recurrent prostate cancer. Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) with/without androgen deprivation therapy represents the main treatment option for these patients and has been historically associated with a biochemical control rate of ~70%. To determine the optimal timing, diagnostic workup, radiotherapy dosefractionation, treatment volume, and use of systemic therapy, several informative studies have been conducted in the last decade. AREAS COVERED This review examines the recent evidence to guide radiotherapy decision making in the SRT setting. Key topics include adjuvant vs salvage RT, utilization of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, length of androgen deprivation therapy, inclusion of elective pelvic volume, and emerging role for hypofractionation. EXPERT OPINION Recently reported trials, conducted in an era prior to the routine use of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, have been pivotal in establishing the current standard of care for SRT in prostate cancer. However, decisions about radiation treatment and systemic therapy may be tailored based on available prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Data from contemporary clinical trials are awaited to define and establish individualized, biomarker-driven approaches for SRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jerusha Padayachee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Simone Chaudhary
- Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, Radiation Medicine Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Brian Shim
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jonathan So
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Remy Lim
- Mercy PET/CT Epsom, Auckland, New Zealand.,Department of Radiology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Srinivas Raman
- Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, Radiation Medicine Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Gillessen S, Bossi A, Davis ID, de Bono J, Fizazi K, James ND, Mottet N, Shore N, Small E, Smith M, Sweeney C, Tombal B, Antonarakis ES, Aparicio AM, Armstrong AJ, Attard G, Beer TM, Beltran H, Bjartell A, Blanchard P, Briganti A, Bristow RG, Bulbul M, Caffo O, Castellano D, Castro E, Cheng HH, Chi KN, Chowdhury S, Clarke CS, Clarke N, Daugaard G, De Santis M, Duran I, Eeles R, Efstathiou E, Efstathiou J, Ngozi Ekeke O, Evans CP, Fanti S, Feng FY, Fonteyne V, Fossati N, Frydenberg M, George D, Gleave M, Gravis G, Halabi S, Heinrich D, Herrmann K, Higano C, Hofman MS, Horvath LG, Hussain M, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones R, Kanesvaran R, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Khauli RB, Klotz L, Kramer G, Leibowitz R, Logothetis CJ, Mahal BA, Maluf F, Mateo J, Matheson D, Mehra N, Merseburger A, Morgans AK, Morris MJ, Mrabti H, Mukherji D, Murphy DG, Murthy V, Nguyen PL, Oh WK, Ost P, O'Sullivan JM, Padhani AR, Pezaro C, Poon DMC, Pritchard CC, Rabah DM, Rathkopf D, Reiter RE, Rubin MA, Ryan CJ, Saad F, Pablo Sade J, Sartor OA, Scher HI, Sharifi N, Skoneczna I, Soule H, Spratt DE, Srinivas S, Sternberg CN, Steuber T, Suzuki H, Sydes MR, Taplin ME, Tilki D, Türkeri L, Turco F, Uemura H, Uemura H, Ürün Y, Vale CL, van Oort I, Vapiwala N, Walz J, Yamoah K, Ye D, Yu EY, Zapatero A, Zilli T, Omlin A. Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022. Eur Urol 2023; 83:267-293. [PMID: 36494221 PMCID: PMC7614721 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Accepted: 11/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silke Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
| | - Alberto Bossi
- Genitourinary Oncology, Prostate Brachytherapy Unit, Gustave Roussy, Paris, France
| | - Ian D Davis
- Monash University and Eastern Health, Victoria, Australia
| | - Johann de Bono
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Karim Fizazi
- Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | | | | | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA; Urology/Surgical Oncology, GenesisCare, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Eric Small
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Mathew Smith
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Christopher Sweeney
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | - Ana M Aparicio
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Andrew J Armstrong
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Tomasz M Beer
- Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Himisha Beltran
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Anders Bjartell
- Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Département de Radiothérapie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Rob G Bristow
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Christie NHS Trust and CRUK Manchester Institute and Cancer Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Muhammad Bulbul
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Orazio Caffo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy
| | - Daniel Castellano
- Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Elena Castro
- Institute of Biomedical Research in Málaga (IBIMA), Málaga, Spain
| | - Heather H Cheng
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Kim N Chi
- BC Cancer, Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Caroline S Clarke
- Research Department of Primary Care & Population Health, Royal Free Campus, University College London, London, UK
| | - Noel Clarke
- The Christie and Salford Royal Hospitals, Manchester, UK
| | - Gedske Daugaard
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Maria De Santis
- Department of Urology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ignacio Duran
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, IDIVAL, Santander, Cantabria, Spain
| | - Ros Eeles
- The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Jason Efstathiou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Onyeanunam Ngozi Ekeke
- Department of Surgery, University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, Alakahia, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
| | | | - Stefano Fanti
- IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Felix Y Feng
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Valerie Fonteyne
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Nicola Fossati
- Department of Urology, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Civico USI - Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Mark Frydenberg
- Department of Surgery, Prostate Cancer Research Program, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Anatomy & Developmental Biology, Faculty of Nursing, Medicine & Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Daniel George
- Department of Medicine, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Surgery, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Martin Gleave
- Urological Sciences, Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Gwenaelle Gravis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France
| | - Susan Halabi
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Daniel Heinrich
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Gjøvik, Norway
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Celestia Higano
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Michael S Hofman
- Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Lisa G Horvath
- Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia; Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, Sydney, NSW, Australia; The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Maha Hussain
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiotherapy, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Robert Jones
- School of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | | | - Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University and Tampere Cancer Center, Tampere, Finland; Research, Development and Innovation Center, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - Raja B Khauli
- Department of Urology and the Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute (NKBCI), American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Laurence Klotz
- Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Gero Kramer
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Raya Leibowitz
- Oncology Institute, Shamir Medical Center, Be'er Ya'akov, Israel; Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
| | - Christopher J Logothetis
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; University of Athens Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Brandon A Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Fernando Maluf
- Beneficiência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil; Departamento de Oncologia, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Joaquin Mateo
- Department of Medical Oncology and Prostate Cancer Translational Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO) and Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - David Matheson
- Faculty of Education, Health and Wellbeing, Walsall Campus, Walsall, UK
| | - Niven Mehra
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Axel Merseburger
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Luebeck, Germany
| | - Alicia K Morgans
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Michael J Morris
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hind Mrabti
- National Institute of Oncology, Mohamed V University, Rabat, Morocco
| | - Deborah Mukherji
- Clemenceau Medical Center, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Declan G Murphy
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | | | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - William K Oh
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, The Tisch Cancer Institute, New York, NY, USA
| | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Joe M O'Sullivan
- Patrick G. Johnston Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland Cancer Centre, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Carmel Pezaro
- Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Darren M C Poon
- Comprehensive Oncology Centre, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Hong Kong; The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong
| | - Colin C Pritchard
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Danny M Rabah
- Cancer Research Chair and Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Department of Urology, KFSHRC, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Dana Rathkopf
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Mark A Rubin
- Bern Center for Precision Medicine and Department for Biomedical Research, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Charles J Ryan
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Fred Saad
- Centre Hospitalier de Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | - Howard I Scher
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nima Sharifi
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Cancer Biology, GU Malignancies Research Center, Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Iwona Skoneczna
- Rafal Masztak Grochowski Hospital, Maria Sklodowska Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Howard Soule
- Prostate Cancer Foundation, Santa Monica, CA, USA
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Sandy Srinivas
- Division of Medical Oncology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Cora N Sternberg
- Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Meyer Cancer Center, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Thomas Steuber
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Matthew R Sydes
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mary-Ellen Taplin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - 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
| | - Levent Türkeri
- Department of Urology, M.A. Aydınlar Acıbadem University, Altunizade Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Fabio Turco
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland
| | - Hiroji Uemura
- Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Hirotsugu Uemura
- Department of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Yüksel Ürün
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey; Ankara University Cancer Research Institute, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Claire L Vale
- University College London, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK
| | - Inge van Oort
- Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jochen Walz
- Department of Urology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes Cancer Centre, Marseille, France
| | - Kosj Yamoah
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Dingwei Ye
- Department of Urology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Evan Y Yu
- Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Almudena Zapatero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Health Research Institute, Madrid, Spain
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, EOC, Bellinzona, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Aurelius Omlin
- Onkozentrum Zurich, University of Zurich and Tumorzentrum Hirslanden Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Tran PT, Lowe K, Tsai HL, Song DY, Hung AY, Hearn JW, Miller S, Proudfoot JA, Deek MP, Phillips R, Lotan T, Paller CJ, Marshall CH, Markowski M, Dipasquale S, Denmeade S, Carducci M, Eisenberger M, DeWeese TL, Orton M, Deville C, Davicioni E, Liauw SL, Heath EI, Greco S, Desai NB, Spratt DE, Feng F, Wang H, Beer TM, Antonarakis ES. Phase II Randomized Study of Salvage Radiation Therapy Plus Enzalutamide or Placebo for High-Risk Prostate-Specific Antigen Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: The SALV-ENZA Trial. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:1307-1317. [PMID: 36367998 PMCID: PMC9940936 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01662] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Revised: 09/09/2022] [Accepted: 09/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to investigate whether enzalutamide (ENZA), without concurrent androgen deprivation therapy, increases freedom from prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression (FFPP) when combined with salvage radiation therapy (SRT) in men with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after RP were enrolled into a randomized, double-blind, phase II, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of SRT plus ENZA or placebo (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02203695). Random assignment (1:1) was stratified by center, surgical margin status (R0 v R1), PSA before salvage treatment (PSA ≥ 0.5 v < 0.5 ng/mL), and pathologic Gleason sum (7 v 8-10). Patients were assigned to receive either ENZA 160 mg once daily or matching placebo for 6 months. After 2 months of study drug therapy, external-beam radiation (66.6-70.2 Gy) was administered to the prostate bed (no pelvic nodes). The primary end point was FFPP in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary end points were time to local recurrence within the radiation field, metastasis-free survival, and safety as determined by frequency and severity of adverse events. RESULTS Eighty-six (86) patients were randomly assigned, with a median follow-up of 34 (range, 0-52) months. Trial arms were well balanced. The median pre-SRT PSA was 0.3 (range, 0.06-4.6) ng/mL, 56 of 86 patients (65%) had extraprostatic disease (pT3), 39 of 86 (45%) had a Gleason sum of 8-10, and 43 of 86 (50%) had positive surgical margins (R1). FFPP was significantly improved with ENZA versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.92; P = .031), and 2-year FFPP was 84% versus 66%, respectively. Subgroup analyses demonstrated differential benefit of ENZA in men with pT3 (HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.69) versus pT2 disease (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 5.47; Pinteraction = .019) and R1 (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.64) versus R0 disease (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.36 to 2.76; Pinteraction = .023). There were insufficient secondary end point events for analysis. The most common adverse events were grade 1-2 fatigue (65% ENZA v 53% placebo) and urinary frequency (40% ENZA v 49% placebo). CONCLUSION SRT plus ENZA monotherapy for 6 months in men with PSA-recurrent high-risk prostate cancer after RP is safe and delays PSA progression relative to SRT alone. The impact of ENZA on distant metastasis or survival is unknown at this time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phuoc T. Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- Current address: Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD
| | - Kathryn Lowe
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Hua-Ling Tsai
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Daniel Y. Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Arthur Y. Hung
- Department of Radiation Medicine, OHSU Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR
| | - Jason W.D. Hearn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Steven Miller
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI
| | | | - Matthew P. Deek
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Ryan Phillips
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Tamara Lotan
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Channing J. Paller
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Catherine H. Marshall
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Mark Markowski
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Shirl Dipasquale
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Samuel Denmeade
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Michael Carducci
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Mario Eisenberger
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Theodore L. DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Matthew Orton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Indiana University Health Arnett, Lafayette, IN
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | - Stanley L. Liauw
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Elisabeth I. Heath
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI
| | - Stephen Greco
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Neil B. Desai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Daniel E. Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH
| | - Felix Feng
- Departments of Medicine, Radiation Oncology and Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Hao Wang
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Tomasz M. Beer
- OHSU Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR
| | - Emmanuel S. Antonarakis
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
- Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Predicting tumour radiosensitivity to deliver precision radiotherapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2023; 20:83-98. [PMID: 36477705 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-022-00709-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Owing to advances in radiotherapy, the physical properties of radiation can be optimized to enable individualized treatment; however, optimization is rarely based on biological properties and, therefore, treatments are generally planned with the assumption that all tumours respond similarly to radiation. Radiation affects multiple cellular pathways, including DNA damage, hypoxia, proliferation, stem cell phenotype and immune response. In this Review, we summarize the effect of these pathways on tumour responses to radiotherapy and the current state of research on genomic classifiers designed to exploit these variations to inform treatment decisions. We also discuss whether advances in genomics have generated evidence that could be practice changing and whether advances in genomics are now ready to be used to guide the delivery of radiotherapy alone or in combination.
Collapse
|
18
|
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
|
19
|
Dover L, Dulaney C. PROshot: Borderline Resectable Pancreas SBRT, Surrogate Endpoints, Axillary Dissection, Genomic Classifiers, and Spine SBRT. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:459-463. [PMID: 36334933 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2022] [Revised: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/01/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Dover
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ascension St. Vincent's East, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Caleb Dulaney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Anderson Regional Health System, Meridian, Mississippi.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Bogdanova NV, Radmanesh H, Ramachandran D, Knoechelmann AC, Christiansen H, Derlin T, von Klot CAJ, Merten R, Henkenberens C. The Prognostic Value of Liquid Biopsies for Benefit of Salvage Radiotherapy in Relapsed Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14174095. [PMID: 36077632 PMCID: PMC9454496 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2022] [Revised: 08/15/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Around 30% of patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer relapse will benefit from local PET/CT-guided ablative radiotherapy (RT) with improved progression-free and ADT (Androgene Deprivation Therapy)-free survivals. Therefore, there is an urgent need for predictive testing for therapeutic benefits prior to initiation. Various tests have already been established on tumor specimens for the prediction of prostate cancer’s behavior or therapy outcome. However, in imaging-proven relapse tumor tissue from the local recurrence or metastases is often not available. Hence, there is a need for a liquid biopsy-based testing. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of CTCs- associated mRNA and blood-derived RNA for the benefit of PSMA PET-guided salvage RT in oligometastatic prostate cancer relapses. Significant correlations were found between the relative transcript levels of several investigated genes and clinicopathological parameters. Furthermore, distinct “transcriptional signatures” were found in patients with temporary and long-term benefits from RT. Abstract To assess the prognostic value of “liquid biopsies” for the benefit of salvage RT in oligometastatic prostate cancer relapse, we enrolled 44 patients in the study between the years 2016 and 2020. All the patients were diagnosed as having an oligometastatic prostate cancer relapse on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET-CT and underwent irradiation at the Department of Radiotherapy at the Hannover Medical School. Tumor cells and total RNA, enriched from the liquid biopsies of patients, were processed for the subsequent quantification analysis of relative transcript levels in real-time PCR. In total, 54 gene transcripts known or suggested to be associated with prostate cancer or treatment outcome were prioritized for analysis. We found significant correlations between the relative transcript levels of several investigated genes and the Gleason score, PSA (prostate-specific antigen) value, or UICC stage (tumor node metastasis -TNM classification of malignant tumors from Union for International Cancer Control). Furthermore, a significant association of MTCO2, FOXM1, SREBF1, HOXB7, FDXR, and MTRNR transcript profiles was found with a temporary and/or long-term benefit from RT. Further studies on larger patients cohorts are necessary to prove our preliminary findings for establishing liquid biopsy tests as a predictive examination method prior to salvage RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalia V. Bogdanova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Hoda Radmanesh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Dhanya Ramachandran
- Gynecology Research Unit, Clinics of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | | | - Hans Christiansen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | - Thorsten Derlin
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
| | | | - Roland Merten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-(0)-511-532-3590
| | | |
Collapse
|