More Extensive Lymph Node Dissection at Radical Prostatectomy is Associated with Improved Outcomes with Salvage Radiotherapy for Rising Prostate-specific Antigen After Surgery: A Long-term, Multi-institutional Analysis

A comparative analysis of perioperative complications and biochemical recurrence between standard and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is commonly performed during radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer staging. This study aimed to comprehensively analyze existing evidence compare perioperative complications associated with standard (sPLND) versus extended PLND templates (ePLND) in RP patients.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of prospective studies on PLND complications was conducted. Systematic searches were performed on Web of Science, Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library until May 2023. Risk ratios (RRs) were estimated using random-effects models in the meta-analysis. The statistical analysis of the data was carried out using Review Manager software.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including three randomized clinical trial and six prospective studies, with a total of 4962 patients were analyzed. The meta-analysis revealed that patients undergoing ePLND had a higher risk of partial perioperative complications, such as lymphedema ( I2 =28%; RR 0.05; 95% CI: 0.01-0.27; P <0.001) and urinary retention ( I2 =0%; RR 0.30; 95% CI: 0.09-0.94; P =0.04) compared to those undergoing sPLND. However, there were no significant difference was observed in pelvic hematoma ( I2 =0%; RR 1.65; 95% CI: 0.44-6.17; P =0.46), thromboembolic ( I2 =57%; RR 0.91; 95% CI: 0.35-2.38; P =0.85), ureteral injury ( I2 =33%; RR 0.28; 95% CI: 0.05-1.52; P =0.14), intraoperative bowel injury ( I2 =0%; RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.14-5.27; P =0.88), and lymphocele ( I2 =0%; RR 1.58; 95% CI: 0.54-4.60; P =0.40) between sPLND and ePLND. Additionally, no significant difference was observed in overall perioperative complications ( I2 =85%; RR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.40-1.16; P =0.16). Furthermore, ePLND did not significantly reduce biochemical recurrence ( I2 =68%; RR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.28-1.24; P =0.16) of prostate cancer.

CONCLUSION

This analysis found no significant differences in overall perioperative complications or biochemical recurrence between sPLND and ePLND, but ePLND may offer enhanced diagnostic advantages by increasing the detection rate of lymph node metastasis.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen Radioguided Surgery to Detect Nodal Metastases in Primary Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: Results of a Planned Interim Analysis of a Prospective Phase 2 Study

BACKGROUND

Extended pelvic nodal dissection (ePLND) represents the gold standard for nodal staging in prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioguided surgery (RGS) could identify lymph node invasion (LNI) during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

OBJECTIVE

To report the planned interim analyses of a phase 2 prospective study (NCT04832958) aimed at describing PSMA-RGS during RARP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A phase 2 trial aimed at enrolling 100 patients with intermediate- or high-risk cN0cM0 PCa at conventional imaging with a risk of LNI of >5% was conducted. Overall, 18 patients were enrolled between June 2021 and March 2022. Among them, 12 patients underwent PSMA-RGS and represented the study cohort.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

All patients received ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging; ^99mTc-PSMA-I&S was synthesised and administered intravenously the day before surgery, followed by single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography. A Drop-In gamma probe was used for in vivo measurements. All positive lesions (count rate ≥2 compared with background) were excised and ePLND was performed.

MEASUREMENTS

Side effects, perioperative outcomes, and performance characteristics of robot-assisted PSMA-RGS for LNI were measured.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Overall, four (33%), six (50%), and two (17%) patients had intermediate-risk, high-risk, and locally advanced PCa. Overall, two (17%) patients had pathologic nodal uptake at PSMA PET. The median operative time, blood loss, and length of stay were 230 min, 100 ml, and 5 d, respectively. No adverse events and intraoperative complications were recorded. One patient experienced a 30-d complication (Clavien-Dindo 2; 8.3%). Overall, three (25%) patients had LNI at ePLND. At per-region analyses on 96 nodal areas, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of PSMA-RGS were 63%, 99%, 83%, and 96%, respectively. On a per-patient level, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of PSMA-RGS were 67%, 100%, 100%, and 90%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted PSMA-RGS in primary staging is a safe and feasible procedure characterised by acceptable specificity but suboptimal sensitivity, missing micrometastatic nodal disease.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate-specific membrane antigen radioguided robot-assisted surgery is a safe and feasible procedure for the intraoperative identification of nodal metastases in cN0cM0 prostate cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with extended pelvic lymph node dissection. However, this approach might still miss micrometastatic nodal dissemination.

Elective nodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer

In patients with prostate cancer who have a high risk of pelvic nodal disease, the use of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy is still controversial. Two large, randomised, controlled trials (RTOG 9413 and GETUG-01) did not show a benefit of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy over prostate-only radiotherapy. In 2020, the POP-RT trial established the role of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy in patients who have more than a 35% risk of lymph node invasion (known as the Roach formula). POP-RT stressed the importance of patient selection. In patients with cN1 (clinically node positive) disease or pN1 (pathologically node positive) disease, the addition of whole pelvis radiotherapy to androgen deprivation therapy significantly improved survival compared with androgen deprivation therapy alone, as shown in large, retrospective studies. This patient population might increase in the future because use of the more sensitive prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT will become the standard staging procedure. Additionally, the SPORTT trial suggested a benefit of whole pelvis radiotherapy in biochemical recurrence-free survival in the salvage setting. A correct definition of the upper field border, which should include the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta, is key in the use of pelvic radiotherapy. As a result of using modern radiotherapy technology, severe late urinary and intestinal toxic effects are rare and do not seem to increase compared with prostate-only radiotherapy.

Recommendations on robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a Brazilian experts' consensus

Radical prostatectomy is a commonly adopted treatment for localized/locally advanced prostate cancer in men with a life expectancy of ten years or more. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is comparable to open radical prostatectomy on cancer control and complication rates; however, new evidence suggests that RARP may have better functional outcomes, especially with respect to urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Some of the surgical steps of RARP are not adequately described in published literature and, as such, may have an impact on the final outcomes of the procedure. We organized a Brazilian experts' panel to evaluate best practices in RARP. The confection of the recommendations broadly involved: selection of the experts; establishment of working groups; systematic review of the literature and elaboration of a questionnaire; and construction of the final text with the approval of all participants. The participants reviewed the publications in English from December 2019 to February 2020. A one-round Delphi technique was employed in 188 questions. Five reviewers worked on the final recommendations using consensual and non-consensual questions. We found 59.9% of questions with greater than 70% agreement that were considered consensual. Non-consensual questions were reported according to the responses. The recommendations were based on evidence-based literature and individual perceptions adapted to the Brazilian reality, although some issues remain controversial. We believe that these recommendations may help urologists involved in RARP and hope that future discussions on this surgical procedure may evolve over the ensuing years.

Extended Versus Limited Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection During Radical Prostatectomy for Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer: Early Oncological Outcomes from a Randomized Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND

The role of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (EPLND) in the surgical management of prostate cancer (PCa) patients remains controversial, mainly because of a lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether EPLND has better oncological outcomes than limited PLND (LPLND.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a prospective, single-center phase 3 trial in patients with intermediate- or high-risk clinically localized PCa.

INTERVENTION

Randomization (1:1) to LPLND (obturator nodes) or EPLND (obturator, external iliac, internal iliac, common iliac, and presacral nodes) bilaterally.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). Secondary outcomes were metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and histopathological findings. The trial was designed to show a minimal 15% advantage in 5-yr BRFS by EPLND.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In total, 300 patients were randomized from May 2012 to December 2016 (150 LPLND and 150 EPLND). The median BRFS was 61.4 mo in the LPLND group and not reached in the EPLND group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-1.32; p =  0.6). Median MFS was not reached in either group (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.17-1.8; p =  0.3). CSS data were not available because no patient died from PCa before the cutoff date. In exploratory subgroup analysis, patients with preoperative biopsy International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade groups 3-5 who were allocated to EPLND had better BRFS (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.74, interaction p =  0.007). The short follow-up and surgeon heterogeneity are limitations to this study.

CONCLUSION

This RCT confirms that EPLND provides better pathological staging, while differences in early oncological outcomes were not demonstrated. Our subgroup analysis suggests a potential BCRFS benefit in patients diagnosed with ISUP grade groups 3-5; however, these findings should be considered hypothesis-generating and further RCTs with larger cohorts and longer follow up are necessary to better define the role of EPLND during RP.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we investigated early outcomes in prostate cancer patients undergoing prostatectomy according to the anatomic extent of lymph node resection. We found that extended removal of lymph nodes did not reduce biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer in the expected range.

The role of cystoprostatectomy in management of locally advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review

Background

The role of cystoprostatectomy for the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPC) was evaluated by a comprehensive review of contemporary literatures.

Methods

A systematic search of English language literatures using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library, from 1990 to 2018, was performed. Two independent authors reviewed abstracts as well as full-text articles and extracted data from the selected manuscripts.

Results

After the literature research, seven articles with a total of 211 patients were identified. Both 120 cases who received cystoprostatectomy for the primary treatment of LAPC and 91 cases for the salvage surgery after local recurrence were finally included. Overall incidence of positive surgical margins ranged from 25 to 78%. The incidence of major complications caused by the surgery during the follow-up time was limited. It had been reported that among LAPC patients who received cystoprostatectomy combined with adjuvant therapies, 5-year cancer-specific survival rate and 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was up to 87.1% and 62.2%. Moreover, symptoms such as hematuria and other urination dysfunctions, as well as patients’ quality of life were significantly improved after cystoprostatectomy in LAPC patients with the bladder invasion.

Conclusions

Cystoprostatectomy can serve as an alternative to the surgical step of multimodal therapy for highly selected LAPC patients with the bladder invasion, which may improve patients’ symptoms and related quality of life. Therefore, cystoprostatectomy as an option for the treatment of LAPC with the bladder invasion may be feasible and safe with considerable survival outcomes.

Facility-Level Variation in Pelvic Lymphadenectomy During Radical Prostatectomy and Effect on Overall Survival in Men with High-Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

This study was designed to examine facility-level variation in the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy and to determine whether more extensive lymphadenectomy is associated with a survival benefit among men with localized high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

Using data from the National Cancer Data Base, we identified 13,652 men with a high predicted probability of 10-year survival (≤ 65 years of age and Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0) who underwent radical prostatectomy at 1023 facilities for biopsy-confirmed localized high-risk prostate cancer diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2011. Multilevel, multinomial logistic regression was fitted to predict facility-level probability of receiving different extents of lymphadenectomy. Inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted Cox regression model with Bonferroni correction was fitted to compare risk of overall mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 11,284 (82.7%), 1601 (11.7%), and 767 (5.6%) men who underwent radical prostatectomy underwent concomitant none/limited lymphadenectomy (0-9 lymph nodes), standard lymphadenectomy (10-16 lymph nodes), and extended lymphadenectomy (≥ 17 lymph nodes), respectively. Extended lymphadenectomy was not associated with a survival benefit relative to standard lymphadenectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.23; p = 0.4) nor no/limited lymphadenectomy (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.87-2.20; p = 0.29) at a median follow-up of 83.3 months. Risk-adjusted facility-level predicted probabilities of extended, standard, or no/limited lymphadenectomy ranged from 0.01 to 52.6%, 3.3-53.3%, and 17.8-96.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found significant facility-level variation in the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy during radical prostatectomy despite no apparent survival benefit associated with more extensive lymphadenectomy. Further prospective data are needed to reevaluate the role of lymphadenectomy in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Rise in Node-Positive Prostate Cancer Incidence in Context of Evolving Use and Extent of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy

BACKGROUND

The incidence of node-positive prostate cancer has risen and might be partially explained by evolving use of lymphadenectomy at a population level. We assessed trends of node-positive prostate cancer in context of extent of lymphadenectomy among men treated surgically for prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study using data from a population-based cancer registry to identify men older than 50 years of age diagnosed with prostate cancer from 2010 to 2015 without distant metastases. We considered extent of node dissection as ordinal (1-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19, ≥20) and dichotomous (1-14, ≥15) variables. We fit multivariable models to assess trends in receipt of extended lymphadenectomy and then estimated odds of node-positive cancer on the basis of extent of lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

We identified 280,156 men diagnosed from 2010 to 2015; 5355 men (1.9%) had positive lymph nodes. Incidence of positive nodes increased from 6.4 to 8.4 cases per 100,000 men from 2010 to 2015 (standardized rate ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.44). Compared with 2010, prostatectomy patients with high-risk (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; 95% CI, 1.42-1.95) and intermediate-risk tumors (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.47-1.88) were more likely to undergo extended lymphadenectomy in 2015. Among high-risk patients, men with ≥20 nodes removed were 7 times more likely to have positive nodes, versus <5 removed (6.1% for 1-4 vs. 32.4% for ≥20; OR, 7.32; 95% CI, 6.16-8.71). After adjusting for extent of dissection, odds of node-positive disease did not increase between 2010 and 2015 (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98-1.39) among high-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

Increased incidence of node-positive prostate cancer in the United States is partially explained by more frequent use of extended lymphadenectomy.