Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in Asian Renal Transplant Recipients

Safety of Docetaxel in a Patient with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer After Kidney Transplantation: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

There are limitations in treating advanced prostate cancer (PC), especially castration-resistant (CR) cases, in renal transplant recipients (RTRs). We describe the case of RTR with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) treated with docetaxel.

CASE REPORT

A 60-year-old man with end-stage renal disease due to autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) underwent living-related kidney transplantation. A year later, he was diagnosed with PC (prostate-specific antigen level: 998 ng/mL). Prostate biopsy revealed prostatic adenocarcinoma with a Gleason score of 4 + 4 = 8. Radiographic examination revealed seminal vesicle invasion and multiple bone and lymph node metastases. Combined androgen blockade therapy was initiated; however, the patient was diagnosed with CRPC 6 months later. Triweekly docetaxel therapy was administered 28 months after diagnosis. The patient successfully completed 7 cycles of this therapy without major adverse events. However, after the 7th cycle, he developed a high fever caused by an infection of ADPKD-associated renal cysts. Therefore, docetaxel was discontinued, and enzalutamide was started, followed by abiraterone, but without any effect. We then introduced cabazitaxel but discontinued it because of hepatic dysfunction. Hence, the patient underwent a docetaxel rechallenge. He was administered the PEGylated form of the recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for neutropenia prophylaxis. After 6 cycles of rechallenge docetaxel therapy, the patient accidentally fell, resulting in a cervical spine fracture and subsequent death due to respiratory failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel can be safely delivered to patients with CRPC after renal transplantation who are taking oral immunosuppressants. It can be a good treatment option for them.

The role of localised prostate cancer treatment in renal transplant patients: A systematic review

Objective

To systematically review and critically appraise all treatment options for localised prostate cancer in renal transplant candidates and recipients.

Method

A systematic review was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, the Transplant Library and Trip database for studies published up to September 2022. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions for non-randomised studies tool.

Results

A total of 60 studies were identified describing 525 patients. The majority of studies were either retrospective non-randomised comparative or case series/reports of poor quality. The vast majority of studies were focussed on prostate cancer after renal transplantation. Overall, 410 (78%) patients underwent surgery, 93 (18%) patients underwent radiation therapy or brachytherapy, one patient underwent focal therapy (high-intensity frequency ultrasound) and 21 patients were placed on active surveillance. The mean age was 61 years old, the mean PSA level at diagnosis was 9.6 ng/mL and the mean follow-up time was 31 months. The majority of patients had low-risk disease with 261 patients having Gleason 6 prostate cancer (50%), followed by 220 Gleason 7 patients (42%). All prostate cancer mortality cases were in high-risk prostate cancer (≥Gleason 8). The cancer-specific survival results were similar between surgery and radiotherapy at 1 and 3 years.

Conclusion

Localised prostate cancer treatment in renal transplant patients should be risk stratified. Surgery and radiation treatment for localised prostate cancer in renal transplant patients appear equally efficacious. Given the limitations of this study, future research should concentrate on developing a multicentre RCT with long-term registry follow-up.

Prostate Cancer in Transplant Receivers-A Narrative Review on Oncological Outcomes

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a low tumor mutational burden (TMB) cancer with a poor response to immunotherapy. Nonetheless, immunotherapy can be useful, especially in metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC). Increased cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) density is correlated with a shorter overall survival (OS), an early biochemical relapse, and a generally poor PCa prognosis. An increased number of CCR4+ regulatory T cells (CCR4 + Tregs) relates to a higher Gleason score or earlier progression. The same therapeutic options are available for renal transplant recipients (RTRs) as for the population, with a comparable functional and oncological outcome. Radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) is the most common method of radical treatment in RTRs. Brachytherapy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) seem to be promising therapies. Further studies are needed to assess the need for prostatectomy in low-risk patients before transplantation. The rate of adverse pathological features in RTRs does not seem to differ from those observed in the non-transplant population and the achieved cancer control seems comparable. The association between PCa and transplantation is not entirely clear. Some researchers indicate a possible association between a more frequent occurrence of PCa and a worse prognosis in advanced or metastatic PCa. However, others claim that the risk and survival prognosis is comparable to the non-transplant population.

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Renal Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has been shown to achieve excellent oncological outcomes with a low rate of complications in patients with prostate cancer. However, data on RARP in renal transplant recipients (RT) are dispersed. A literature search was conducted through April 2023 using PubMed/Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases. The primary aim was to evaluate the safety, oncologic and clinical outcomes of RARP in RT recipients. The secondary aim was to identify surgical technique modifications required to avoid iatrogenic damage to the transplanted kidney. A total of 18 studies comprising 186 patients met the inclusion criteria. Age at the time of treatment ranged 43-79 years. Biopsy results showed a high prevalence of low- and intermediate-risk disease. Operative time ranged between 108.3 and 400 mins, while estimated blood loss ranged from 30 to 630 mL. Length of hospital stay ranged from 3 to 6 days whereas duration of catheterization was between 5 and 18 days. Perioperative complication rate was 17.1%. Overall positive surgical margin rate was 24.19%, while biochemical recurrence was observed in 10.21% (19/186 patients). Modifications to the standard surgical technique were described in 13/18 studies. Modifications in port placement were described in 7/13 studies and performed in 19/88 (21.6%) patients. Surgical technique for the development of the Retzius space was reported in 13/18 studies. Data on lymphadenectomy were reported in 15/18 studies. Bilateral lymphadenectomy was described in 3/18 studies and performed in 4/89 (4.5%) patients; contralateral lymphadenectomy was reported in 7/18 studies and performed in 41/125 (32.8%) patients. RARP in RTRs can be considered relatively safe and feasible. Oncological results yielded significantly worse outcomes in terms of PSM and BCR rate compared to the data available in the published studies, with an overall complication rate highly variable among the studies included. On the other hand, low graft damage during the procedure was observed. Main criticisms came from different tumor screening protocols and scarce information about lymphadenectomy techniques and outcomes among the included studies.

Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Objective:

Management of prostate cancer in kidney transplant recipients presents a unique surgical challenge due to the risk of direct or indirect injury to the transplanted kidney. Herein, we report the largest single center study of Robot-assisted Radical prostatectomy (RARP) in kidney transplant recipients.

Methods:

Between Jan 2014–2019, 14 kidney transplant recipients with prostate cancer underwent RARP. Clinical and pathological features, perioperative and postoperative complications were retrospectively evaluated. Continence was defined as by patient utilization of zero urinary pads postoperatively.

Results:

The median (IQR) age at RARP was 60.2 (57.8–61.3) years, the interval between kidney transplant and RARP was 8.1 ± 7.5 years. The median (IQR) PSA was 6.9 (4–8.6); 10 of 14 patients had intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer. The median ASA score was 3, the mean (SD) operative time was 129.7 (26.3) minutes, and mean (SD) blood loss was 110 (44.6) ml. All cases were completed robotically, there was no graft loss or injury to transplanted ureter, and the mean length of stay was 1 (0.26) day.

Final pathology demonstrated that 42.8% (6/14) of the patients had nonorgan confined disease (pT3a/T3b). 50% (7/14) of the patients were upgraded to higher risk Gleason disease on final surgical pathology. Post-RARP continence rate at 3 months, and 12 months were 45.5% (5/11) and 87.5% (7/8), respectively.

Conclusion:

RARP following kidney transplantation represents a safe and feasible operation which does not appear to compromise oncological or transplant outcomes.

Radical prostatectomy outcomes in renal transplant recipients: a retrospective case series of Thai patients

Background

The incidence of prostate cancer in renal transplant recipients (RTR) is similar to the general population. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the standard of care in the management of clinically localized cancer, but is considered complicated due to the presence of adhesions, and the location of transplanted ureter/kidney. To date, a few case series or studies on RP in RTR have been published, especially in Asian patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety and report the experience with RP on RTR.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data of 1270 patients who underwent RP from January 2008 to March 2020, of which 5 patients were RTR. All available baseline characteristics, perioperative and postoperative data (operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, length of hospital stay, complication), pathological stage, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and pre/postoperative creatinine were reviewed.

Results

Of the 5 RTR who underwent RPs (1 open radical prostatectomy (ORP), 1 laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), 2 robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (RALRP), and 1 Retzius-sparing RALRP (RS-RALRP)) prostatectomy, the mean age (± SD) was 70 (± 5.62) years. In LRP and RALRP cases, the standard ports were moved slightly medially to prevent graft injury. The mean operative time ranged from 190 to 365 min. The longest operative time and highest EBL (630 ml) was the ORP case due to severe adhesion in Retzius space. For LRP and RALRP cases, the operative times seemed comparable and had EBL of ≤ 300 ml. All RPs were successful without any major intra-operative complication. There was no significant change in graft function. The restorations of urinary continence were within 1 month in RS-RALRP, approximately 6 months in RALRP, and about 1 year in ORP and LRP. Three patients with positive surgical margins had prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence at the first follow-up and 1 had later PSA recurrence. Two patients with negative margins were free from biochemical recurrence at 47 and 3 months after their RP.

Conclusions

Our series suggested that all RP techniques are safe and feasible mode of treatment for localized prostate cancer in RTR.

Oncological and Postoperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy in Renal Transplant Recipients: A Multicenter and Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) has been poorly studied in men with renal graft.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the predictive factors for oncologic outcomes and complications after RARP in renal transplants recipients (RTRs).

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective multicenter controlled study identified all RTRs who had undergone RARP between 2008 and 2016 in 2 experts departments. All RTRs were matched 1:1 with patients who had also undergone RARP but with no history of renal transplant (control group).

INTERVENTION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Incontinence, oncologic outcomes, and complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Comparisons of the quantitative variables using Student's t tests, and comparisons of the qualitative variables using χ2 tests. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS (version 9.3). Independent risk factors of biochemical recurrence (BCR), postoperative complications, or incontinence were searched by using a multivariate linear regression.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven RTRs were included in the transplant group and compared with 27 men in the control group with similar preoperative characteristics. Univariate analysis showed a shorter BCR-free survival in RTRs, with 26.9 months vs 49.3 months in the control group (P = .018). BCR rate was similar in each group (7.4% vs 11.1%, P = .639). No difference between groups was showed for immediate postoperative complications (29.6% vs 22.2%, P = .279). Multivariate analysis showed that a renal graft history was an independent risk factor of shorter BCR-free survival (hazard ratio = 4.291; 95% confidence interval, 2.102-8.761 and P < .001). Even if it is the first comparative study on this topic, the low number of men included is the main limitation of our study.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show the reliability of RARP in RTRs. The rate of BCR does not appear more frequently but BCR-free survival seems shorter in these patients. A prospective comparative study remains necessary with more patients to confirm our results.

Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Orthotopic Neobladder as a Urinary Diversion for a Kidney Transplant Recipient: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

A higher prevalence of bladder cancer is reported in solid organ recipients, and advanced cancer requires radical cystectomy combined with urinary diversion. Surgery is technically challenging in kidney transplant recipients because of urinary tract abnormalities. Here, we describe the use of a robot-assisted approach in a kidney transplant recipient.

CASE PRESENTATION

The etiology of the patient's end-stage renal disease was bilateral hypoplastic kidney. The patient started to receive hemodialysis at 19 years of age and underwent living-related kidney transplant at 23 years of age. Thirteen years later, he was diagnosed with invasive urothelial carcinoma and underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extracorporeal neobladder construction under open laparotomy. Surgery was indicated to enhance suture flexibility and dissection of the peribladder tissues. Although the patient had an intraperitoneal infection caused by leakage from the vesicourethral anastomosis site and required drainage of the abscess, his condition stabilized after antibiotic treatment.

CONCLUSION

This case outlines the effectiveness of the robot-assisted approach in patients with urinary tract abnormalities, such as kidney transplant recipients.

Robot assisted radical prostatectomy in kidney transplant recipients: surgical, oncological and functional outcomes of two different robotic approaches

Background:

To date, few series on robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) have been published.

Purpose:

To report the experience of two referral centers adopting two different RARP approaches in KTRs. Surgical, oncological and functional results were primary outcomes evaluated in the study.

Material and methods:

We retrospectively analyzed data from 9 KTRs who underwent transperitoneal RARP or Retzius-sparing RARP for PCa from October 2012 to April 2016. Data were reported as median and interquartile range (IQR). Pre- and postoperative outcomes were compared by non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Significant differences were accepted when p ≤ 0.05. Overall survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method.

Results:

Four KTRs underwent a T-RARP and 5 a RS-RARP. Patient median age was 60 (56-63) years. Charlson comorbidity index was 6 (5-6). Preoperative median PSA was 5.6 (5-15) ng / mL. Preoperative Gleason score (GS) was 6 in 5 patients, 7 (3 + 4) in 3, and 8 (4 + 4) in one. Pre- and postoperative creatinine were 1.17 (1.1; 1.4) and 1.3 (1.07; 1.57) mg / dL (p = 0.237), while eGFR was 66 (60-82) and 62 (54-81) mL / min / 1.73m2 (p = 0.553), respectively. One (11.1%) Clavien-Dindo grade II complication occurred. Two extended template lymphadenectomies were performed, both with nodal invasion. These two patients experienced a biochemical recurrence and were subjected to RT. Two patients (22.2%) had PSMs. Median follow-up was 42 months. Seven patients (77.8%) were continent, 5 (55.6%) were potent. Two (22.2%) patients died during follow-up for oncologic unrelated causes.

Conclusions:

Our series suggests that both RARP approaches are safe and feasible techniques in KTRs for PCa.

Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Kidney Transplant Patients: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) based on available literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science through "robot" AND "prostatectomy" AND "transplant." Three authors separately reviewed the records to select the relevant articles with any discrepancies solved by open discussion. Patient age, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and tumor stage were recorded as well as intraoperative and postoperative complications, length of stay, surgical margin status, and disease recurrence, if provided. The operative techniques and modification/adjustments to standard port placements were also reviewed. We also include our case report in this review.

RESULTS

We retrieved 10 articles reporting clinical data on RARP for kidney transplant patients, including 5 case series (level 4) and 5 case reports (level 4). A total of 35 kidney transplant recipients undergoing RARP were analyzed in this systematic review, one case in our institution included. None of the cases had major technical difficulties precluding the operation. Technical modifications to the standard technique were described in 10 of the 11 articles specifically including modifications to port placement (54% of patients), development of the space of Retzius (60% of patients), and performance of lymphadenectomy. Mean operative time was 220 minutes. Perioperative complication rate was 17.1% (6 of 35 patients), with only one Clavien III or greater complication. The rate of positive surgical margins was found to be 31.4%. Data on biochemical recurrence revealed a combined rate of 18.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

RARP is technically feasible for treating localized prostate cancer in RTRs. Graft function did not deteriorate in any patient. Modifications to the standard technique should be considered specifically for port placement, development of the space of Retzius, and performance of lymphadenectomy. Oncologic outcomes remain difficult to interpret given the small number of reported cases.

Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in Renal Transplant Recipients: 13 Cases Studied at a Single Center

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of surgical prostatectomy in renal transplant recipients (RTRs).

METHODS

Between January 2008 and February 2017, we identified 13 RTRs who were diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and underwent radical prostatectomy. We reviewed all available clinicopathologic data for these 13 patients.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 61 years and median serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 8.79 ng/mL. The mean period between transplantation and diagnosis of prostate cancer was 136 months. The sources for the kidney transplants included 10 living and 3 deceased donors. Biopsies indicated that the Gleason scores were 7 in 10 patients and 8 to 10 in 3 patients. Meanwhile, the D'Amico risk classification indicated an intermediate risk in 9 patients and a high risk in 4 patients. Eight patients were at stage cT1 and 5 were at stage cT2. The surgical procedure was retropubic radical prostatectomy in one recipient, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in 3 recipients, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in 9 RTRs. Intraoperative complications were not noted in any patient, although one patient demonstrated postoperative complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3). An indwelling urinary catheter was required in 3 patients for over 3 weeks due to delayed wound healing. Biochemical recurrence evaluated by PSA monitoring occurred in four patients. Postoperative graft function was stable in all but one patient who required resumption of dialysis before prostatectomy; however, all patients are alive at the time of publication with 12 patients showing well-functioning renal allografts.

CONCLUSION

Prostatectomy may be a feasible and effective technique as an initial treatment for RTRs with localized prostate cancer.