Improvement of the surgical curability of locally confined prostate cancer including non-organ-confined high-risk disease through retropubic radical prostatectomy with intentional wide resection

Oncological outcome of neoadjuvant low-dose estramustine plus LHRH agonist/antagonist followed by extended radical prostatectomy for Japanese patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm study

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) are prone to have worse pathological diagnoses of positive surgical margins and/or lymph node invasion, resulting in early biochemical recurrence (BCR) despite having undergone radical prostatectomy (RP). Therefore, it is controversial whether patients with high-risk PCa should undergo RP. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy (NAC) followed by "extended" RP.

METHODS

A total of 87 patients with high-risk PCa prospectively underwent extended RP after NAC; most of the patients underwent 6 months of estramustine phosphate (EMP) 140 mg twice daily, along with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist. We developed our surgical technique to reduce the rate of positive surgical margins. We aimed to approach the muscle layer of the rectum by dissecting the mesorectal fascia and continuing the dissection through the mesorectum until the muscle layer of the rectum was exposed.

RESULTS

More than 1 year had elapsed after surgery in all 86 patients, with a median follow-up period of 37.7 months. The 3-year BCR-free survival was 74.9%. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis revealed that a positive core ratio of 50% or greater and pathological stage of pT3 or greater were independent predictors for BCR. About 17 of 23 cases received salvage androgen deprivation therapy and concurrent external beam radiotherapy, and showed no progression after the salvage therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC concordant with extended RP is feasible and might provide good cancer control for patients with high-risk PCa.

Factors influencing biochemical recurrence in patients who have received salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Several studies have evaluated the risk factors influencing biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer in patients receiving salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP), but the results remain conflicting. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to resolve this conflict. We searched the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science using the following terms in "All fields": "salvage radiation therapy," "salvage IMRT," "S-IMRT," "salvage radiotherapy," "SRT," "radical prostatectomy," "RP," "biochemical recurrence," "BCR," "biochemical relapse." Eleven studies, with a total of 1383 patients, were included in our meta-analysis. Of all the variables, only Gleason score (GS) ≥7 (odds ratio [OR]: 3.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.60-5.64) and pathological tumor (pT) stage ≥3a (OR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.36-2.42) were positively correlated with BCR. However, SRT combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.44-0.90) and radiation therapy (RT) dose ≥64 Gy (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.19-0.64) were negatively correlated with BCR. Perineural invasion (OR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.11-6.26), preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥10 ng ml-1 (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.94-1.96), positive surgical margin (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.7-1.19), and seminal vesicle involvement (SVI) (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.83-1.43) had no effect on BCR. Our meta-analysis indicated that pT stage, GS, RT dose, and SRT combined with ADT may influence BCR, while preoperative PSA, surgical margin, perineural invasion, and SVI have only a weak effect on BCR.

Proposed salvage treatment strategy for biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for patients with recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy include salvage radiotherapy of the prostatic bed and/or androgen deprivation therapy. To establish an effective treatment strategy for recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy, we retrospectively analyzed the outcome of salvage radiation monotherapy in such cases.

METHODS

Data from 61 men who had undergone salvage radiation monotherapy for biochemical recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy were retrospectively reviewed. In all patients, salvage radiotherapy consisted of iraradiation to the prostatic bed (70 Gy) using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques. Treatment outcome was analyzed to identify predictive factors of salvage radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The biochemical recurrence-free survival after salvage radiation monotherapy at 2 and 5 years was 55% and 38%, respectively. Cox proportional regression models revealed that the independent predictive factors for biochemical recurrence were Gleason Score ≥ 8, negative surgical margin, and PSA velocity ≥ 0.38 ng/mL/year. Negative surgical margin and PSA velocity ≥ 0.8 ng/mL/year were significantly associated with poor response in the serum PSA levels after salvage radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, we propose a treatment strategy for biochemical recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy. Patients with Gleason score ≤ 7, positive surgical margin, and PSA velocity < 0.38 ng/mL/year are categorized the most favorable group, so that eradication by salvage radiation monotherapy could be expected. Other patients could be divided to two groups depending on surgical margin status and PSA velocity: 1) patients who might require combination of SRT and short-term androgen deprivation therapy and 2) patients who should be treated by androgen deprivation monotherapy.

Comparison of positive surgical margin rates in high risk prostate cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

We compared positive surgical margin (PSM) rates for patients with high risk prostate cancer (HRCaP) who underwent open radical retropubic (RRP), robotic (RALP), and laparoscopic (LRP) prostatectomy at a single institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of our prospectively maintained IRB approved database identifying prostate cancer patients who underwent RRP, RALP, or LRP between January 2000 and March 2010. Patients were considered to have HRCaP if they had biopsy or final pathologic Gleason score ≥ 8, or preoperative PSA ≥ 20, or pathologic stage ≥ T3a. A positive surgical margin (PSM) was defined by the presence of tumor at the inked surface of the specimen. Patients who received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and those who underwent a perineal prostatectomy were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

Of the 445 patients in this study, surgical technique for prostatectomy included RRP (n = 153), RALP (n = 152), and LRP (n = 140). PSM rate for the three groups were not different: 52.9% RRP, 50% RALP, and 41.4% LRP, (p = 0.13). The PSM rate did not differ when comparing RRP to a combined group of RALP and LRP (p = 0.16). Among patients with a PSM, there was no statistical difference between the three groups in terms of the number of patients with a pathologic stage of T3 or higher (p = 0.83). On univariate analysis, a higher preoperative PSA value was associated with a positive margin (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In this HRCaP series, the PSM rate did not differ based on the surgical approach. On univariate analysis, patients with a higher preoperative PSA value were more likely to have a PSM.