Risk stratification for disease progression in pT3 prostate cancer after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Patients with Positive Lymph Nodes after Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy—Do We Know the Proper Way of Management?

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most frequent malignancy in the male population worldwide. Men with a nodal invasion established after radical prostatectomy with lymph node dissection are a heterogeneous group of patients who require more thorough stratification and therapy individualization, which remain uncovered by current guidelines. Considering a multitude of prognostic factors and novel diagnostic techniques, classifying patients into narrower and more specified risk groups should be a vital part of lymph node positive PCa management in the future.

Abstract

Lymph node invasion in prostate cancer is a significant prognostic factor indicating worse prognosis. While it significantly affects both survival rates and recurrence, proper management remains a controversial and unsolved issue. The thorough evaluation of risk factors associated with nodal involvement, such as lymph node density or extracapsular extension, is crucial to establish the potential expansion of the disease and to substratify patients clinically. There are multiple strategies that may be employed for patients with positive lymph nodes. Nowadays, therapeutic methods are generally based on observation, radiotherapy, and androgen deprivation therapy. However, the current guidelines are incoherent in terms of the most effective management approach. Future management strategies are expected to make use of novel diagnostic tools and therapies, such as photodynamic therapy or diagnostic imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen. Nevertheless, this heterogeneous group of men remains a great therapeutic concern, and both the clarification of the guidelines and the optimal substratification of patients are required.

Gene signatures predict biochemical recurrence-free survival in primary prostate cancer patients after radical therapy

Background

This study evaluated the predictive value of gene signatures for biochemical recurrence (BCR) in primary prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

Methods

Clinical features and gene expression profiles of PCa patients were attained from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets, which were further classified into a training set (n = 419), a validation set (n = 403). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox (LASSO‐Cox) method was used to select discriminative gene signatures in training set for biochemical recurrence‐free survival (BCRFS). Selected gene signatures established a risk score system. Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors about BCRFS were performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression models. A nomogram based on multivariate analysis was plotted to facilitate clinical application. Kyoto Encyclopedia of Gene and Genomes (KEGG) and Gene Ontology (GO) analyses were then executed for differentially expressed genes (DEGs).

Results

Notably, the risk score could significantly identify BCRFS by time‐dependent receiver operating characteristic (t‐ROC) curves in the training set (3‐year area under the curve (AUC) = 0.820, 5‐year AUC = 0.809) and the validation set (3‐year AUC = 0.723, 5‐year AUC = 0.733).

Conclusions

Clinically, the nomogram model, which incorporates Gleason score and the risk score, could effectively predict BCRFS and potentially be utilized as a useful tool for the screening of BCRFS in PCa.

Prostate cancer: Molecular imaging and MRI

The role of molecular imaging in initial evaluation of men with presumed or established diagnosis of prostate cancer and work up of biochemical recurrence and metastatic disease is rapidly evolving due to superior diagnostic performance compared to anatomic imaging. However, variable tumor biology and expression of transmembrane proteins or metabolic alterations poses a challenge. We review the evidence and controversies with emphasis on emerging PET radiopharmaceuticals and experience on clinical utility of PET/CT and PET/MRI in diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.