Oncological outcomes after attempted nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (NSRP) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer are comparable to standard non-NSRP: a longitudinal long-term propensity-matched single-centre study.

Abstract

To assess the long-term safety of nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (NSRP) in men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) by comparing survival outcomes, disease recurrence, the need for additional therapy, and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing NSRP to those having non-NSRP. We included consecutive patients at a single, academic centre who underwent open RP for high-risk PCa, defined as preoperative prostate-specific antigen level of > 20 ng/mL and/or postoperative International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group 4 or 5 (i.e., Gleason score ≥ 8) and/or ≥pT3 and/or pN1 assessing the RP and lymph node specimen. We calculated a propensity score and used inverse probability of treatment weighting to match baseline characteristics of patients with high-risk PCa who underwent NSRP vs non-NSRP. We analysed oncological outcome as time-to-event and calculated hazard ratios (HRs). A total of 726 patients were included in this analysis of which 84% (n = 609) underwent NSRP. There was no evidence for the positive surgical margin rate being different between the NSRP and non-NSRP groups (47% vs 49%, P = 0.64). Likewise, there was no evidence for the need for postoperative radiotherapy being different in men who underwent NSRP from those who underwent non-NSRP (HR 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-1.15). NSRP did not impact the risk of any recurrence (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.73-1.34, P = 0.09) and there was no evidence for survival being different in men who underwent NSRP to those who underwent non-NSRP (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39-1.08). There was also no evidence for the cancer-specific survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.29-1.11) or progression-free survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.73-1.34) being different between the groups. In patients with high-risk PCa, NSRP can be attempted without compromising long-term oncological outcomes provided a comprehensive assessment of objective (e.g., T Stage) and subjective (e.g., intraoperative appraisal of tissue planes) criteria are conducted.