Use Of Radical Prostatectomy Research Articles

Long-term evaluation of low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy in localized prostate cancer

As aresult of technical innovation, i.e., improvement of seed quality, implantation method, and dose calculation, it has been possible to continuously improve oncological results in the treatment of localized prostate cancer with low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT). Randomized controlled trials have shown that there is no significant difference in oncological control between the use of radical prostatectomy and LDR-BT in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate the oncological efficacy of LDR-BT. A retrospective multicenter analysis was conducted on 618patients treated with LDR-BT as monotherapy, who received adose of 145 Gy. We used iodine125 as the radioactive source. The analysis was conducted with follow-up data from two brachytherapy centers in Germany between 2004 and 2019. The primary endpoint was biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS), whereby the Phoenix definition (PSA - nadir +2 ng/ml; PSA: prostate-specific antigen) was used to define biochemical relapse, i.e., therapeutic failure. Median follow-up was 52months (range 3-180months). The bRFS across all risk groups was 87.87%. Oncological efficacy was significantly higher in patients with aGleason score of 6 and 7a (p-value < 0.0001); however, there was no significant difference in bRFS between these two groups. Bilateral tumor infiltration or prostate volume had no significant influence on bRFS. Our results show no difference in bRFS between Gleason score6 and7a.

Radical prostatectomy trends between 2010 and 2020 in Ehime, Japan, identified using data from the Medical Investigation Cancer Network (MICAN) study.

The use of radical prostatectomy is increasing with the rising incidence of prostate cancer. We assessed the surgical trends related to radical prostatectomy using data from a multi-center, retrospective cohort study, the MICAN (Medical Investigation Cancer Network) study, which was conducted in all the urology-related medical facilities in Ehime Prefecture, Japan. We compared data from the MICAN study with prostate biopsy registry data collected in Ehime between 2010 and 2020 and recorded the surgical trends. There was a significant increase in the mean age of patients with positive biopsies, and the positivity rate increased from 46.3% in 2010 to 60.5% in 2020, while the number of biopsies obtained decreased. The number of radical prostatectomies performed increased over the years, with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy becoming the predominant procedure. In 2020, robot-assisted radical prostatectomies accounted for 96.0% of the surgeries performed. The age at surgery also gradually increased. Of the registered patients aged ≤75 years, 40.5% underwent surgery in 2010, compared with 83.1% in 2020. The prevalence of surgery also increased from 4.6% to 29.8% in patients aged >75 years. There was a gradual increase in the proportion of high-risk cases, from 29.3% to 44.0%, but a decrease in that of low-risk cases, from 23.8% in 2010 to 11.4% in 2020. We have shown that the number of radical prostatectomies performed in Ehime is increasing in patients aged both ≤75 and >75 years. The proportion of low-risk cases has decreased, while that of high-risk cases has increased.

Functional Outcomes after Radiation Therapy or Radical Prostatectomy with Postoperative Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

<h3>Purpose/Objective(s)</h3> The use of radical prostatectomy (RP) for men with high-risk prostate cancer (PC) is increasing. RP is often utilized as a component of multi-modality therapy, as a method to intensify treatment. Many patients who undergo RP will subsequently require radiation therapy (RT), exposing patients to side effects from both treatments. While the side effects of RT and RP have been directly compared in previous studies, there is limited data comparing side effects of primary RT with those of patients undergoing RP and RT (RP/RT). We hypothesize that patients undergoing RP/RT for high-risk PC will experience significantly higher side effects than those undergoing primary RT. <h3>Materials/Methods</h3> We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database with Medicare insurance claims to identify patients 66 years or older with primary high-risk PC who underwent RP, RT, or both between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013. High-risk PC was defined as disease meeting one or more of the following criteria: stage ≥ T3a, grade group ≥ 4, PSA >20. Outcomes of interest included treatment for urinary incontinence, urethral stricture, erectile dysfunction (ED), proctitis and cystitis at least 1 year after completion of primary prostate cancer treatment, which were captured using diagnosis and procedure codes. Rates of these endpoints were compared using cumulative incidence functions as well as cox proportional hazard models. Patients who were lost to follow up or died were censored at the time of their last encounter. <h3>Results</h3> The cohort included 17,649 patients, of which 15,399 were treated with primary RT (87.25%) and 2,250 were treated with RP/RT (12.75%). On multivariable analysis, compared to primary RT, RP/RT was associated with an increased risk of incontinence therapy [HR 1.907 (1.679-2.166)], stricture therapy [HR 1.865 (95% CI: 1.589-2.190)] and ED therapy [HR 2.869 (95% CI: 2.046-4.023)] after treatment for prostate cancer. Rates of therapy for cystitis or proctitis were not significantly different between these two groups. <h3>Conclusion</h3> For men with high-risk PC, treatment with RP/RT was associated with increased utilization of incontinence therapy, stricture therapy, and ED therapy after completion of prostate cancer treatment. With multiple curative treatment options and long duration of survival after treatment, the side effect profile of treatment is a major factor in determining the most appropriate course of treatment for an individual patient. Patients considering primary RP as a component of multimodality therapy for high-risk PC should be informed about the increased risk of side effects. Clinical trials are required to better evaluate this treatment paradigm.

Changes in prostate cancer incidence, mortality and survival in relation to prostate specific antigen testing in New South Wales, Australia

BackgroundTo examine changes in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates, and 5-year relative survival, in relation to changes in the rate of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening tests and the use of radical prostatectomy (RP) in the Australian population. MethodsProstate cancer stage-specific incidence rates, 5-year relative survival and mortality rates were estimated using New South Wales Cancer Registry data. PSA screening test rates and RP/Incidence ratios were estimated from Medicare Benefits Schedule claims data. We used multiple imputation to impute stage for cases with “unknown” stage at diagnosis. Annual percentage changes (APC) in rates were estimated using Joinpoint regression. ResultsTrends in the age-standardized incidence rates for localized disease largely mirrored the trends in PSA screening test rates, with a substantial ‘spike’ in the rates occurring in 1994, followed by a second ‘spike’ in 2008, and then a significant decrease from 2008 to 2015 (APC −6.7, 95% CI −8.2, −5.1). Increasing trends in incidence rates were observed for regional stage from the early 2000s, while decreasing or stable trends were observed for distant stage since 1993. The overall RP/Incidence ratio increased from 1998 to 2003 (APC 9.6, 95% CI 3.8, 15.6), then remained relatively stable to 2015. The overall 5-year relative survival for prostate cancer increased from 58.4% (95% CI: 55.0–61.7%) in 1981–1985 to 91.3% (95% CI: 90.5–92.1%) in 2011–2015. Prostate cancer mortality rates decreased from 1990 onwards (1990–2006: APC −1.7, 95% CI −2.1, −1.2; 2006–2017: APC −3.8, 95% CI −4.4, −3.1). ConclusionsOverall, there was a decrease in the incidence rate of localized prostate cancer after 2008, an increase in survival over time and a decrease in the mortality rate since the 1990s. This seems to indicate that the more conservative use of PSA screening tests in clinical practice since 2008 has not had a negative impact on population-wide prostate cancer outcomes.

Characteristics of prostate cancer patients captured by facility-based versus geography-based cancer registries.

237 Background: Cancer registries provide valuable information related to cancer epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes. However, the sampling for inclusion can impact generalizability of findings to other settings. We use a population-based cancer registry to evaluate demographics, cancer factors, and treatment patterns based on eligibility for a facility-based cancer registry. Methods: We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer (site = C61.9) in 2018. Exposure was whether data were reported from a facility accredited by American College of Surgeons’ Commission on Cancer (CoC), providing eligibility for the National Cancer Database (NCDB) (i.e., NCDB-eligible). Outcomes of interest included demographics, tumor factors (e.g., biopsy grade), and treatment. Bivariate testing and multivariable regression analyses tested for significant associations between exposure and outcomes of interest. Results: We identified 57,713 men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2018, of which 32,384 (61.9%) were eligible for inclusion in NCDB. NCDB-eligible men were younger (66.6 vs 67.8 years, p &lt; 0.001), less likely to be Hispanic/Latino (8.0% vs 14.4%, p &lt; 0.001), and more likely to reside in a county with median income over $75,000 (39.7% vs 33.3%, p &lt; 0.001). NCDB eligibility varied widely by registry, from 96.1% in Connecticut to 44.7% in Utah. The proportion of localized cancer patients with Grade Group 1 cancer on biopsy was higher among men ineligible for NCDB (41.4% vs 26.9%, p &lt; 0.001). The proportion of patients with more advanced disease at presentation was higher among NCDB-eligible patients (metastatic: 9.4% vs 6.8%; regional: 18.7% vs 8.7%; p &lt; 0.001). For patients with localized or regional cancer, treatment was identified more frequently among NCDB-eligible patients for both low-risk (38.5% vs 22.7%, p &lt; 0.001) and high-risk tumors (84.9% vs 64.2%). Among treated patients, use of radical prostatectomy was more common among NCDB-eligible patients (low risk: 58.9% vs 43.1%; high risk: 53.7% vs 43.4%, p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions: Prostate cancer patients eligible for inclusion in the facility based NCDB have important differences in demographics, severity of cancer risk, and treatment patterns compared to those who are not eligible. Generalizations related to epidemiologic trends, practice patterns, and outcomes for prostate cancer patients in the NCDB should be interpreted with caution.

Multimodal therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer: results from a single-centre study

Introduction. In recent years, interest in the use of radical prostatectomy (RPE) as one of the components of a multimodal approach in patients with lymphogenous disseminated and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) has grown significantly. At the same time, the dearth of large randomized trials does not make it possible to use this technique in wide clinical practice outside of clinical trials.Purpose of the study. To evaluate the effectiveness of multimodal therapy using combined chemo-hormonal, surgical and radiation therapy in patients with primary oligometastatic hormone-sensitive PCa.Material and methods. The study included 48 patients with primary oligometastatic prostate cancer who received combination treatment within the internal one-research-center protocol. At the first stage, all patients underwent combined drug therapy with docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks for 6 courses) and degarelix. Patients who had a decrease in PSA level ≤ 2 ng/ml and registered stabilization of the disease according to radiological examination were treated surgically through RPE with extended pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Radiation therapy was performed only in patients with the presence of bone lesions at a dose of 50-70 Gy to the location of bone metastases in the stage 3 plan of combined multimodal therapy.Results. PCa biochemical relapse was verified in 27 (56.3%) patients during the median follow-up of 10 months. The average time to PSA increase was 9.0 ± 5.7 months (from 1 to 24 months), median — 7 months, Six-month PSA relapse-free survival (PSA-RFS) was 61.2 ± 7.5%; 1-year PSA-RFS — 38.0 ± 8.6%. The average duration before the initiation of hormonal therapy was 12 ± 6.1 months (from 3 to 27 months), median: 10 months. Six-month survival before the drug administration was 72.6 ± 6.8%; twelve-month survival: 40.9 ± 8.7%. About 40% of patients with oligometastatic PCa had no signs of progression and did not receive any other drug therapy for 12 months after completion of protocol treatment.Conclusions. Analysis of the study results demonstrates satisfactory oncological outcomes of the studied treatment option in patients with newly diagnosed oligometastatic hormone-sensitive PCa, as well as a low likelihood of side effects and complications. Nevertheless, it is necessary to continue conducting larger and more structured randomized trials to determine the possibility of applying this therapeutic approach in clinical practice.

Time Trends in Use of Radical Prostatectomy by Tumor Risk and Life Expectancy in a National Veterans Affairs Cohort

Guidelines endorse using tumor risk and life expectancy (LE) to select appropriate candidates for radical prostatectomy (RP), recommending against treatment of most low-risk tumors and men with limited LE. To investigate time trends in the use of RP by tumor risk and Prostate Cancer Comorbidity Index (PCCI) score in a contemporary, nationally representative Veterans Affairs (VA) cohort. This cohort study of 5736 men treated with RP at 8 VA hospitals from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2017, used a nationally representative, multicenter sample from the VA SEARCH (Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital) database. Statistical analysis was performed from June 30, 2018, to August 20, 2020. Stratified linear and log-linear Poisson regressions were used to estimate time trends in the proportion of men treated with RP across American Urological Association tumor risk and PCCI (a validated predictor of LE based on age and comorbidities) subgroups. Among 5736 men (mean [SD] age at surgery, 62 [6] years) treated with RP from 2000 to 2017, the proportion of low-risk tumors treated with RP decreased from 51% to 7% (difference, -44%; 95% CI, -50% to -38%). The proportion of intermediate-risk tumors treated with RP increased from 30% to 59% (difference, 29%; 95% CI, 23%-35%), with unfavorable intermediate-risk tumors increasing from 30% to 41% (difference, 11%; 95% CI, 4%-18%) and favorable intermediate-risk tumors decreasing from 61% to 41% (difference, -20%; 95% CI, -24% to -15%). The proportion of high-risk tumors treated with RP increased from 18% to 33% (difference, 15%; 95% CI, 9%-21%). Among men treated with RP, the proportion with the highest PCCI scores of 10 or more (ie, LE <10 years) increased from 4% to 13% (difference, 9%; 95% CI, 4%-14%). Within each tumor risk subgroup, no significant difference in the rate of tumors treated with RP over time was found across PCCI subgroups. In this study, the use of RP shifted from low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk to higher-risk prostate cancer. However, its use among men with limited LE appears unchanged across tumor risk subgroups and increased overall.

Safety, efficacy and cost of intra-operative cell salvage during open radical prostatectomy.

BackgroundWe aim to examine the safety and efficacy of intra-operative cell salvage (ICS) in radical prostatectomy.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed, enrolling consecutive patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy at two institutions during 01/01/18–31/12/19. Patients were grouped by ICS use. Primary outcomes were allogeneic transfusion rates, and biochemical recurrence (prostate specific antigen >0.2 mg/mL). Secondary outcomes were use of adjuvant therapies, Clavien-Dindo complications and transfusion-related cost (allogeneic transfusion + ICS setup + ICS reinfusion).ResultsIn total, 168 men were enrolled. Patients were grouped based on whether they received no blood conservation technique (126 men) or ICS (42 men). Groups were similar in median age, pre- and post-operative haemoglobin and length of stay. They also had similar post-operative tumour Gleason score, TNM-stage and positive surgical margin rates. Compared with controls, the ICS group had shorter follow up (336 vs. 225 days; P=0.003). The groups had similar rates of biochemical recurrence (17% vs. 14%; P=0.90), adjuvant therapy use (30% vs. 29%; P=0.85) and complications (14% vs. 19% patients; P=0.46). There was no metastatic progression or cancer-specific mortality in either group. Although a similar proportion of patients received allogenic transfusion (2.4% vs. 4.8%; P=0.33) and units of packed red blood cells (PRBC) (9 vs. 5 units), transfusion-related costs were higher amongst the ICS group (AUD $11,422 vs. $43,227).ConclusionsICS use in radical prostatectomy was not associated with altered rates of allogeneic transfusion, complications, biochemical recurrence or adjuvant or salvage therapies. Transfusion related costs were higher in the ICS group.

Surgical management of high-risk, localized prostate cancer.

High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease that lacks clear consensus on its ideal management. Historically, non-surgical treatment was the preferred strategy, and several studies demonstrated improved survival among men with high-risk disease managed with the combination of radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) compared with ADT alone. However, practice trends in the past 10-15 years have shown increased use of radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection for primary management of high-risk, localized disease. Radical prostatectomy, as a primary monotherapy, offers the potential benefits of avoiding ADT, reducing rates of symptomatic local recurrence, enabling full pathological tumour staging and potentially reducing late adverse effects such as secondary malignancy compared with radiation therapy. Retrospective studies have reported wide variability in short-term (pathological) and long-term (oncological) outcomes of radical prostatectomy. Surgical monotherapy continues to be appropriate for selected patients, whereas in others the best treatment strategy probably involves a multimodal approach. Appropriate risk stratification utilizing clinical, pathological and potentially also genomic risk data is imperative in the initial management of men with prostate cancer. However, data from ongoing and planned prospective trials are needed to identify the optimal management strategy for men with high-risk, localized prostate cancer.

Racial Disparities in the Presentation, Early Definitive Surgical Treatment, and Mortality Among Men Diagnosed with Poorly Differentiated/Undifferentiated Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer in the USA.

To assess the influence of race on presentation of poorly differentiated/undifferentiated prostate cancer, use of radical prostatectomy (RP) as primary treatment and survival outcomes. Using the 2004-2014 files of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data, we identified 244,167 black and white men diagnosed with poorly differentiated/undifferentiated prostate cancer. Demographic and tumor characteristics of study patients were compared by race. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the influence of race on receipt of RP. Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to determine the impact of RP and race on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Compared to white men, black men were diagnosed of prostate cancer at a younger age (64.2years versus (vs) 67.5years, p < 0.0001) and presented with higher median prostate-specific antigen, PSA (24.4ng/ml vs 22.1ng/ml, p < 0.0001) but lower disease stage. Lower proportion of black men received RP compared to white men (33.9% vs 42.6%; p < 0.0001). The odds of receipt of RP were 2 times higher in white men relative to black men. The risks of CSM and ACM were over 2 times and 3 times respectively higher in patients who did not receive RP vs patients who received RP in the study population and in each race. Despite the younger age at diagnosis of poorly differentiated/undifferentiated prostate cancer and higher PSA at diagnosis in black men, white men had significantly higher odds of receipt of RP relative to black men.

Optimal timing of post-prostatectomy radiotherapy for prostate cancer with high-risk pathologic features: A multi-institutional analysis.

24 Background: The use of radical prostatectomy (RP) as initial treatment of high-risk/locally-advanced prostate cancer is increasing but patients (pts) with adverse pathologic features such as positive surgical margins or T3 disease have up to 70% recurrence risk. These high-risk pts may be managed with adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) or early salvage radiotherapy (ESRT). The optimal timing of post-operative radiotherapy is unclear. Methods: Individual data from 1566 consecutive pts with pT2N0M0/R1 or pT3N0M0/R0-1 disease who underwent post-prostatectomy ART or ESRT (1987-2013) at 10 academic centers were pooled. Post-irradiation freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), freedom from distant metastases (FFDM), prostate-cancer specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate competing-risks regression (MVA) analyses. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to account for covariates potentially associated with treatment allocation. All outcomes were measured from the date of surgery to address lead time bias. Results: After PS-matching, median follow-up after surgery was 66 vs. 73 months for the ART and ESRT groups, respectively, and baseline characteristics were well-matched. ART was associated with higher FFBF (12-yr: 69% vs. 43%; log-rank P &lt; 0.0001), FFDM (12-yr: 95% vs. 85%; log-rank P = 0.03), PCSS (12-yr: 99% vs. 94%; log-rank P = 0.048), and OS (12-yr: 91% vs. 79%; log-rank P = 0.01). ART, lower Gleason score, lower T-stage, nodal irradiation, and postoperative androgen deprivation therapy were favorable prognostic features on MVA for BF. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the decreased risk of BF associated with ART remained significant unless more than 56% of ART pts were cured by surgery alone. This threshold is greater than the estimated 12-yr FFBF of 46% after RP alone as determined by a contemporary nomogram. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this represents the largest multi-institutional study to date comparing ART to ESRT. ART was associated with reduced biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and death compared to ESRT for high-risk pts, pending prospective validation.

Perioperative outcomes of aspirin use in radical prostatectomy.

150 Background: Increasing cardiovascular disease has led to increases in the patient population on anti-platelet therapy who require urologic surgery. We sought to study perioperative outcomes for those undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) while taking or not taking perioperative aspirin (pASA). Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing RP was performed on the Premier Hospital Database from 2003 to 2015, with survey projection weighting resulting in a cohort of 157,674 patients. Two groups were formed – those continued on pASA (group 1, n = 4400) and those with no pASA (group 2, n = 153,274). In-hospital complication rates were studied: major bleeding, overall transfusion, day-of-surgery transfusion, prolonged ( &gt; 4 days) length of stay (LOS), and prolonged ( &gt; 285 minutes) operative time. We also assessed 90-day rates of: cardiovascular catastrophe, readmission, major complication, and DVT/PE. Unadjusted rates were calculated for all RP patients and further subdivided into open and minimally invasive RP. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) were then calculated between groups 1 and 2. Results: Group 1 was older (51.5% vs 41.8% ≥65 years, p = 0.002) and less healthy (13.8% vs 5.3% with a CCI score ≥2, p &lt; 0.0001) vs those in group 2. Group 1 patients were more likely to receive an open RP (42.3% vs 28.1%, p &lt; 0.0001). For in-hospital outcomes for all RPs, no significant differences were noted regardless of surgical approach. For 90-day outcomes, those in group 1 were more likely to suffer a MI (OR 5.88, CI [3.4-10.18], p &lt; 0.001), major complication (OR2.95, CI [1.58-5.5], p &lt; 0.001), or be readmitted (OR 1.63, CI [1.18-2.26], p &lt; 0.05). The disparity in both MI and major complication rates appeared to be largely driven by those undergoing minimally invasive RPs, with an OR of 7.92 and 4.02 noted, respectively. Conclusions: This large, retrospective, database review of both academic and community hospitals provides an important assessment of the impact pASA has on RP outcomes. In-hospital outcomes were equivalent between groups but those on pASA saw increased rates of MI, major complication, and readmission. Despite this, this study lends support to the belief that pASA should likely not be considered an absolute contraindication to RP.

Trends in Treatment for Prostate Cancer in China: Preliminary Patterns of Care Study in a Single Institution.

Objectives: A Patterns of Care Study (PCS) was performed in the largest regional medical center in Zhejiang Province, China. The hospital information system (HIS) was used to evaluate patient characteristics and changes in initial treatment patterns for prostate cancer and to determine recent predominant trends in treatment plans for prostate cancer (PCa) in China.Methods: Men who were newly diagnosed with localized or locally advanced PCa for 2010-2011 and 2016-2017 were identified in the HIS database. Patient characteristics and temporal trends in initial management were assessed, and differences between groups were evaluated for significance using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests.Results: In total, 1792 patients met the study criteria, including 505 and 1287 patients in the 2010-2011 and 2016-2017 samples, respectively. The average age of patients diagnosed in the 2010-2011 PCS survey was 70 years, decreasing to 68 years when the 2016-2017 patients were included (P<0.001). In the 2010-2011 sample, 50.69% of the patients had an initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥20 ng/ml. In contrast, the initial PSA level was 4-19.99 ng/ml for 66.67% of the patients in the 2016-2017 sample (P<0.001). Based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria, the percentages of patients in low- and intermediate-risk groups increased from 33.06% to 54.78%; conversely, the percentages in high-risk, very high-risk, and regional (N1) groups decreased to a certain extent (P<0.001). According to European Association of Urology (EAU) criteria, the percentages of patients in low- and intermediate-risk groups increased from 32.07% to 53.69%, yet the percentage in the high-risk group decreased (P<0.001). The use of radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiation therapy (RT) increased from 48.32% to 76.46% and 5.35% to 16.94%, particularly in high-risk and low-risk groups, respectively, whereas the rates of hormone therapy (HT) and active surveillance and observation (AS&O) decreased from 32.28% to 4.27% and from 16.04% to 2.33%, respectively (P<0.001). A similar pattern was observed when patients were stratified by EAU risk group.Conclusions: The results of this real-world study in the largest regional medical center in Zhejiang Province, China, indicate that the predominant characteristics of PCa patients and trends in initial management are changing rapidly. We found the following: (a) a trend toward a decreased age among newly diagnosed patients; (b) a trend toward lower initial PSA levels; (c) a downward trend in risk group classification; (d) a significant increase in the likelihood of receiving RP, particularly in the high-risk group; (e) an increase in the rate of RP, mostly due to use of the Da Vinci robotic system; (f) a significant increase in the likelihood of receiving RT, especially in the low-risk group; and (g) a decrease in HT and AS&O.

Impact of a robotic surgical system on treatment choice for men with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer.

Introducing a new surgical technology may affect behaviors and attitudes of patients and surgeons about clinical practice. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) was approved in 2012 in Japan. We investigated whether the introduction of this system affected the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) and the use of radical prostatectomy (RP). We conducted a retrospective multicenter study on 718 patients with clinically determined organ-confined PCa treated at one of three Japanese academic institutions in 2011 (n=338) or 2013 (n=380). Two patient groups formed according to the treatment year were compared regarding the clinical characteristics of PCa, whether referred or screened at our hospital, comorbidities and surgical risk, and choice of primary treatment. Distribution of PCa risk was not changed by the introduction of RALP. Use of RP increased by 70% (from 127 to 221 cases, p<0.0001), whereas the number of those undergoing radiotherapy or androgen deprivation therapy decreased irrespective of the disease risk of PCa. Increased use of RP (from 34 to 100 cases) for intermediate- or high-risk PCa patients with mild perioperative risk (American Society of Anesthesiologists score 2) accounted for 70% of the total RP increase, whereas the number of low- or very low-risk PCa patients with high comorbidity scores (Charlson Index≥4) increased from 8 to 25 cases, accounting for 18%. Use of expectant management (active surveillance, watchful waiting) in very low-risk PCa patients was 15% in 2011 and 12% in 2013 (p=0.791). Introduction of a robotic surgical system had little effect on the risk distribution of PCa. Use of RP increased, apparently due to increased indications in patients who are candidates for RP but have mild perioperative risk. Although small, there was an increase in the number of RPs performed on patients with severe comorbidities but with low-risk or very low-risk PCa.

Characteristics and national trends of patients receiving treatment of the primary tumor for metastatic prostate cancer.

BackgroundWe sought to determine temporal trends in the receipt of prostatectomy or locoregional radiation to the prostate for patients with metastatic prostate cancer and to identify predictors of receipt of local treatment.MethodsWe identified 39,976 patients with metastatic prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004–2012 using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We used logistic multivariable regression to determine trends in the receipt of prostate and/or pelvic radiation or radical prostatectomy after adjusting for demographic and clinical factors.ResultsPatients with metastatic disease were less likely to receive locoregional treatment over time [7.88% in 2004 vs. 5.53% in 2012, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.97 per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.95–0.98; P < 0.001]. Cofactors associated with decreased likelihood for locoregional treatment included older age (AOR = 0.96 per year, 95% CI = 0.96–0.96, P < 0.001) and increased comorbidity level (1 comorbidity: AOR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.73–0.93, P = 0.001; two or more comorbidities: AOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.39–0.61, P < 0.001). Decreasing utilization of both radiation and surgery of the primary site contributed to this trend. More specifically, patients with metastatic disease were less likely to receive radiation to the prostate and/or pelvis over time (5.9% in 2004 vs. 4.2% in 2012, AOR = 0.97 per year, 95% CI = 0.95–0.99, P < 0.001). Similarly, there was a trend toward decreased use of radical prostatectomy (2.17% in 2004 compared to 1.31% in 2012, AOR = 0.96 per year, 95% CI 0.93–0.99, P = 0.01).ConclusionDespite recent evidence of the possible benefit for locoregional treatment of prostate cancer in the setting of metastatic disease, rates of prostate radiation and radical prostatectomy among this population have actually declined over the 8-year period between 2004 and 2012, suggesting slow adoption of this novel treatment paradigm.

Increasing use of radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer in the USA and Germany: a comparative population-based study.

Current guidelines do not recommend a preferred treatment modality for locally advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the study was to compare treatment patterns found in the USA and Germany and to analyze possible trends over time. We compared 'Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results' (SEER) data (USA) with reports from four German federal epidemiological cancer registries (Eastern Germany, Bavaria, Rhineland-Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein), both from 2004 to 2012. We defined locally advanced prostate cancer as clinical stage T3 or T4. Exclusion criteria were metastatic disease and age over 79 years. We identified 9127 (USA) and 11 051 (Germany) patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. The share was 2.1% in the USA compared with 6.0% in Germany (P<0.001). In the United States, the utilization of radiotherapy (RT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) was comparably high with 42.0% (RT) and 42.8% (RP). In Germany, the major treatment option was RP with 36.7% followed by RT with 22.1%. During the study period, the use of RP increased in both countries (USA P=0.001 and Germany P=0.003), whereas RT numbers declined (USA P=0.003 and Germany P=0.002). The share of adjuvant RT (aRT) was similar in both countries (USA 21.7% vs Germany 20.7%). We found distinctive differences in treating locally advanced prostate cancer between USA and Germany, but similar trends over time. In the last decade, a growing number of patients underwent RP as a possible first step within a multimodal concept.

Temporal Trends and the Impact of Race, Insurance, and Socioeconomic Status in the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer

BackgroundNumerous management options exist for patients with prostate cancer; however, recent trends and their influencing factors are not well described. ObjectiveTo describe modern patterns of care and factors associated with management choice using the National Cancer Database. Design, setting, and participantsPatients with localized prostate cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2012 were included and grouped according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines into low, intermediate, or high risk. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisTrend analyses and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with management. Results and limitationsThere were 598 640 patients who met the study criteria; 36.3% were classified as low risk, 43.8% intermediate risk, and 20.0% high risk. Over the study period, among low-risk patients, observation increased from 9.2% to 21.3%, while radical prostatectomy (RP) increased from 29.5% to 51.1% (p<0.001 for both). In contrast, external beam radiotherapy decreased from 24.3% to 14.5%, while brachytherapy decreased from 31.7% to 11.1%. A similar pattern was seen for patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk disease. Among high-risk patients, RP increased from 25.1% to 43.4% replacing external beam radiotherapy as the dominant therapy. On multivariate analysis, racial minorities, the uninsured, and low-income patients were less likely to receive RP. Low-risk patients in similar subgroups were significantly more likely to be observed. Limitations include potential miscoding or misclassification of variables. ConclusionsPatterns of care in localized prostate cancer are changing rapidly. While use of observation is increasing in low-risk groups, the use of RP is increasing across all risk groups with a concomitant decline in use of radiotherapy. Socioeconomic factors appear to influence management choice. Patient summaryIn this report we identify a recent significant increase in the use of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients. Socioeconomic factors such as race, insurance type, and income may affect treatments offered to and received by patients.

Patterns of care and treatment trends for Canadian men with localized low-risk prostate cancer: an analysis of provincial cancer registry data.

Many prostate cancers (pcas) are indolent and, if left untreated, are unlikely to cause death or morbidity in a man's lifetime. As a result of testing for prostate-specific antigen, more such cases are being identified, leading to concerns about "overdiagnosis" and consequent overtreatment of pca. To mitigate the risks associated with overtreatment (that is, invasive therapies that might cause harm to the patient without tangible benefit), approaches such as active surveillance are now preferred for many men with low-risk localized pca (specifically, T1/2a, prostate-specific antigen ≤ 10 ng/mL, and Gleason score ≤ 6). Here, we report on patterns of care and treatment trends for men with localized low-risk pca. The provinces varied substantially with respect to the types of primary treatment received by men with localized low-risk pca. From 2010 to 2013, many men had no record of surgical or radiation treatment within 1 year of diagnosis-a proxy for active surveillance; the proportion ranged from 53.3% in Nova Scotia to 80.8% in New Brunswick. Among men who did receive primary treatment, the use of radical prostatectomy ranged from 12.0% in New Brunswick to 35.9% in Nova Scotia. The use of radiation therapy (external-beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy) ranged from 4.1% in Newfoundland and Labrador to 17.6% in Alberta. Treatment trends over time suggest an increase in the use of active surveillance. The proportion of men with low-risk pca and no record of surgical or radiation treatment rose to 69.9% in 2013 from 46.1% in 2010 for all provinces combined. The provinces varied substantially with respect to patterns of care for localized low-risk pca. Treatment trends over time suggest an increasing use of active surveillance. Those findings can further the discussion about the complex care associated with pca and identify opportunities for improvement in clinical practice.

Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy.

The use of radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer has been increasing during the last decade partially due to the widespread adoption of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic technique. Although no prospective, randomized controlled trials have compared open radical prostatectomy (ORP) with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP), numerous comparative studies have been retrospectively conducted. A systematic review of the literature was performed to clarify the role and advancement of RALRP. Studies comparing ORP with RALRP that measured outcomes of cancer control, urinary and sexual function, and complications were included. A nonsystematic review was utilized to describe the advancements in the techniques used for RALRP. RALRP is the procedure of choice when treating localized prostate cancer. This preference is due to the observed improvement in morbidity rates, as evidenced by decreased rates of blood loss and postoperative pain and similar oncological outcomes when compared with ORP. Robotic assistance during surgery is continually being modified and the techniques advanced, as evidenced by improved nerve sparing for preserving potency and reconstruction of the bladder neck to help in the early recovery of urinary continence. Morbidity rates should continue to improve with the advancement of minimally invasive techniques for radical prostatectomy. The adoption of robotic assistance during surgery will continue as the applications of robotic-assisted surgery expand into other solid organ malignancies.

MP62-01 FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH CLINICALLY HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER (PCA) TREATED WITH ROBOT-ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (RALP)

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized V1 Apr 2015MP62-01 FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH CLINICALLY HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER (PCA) TREATED WITH ROBOT-ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (RALP) Firas Abdollah, Daniel Pucheril, Jesse Sammon, Akshay Sood, Dane Klett, Nicola Fossati, Giorgio Gandaglia, Nazareno Suardi, Giorgio Guazzoni, Manuela Tutolo, Craig Rogers, Hans Stricker, Wooju Jeong, James Peabody, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, and Mani Menon Firas AbdollahFiras Abdollah More articles by this author , Daniel PucherilDaniel Pucheril More articles by this author , Jesse SammonJesse Sammon More articles by this author , Akshay SoodAkshay Sood More articles by this author , Dane KlettDane Klett More articles by this author , Nicola FossatiNicola Fossati More articles by this author , Giorgio GandagliaGiorgio Gandaglia More articles by this author , Nazareno SuardiNazareno Suardi More articles by this author , Giorgio GuazzoniGiorgio Guazzoni More articles by this author , Manuela TutoloManuela Tutolo More articles by this author , Craig RogersCraig Rogers More articles by this author , Hans StrickerHans Stricker More articles by this author , Wooju JeongWooju Jeong More articles by this author , James PeabodyJames Peabody More articles by this author , Francesco MontorsiFrancesco Montorsi More articles by this author , Alberto BrigantiAlberto Briganti More articles by this author , and Mani MenonMani Menon More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.2375AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The last decade saw a shift in treatment paradigm for PCa. Specifically, there has been increased recognition of the role for surgery as an initial treatment in patients with clinically high-risk PCa. Simultaneously, a rapid increase in the use of RALP as a substitute for open surgery has occured. In consequence, an increasing number of men with high-risk PCa are treated with RALP. We evaluated post-op functional outcomes in these individuals, focusing on post-op urinary continence (UC) and erectile function (EF) recovery. METHODS 799 men with D'Amico clinical high-risk PCa treated with RALP between 2004 and 2012 at 2 tertiary care centers were included. Uni-/multi-variable (MVA) Cox regression analyses tested the relationship between available predictors and two endpoints: 1) UC recovery (the use of 0-1 pad after surgery); 2) EF recovery (post-op International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-EF≥17). Covariates consisted of age, body mass index (BMI), PSA value, clinical stage, Gleason grade at biopsy, Charlson comorbidity index, nerve sparing status, pre-op IIEF-EF (for EF recovery endpoint), and pre-op IPSS (for continence recovery endpoint). All patients were instructed to start PDE-5 inhibitors, and/or penile injection to treat erectile dysfunction after surgery. RESULTS Mean (median) age, PSA value, and BMI at surgery were 62.1 yrs (63), 10.2 ng/ml (6.1), and 27.9 Kg/m2 (27), respectively. Biopsy GS was ≥8 in 56.6% of patients, and clinical stage was ≥T2c in 40.1% of patients. Mean (median) pre-op IIEF-EF was 19 points (22). Overall, 86.5% received a nerve-sparing RALP, 32.9% had positive surgical margins, and 3.4% received any adjuvant treatment. Mean (median) follow-up time was 58.5 months (56.5). At 3-, 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-months post-op the UC recovery rate was respectively 79, 83, 86, 88, and 97%, while the EF recovery rate was respectively 14, 28, 42, 54, and 77%. At MVA, only age (HR: 0.98, p=0.005) was an independent predictor of UC recovery, while both BMI (HR: 0.94, p=0.02), and pre-op IIEF-EF (HR: 1.07, p=0.04) were independent predictors of EF recovery. CONCLUSIONS Our findings represent one of the few reports on functional outcomes in patients with D'Amico clinically high-risk PCa treated with RALP. At 3-years post-op the vast majority of patients recover urinary continence (97%), and a substantial number recover EF (77%). However, older age and higher BMI might negatively impact the recovery of functional outcomes, while a better baseline sexual function has a positive impact on post-op EF recovery. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e780 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Firas Abdollah More articles by this author Daniel Pucheril More articles by this author Jesse Sammon More articles by this author Akshay Sood More articles by this author Dane Klett More articles by this author Nicola Fossati More articles by this author Giorgio Gandaglia More articles by this author Nazareno Suardi More articles by this author Giorgio Guazzoni More articles by this author Manuela Tutolo More articles by this author Craig Rogers More articles by this author Hans Stricker More articles by this author Wooju Jeong More articles by this author James Peabody More articles by this author Francesco Montorsi More articles by this author Alberto Briganti More articles by this author Mani Menon More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...