首页 > 最新文献

European urology oncology最新文献

英文 中文
Mortality Risk for Patients with Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer. 活检格里森分级 1 组前列腺癌患者的死亡率风险。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.009
Derya Tilki, Ming-Hui Chen, Hartwig Huland, Markus Graefen, Anthony V D'Amico

Background and objective: We investigated the association of clinical factors at presentation with the presence of unsampled high-risk prostate cancer (PC) and PC-specific mortality (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM) following radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 1 PC.

Methods: The study population comprised 10228 patients treated for GGG1 PC diagnosed via transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (SBx; n = 9248) or combined biopsy (CBx; SBx + TRUS/magnetic resonance image [MRI] fusion biopsy; n = 980) from a cohort study at a university hospital in Hamburg, Germany. We used logistic, Fine and Grays, and Cox multivariable regression methods to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of adverse pathology and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for early prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure (≤18 mo), PCSM, and ACM in relation to each clinical factor.

Key findings and limitations: Irrespective of biopsy approach, percent positive biopsies (PPB) >50% and PSA >20 ng/ml were significantly associated with higher risk of adverse pathology (SBx: aOR 1.71 and 3.49; CBx: aOR 1.81 and 2.82, respectively) and early PSA failure (SBx: aHR 1.54 and 4.37; CBx: aHR 2.88 and 7.81, respectively). PPB >50% and PSA >20 ng/ml were also associated with higher risk of PCSM (aHRs 2.56 and 3.71) and ACM (aHRs 1.47 and 2.00) in the SBx group (all p ≤ 0.04). The study is limited by the single-institution cohort design.

Conclusion and clinical implication: Maintaining the "cancer" classification for patients with GGG1 and either PPB >50% or PSA>20 ng/ml and considering rebiopsy to identify unsampled high-grade disease may minimize the risk of mortality for this subgroup.

Patient summary: For patients undergoing non-targeted prostate biopsy, approximately 1 in 12 with a biopsy result of grade group 1 prostate cancer may have more aggressive cancer than the result suggests. A very high PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level (>20 ng/ml) or the presence of grade group 1 cancer in more than 50% of the biopsy samples can identify patients at risk.

背景和目的:我们研究了活检格里森分级(GGG)1级前列腺癌患者发病时的临床因素与未取样高危前列腺癌(PC)的存在、PC特异性死亡率(PCSM)以及根治性前列腺切除术后的全因死亡率(ACM)之间的关系:研究对象包括德国汉堡一家大学医院的队列研究中通过经直肠超声(TRUS)引导的系统活检(SBx;n = 9248)或联合活检(CBx;SBx + TRUS/磁共振成像 [MRI] 融合活检;n = 980)确诊的 10228 例 GGG1 PC 患者。我们采用逻辑回归、Fine and Grays回归和Cox多变量回归方法计算了不良病理结果的调整赔率(aOR)以及早期前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)失效(≤18个月)、PCSM和ACM的调整危险比(aHR)与各临床因素的关系:无论采用哪种活检方法,活检阳性率(PPB)>50%和PSA>20 ng/ml与较高的不良病理风险(SBx:aOR分别为1.71和3.49;CBx:aOR分别为1.81和2.82)和早期PSA失败(SBx:aHR分别为1.54和4.37;CBx:aHR分别为2.88和7.81)显著相关。在 SBx 组,PPB >50% 和 PSA >20 ng/ml 也与较高的 PCSM(aHRs 2.56 和 3.71)和 ACM(aHRs 1.47 和 2.00)风险相关(所有 p 均小于 0.04)。结论和临床意义:结论和临床意义:对GGG1和PPB>50%或PSA>20 ng/ml的患者维持 "癌症 "分类,并考虑重新检查以确定未取样的高级别疾病,可最大限度地降低该亚组患者的死亡风险:对于接受非靶向前列腺活检的患者,大约每12名活检结果为1级前列腺癌的患者中就有1名可能患有比活检结果更具侵袭性的癌症。PSA(前列腺特异性抗原)水平过高(>20 ng/ml)或超过50%的活检样本中存在1级组癌,都可能是高危患者。
{"title":"Mortality Risk for Patients with Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer.","authors":"Derya Tilki, Ming-Hui Chen, Hartwig Huland, Markus Graefen, Anthony V D'Amico","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.009","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>We investigated the association of clinical factors at presentation with the presence of unsampled high-risk prostate cancer (PC) and PC-specific mortality (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM) following radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 1 PC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study population comprised 10228 patients treated for GGG1 PC diagnosed via transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (SBx; n = 9248) or combined biopsy (CBx; SBx + TRUS/magnetic resonance image [MRI] fusion biopsy; n = 980) from a cohort study at a university hospital in Hamburg, Germany. We used logistic, Fine and Grays, and Cox multivariable regression methods to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of adverse pathology and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for early prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure (≤18 mo), PCSM, and ACM in relation to each clinical factor.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Irrespective of biopsy approach, percent positive biopsies (PPB) >50% and PSA >20 ng/ml were significantly associated with higher risk of adverse pathology (SBx: aOR 1.71 and 3.49; CBx: aOR 1.81 and 2.82, respectively) and early PSA failure (SBx: aHR 1.54 and 4.37; CBx: aHR 2.88 and 7.81, respectively). PPB >50% and PSA >20 ng/ml were also associated with higher risk of PCSM (aHRs 2.56 and 3.71) and ACM (aHRs 1.47 and 2.00) in the SBx group (all p ≤ 0.04). The study is limited by the single-institution cohort design.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and clinical implication: </strong>Maintaining the \"cancer\" classification for patients with GGG1 and either PPB >50% or PSA>20 ng/ml and considering rebiopsy to identify unsampled high-grade disease may minimize the risk of mortality for this subgroup.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>For patients undergoing non-targeted prostate biopsy, approximately 1 in 12 with a biopsy result of grade group 1 prostate cancer may have more aggressive cancer than the result suggests. A very high PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level (>20 ng/ml) or the presence of grade group 1 cancer in more than 50% of the biopsy samples can identify patients at risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141497552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Adjuvant Atezolizumab in Patients with Sarcomatoid Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of IMmotion010. 肉瘤型肾细胞癌患者的阿特珠单抗辅助治疗:IMMOTION010 的预设亚组分析。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.006
Jose Antonio Karam, Robert Uzzo, Axel Bex, William Leung, Connie Tat, Alan Nicholas, Alexander Andreev-Drakhlin, Mahrukh Huseni, Sumanta Kumar Pal, Viraj A Master

Patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) have a poor prognosis. In the randomised, double-blind phase 3 IMmotion010 trial (NCT03024996), adjuvant atezolizumab did not demonstrate a disease-free survival (DFS) benefit versus placebo in the overall population of patients with locoregional renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence following surgery. This prespecified subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety was completed in 104 patients with sRCC. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms. At a median follow-up of 45 mo, the median DFS was not evaluable (NE; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12 mo-NE) in the atezolizumab arm (n = 37) and 23 mo (95% CI, 11-NE) in the placebo arm (n = 66; hazard ratio 0.77 [95% CI, 0.44-1.4]). In the sRCC subgroup, grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in one patient (2.7%) in the atezolizumab arm and two patients (3.0%) in the placebo arm. By comparison, 54 of 353 patients (15%) and 16 of 317 patients (5.0%) with non-sarcomatoid histology reported grade 3/4 TRAEs in the respective arms. In conclusion, the difference in DFS was not statistically significant between adjuvant atezolizumab and placebo in patients with sRCC. The safety profile was similar between patients with sRCC and non-sRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with a specific type of locoregional kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) were treated with atezolizumab or placebo after surgery. Slightly more patients treated with atezolizumab lived longer without the disease getting worse than those treated with placebo, although this finding was not statistically significant. The side effects were similar to those seen in patients with other types of kidney cancer treated with atezolizumab in the same study (IMmotion010). In patients with sarcomatoid kidney cancer, atezolizumab was tolerable and may be more effective than placebo, but this requires further study.

肉瘤型肾细胞癌(sRCC)患者预后较差。在随机双盲3期IMmotion010试验(NCT03024996)中,在手术后复发风险增加的局部肾细胞癌患者总体中,阿特珠单抗辅助治疗与安慰剂相比未显示出无病生存期(DFS)优势。这项预设的疗效和安全性亚组分析是在104例sRCC患者中完成的。各治疗组的基线特征相似。在中位随访45个月时,atezolizumab治疗组(n = 37)和安慰剂治疗组(n = 66)的中位DFS分别为不可评估(NE;95% 置信区间 [CI],12 mo-NE)和23个月(95% CI,11-NE);危险比为0.77 [95% CI,0.44-1.4]。在sRCC亚组中,atezolizumab治疗组有一名患者(2.7%)发生了3/4级治疗相关不良事件(TRAE),安慰剂治疗组有两名患者(3.0%)发生了此类不良事件。相比之下,353例患者中有54例(15%)和317例非肉瘤组织学患者中有16例(5.0%)报告了3/4级TRAE。总之,在sRCC患者中,辅助阿特珠单抗与安慰剂在DFS方面的差异没有统计学意义。sRCC患者和非sRCC患者的安全性相似。患者总结:特定类型的局部肾癌(具有肉瘤特征的肿瘤)患者在术后接受阿特珠单抗或安慰剂治疗。与接受安慰剂治疗的患者相比,接受atezolizumab治疗的患者在病情没有恶化的情况下存活时间略长,但这一结果并不具有统计学意义。副作用与同一项研究(IMmotion010)中接受阿特珠单抗治疗的其他类型肾癌患者的副作用相似。在肉瘤型肾癌患者中,atezolizumab的耐受性良好,而且可能比安慰剂更有效,但这还需要进一步研究。
{"title":"Adjuvant Atezolizumab in Patients with Sarcomatoid Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of IMmotion010.","authors":"Jose Antonio Karam, Robert Uzzo, Axel Bex, William Leung, Connie Tat, Alan Nicholas, Alexander Andreev-Drakhlin, Mahrukh Huseni, Sumanta Kumar Pal, Viraj A Master","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.006","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) have a poor prognosis. In the randomised, double-blind phase 3 IMmotion010 trial (NCT03024996), adjuvant atezolizumab did not demonstrate a disease-free survival (DFS) benefit versus placebo in the overall population of patients with locoregional renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence following surgery. This prespecified subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety was completed in 104 patients with sRCC. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms. At a median follow-up of 45 mo, the median DFS was not evaluable (NE; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12 mo-NE) in the atezolizumab arm (n = 37) and 23 mo (95% CI, 11-NE) in the placebo arm (n = 66; hazard ratio 0.77 [95% CI, 0.44-1.4]). In the sRCC subgroup, grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in one patient (2.7%) in the atezolizumab arm and two patients (3.0%) in the placebo arm. By comparison, 54 of 353 patients (15%) and 16 of 317 patients (5.0%) with non-sarcomatoid histology reported grade 3/4 TRAEs in the respective arms. In conclusion, the difference in DFS was not statistically significant between adjuvant atezolizumab and placebo in patients with sRCC. The safety profile was similar between patients with sRCC and non-sRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with a specific type of locoregional kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) were treated with atezolizumab or placebo after surgery. Slightly more patients treated with atezolizumab lived longer without the disease getting worse than those treated with placebo, although this finding was not statistically significant. The side effects were similar to those seen in patients with other types of kidney cancer treated with atezolizumab in the same study (IMmotion010). In patients with sarcomatoid kidney cancer, atezolizumab was tolerable and may be more effective than placebo, but this requires further study.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141491506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Enzalutamide Monotherapy in the EMBARK Trial Should Be Practice-changing and Existing Data Suggest How to Mitigate Toxicity EMBARK试验中的恩杂鲁胺单药治疗应改变实践,现有数据建议如何减轻毒性。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-29 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.001
{"title":"Enzalutamide Monotherapy in the EMBARK Trial Should Be Practice-changing and Existing Data Suggest How to Mitigate Toxicity","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":"7 5","pages":"Pages 971-972"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141467311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Hilar and Nonhilar Renal Masses: Comparison of Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Results in a Multicentre Prospective Cohort (NEPRAH Study, UroCCR 175). 机器人辅助肾部分切除术治疗肾门肿块和非肾门肿块:多中心前瞻性队列围手术期、肿瘤学和功能结果比较(NEPRAH 研究,UroCCR 175)。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-26 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.003
Julien Sarkis, Cecile M Champy, Nicolas Doumerc, Franck Bruyere, Morgan Rouprêt, Nicolas Branger, Louis Surlemont, Constance Michel, Thibaut Waeckel, Bastien Parier, Jean-Baptiste Beauval, Pierre Bigot, Hervé Lang, Maxime Vallee, Julien Guillotreau, Jean-Jacques Patard, Clément Sarrazin, Stéphane de Vergie, Olivier Belas, Romain Boissier, Richard Mallet, Frédéric Panthier, Fayek Taha, Quentin-Côme Le Clerc, Lionel Hoquetis, François Audenet, Louis Vignot, Philippe Paparel, Alexis Fontenil, Jean-Christophe Bernhard, Alexandre Ingels

Background and objective: A hilar location for a renal tumour is sometimes viewed as a limiting factor for safe partial nephrectomy. Our aim was to evaluate perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for hilar tumours (RAPN-H) in comparison to RAPN for nonhilar tumours (RAPN-NH).

Methods: We conducted an observational, multicentre cohort study using prospectively collected data from the French Research Network on Kidney Cancer (UroCCR). The registry includes data for 3551 patients who underwent RAPN for localised or locally advanced renal masses between 2010 and 2023 in 29 hospitals in France. We studied the impact of a hilar location on surgery, postoperative renal function, tumour characteristics, and survival. We also compared rates of trifecta achievement (warm ischaemia time [WIT] <25 min, negative surgical margins, and no perioperative complications) between the groups. Finally, we performed a subgroup analysis of RAPN without vascular clamping. Variables were compared in univariable analysis and using multivariable linear, logistic, and Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for relevant patient and tumour covariates.

Key findings and limitations: The analytical population included 3451 patients, of whom 2773 underwent RAPN-NH and 678 underwent RAPN-H. Longer WIT (β = 2.4 min; p < 0.01), longer operative time (β = 11.4 min; p < 0.01) and a higher risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.33; p = 0.05) were observed in the hilar group. Blood loss, the perioperative transfusion rate, postoperative changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, and trifecta achievement rates were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). At mean follow-up of 31.9 mo, there was no significant difference in recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.2; p = 0.3), cancer-specific survival (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.48-2.6; p = 0.79), or overall survival (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.52-1.53; p = 0.69).

Conclusions and clinical implications: Patient and tumour characteristics rather than just hilar location should be the main determinants of the optimal surgical strategy for hilar tumours.

Patient summary: We found that kidney tumours located close to major kidney blood vessels led to a longer operation and a higher risk of complications during robot-assisted surgery to remove the tumour. However, tumours in these locations were not related to a higher risk of kidney function loss, cancer recurrence, or death.

背景和目的:肾肿瘤位于肾门有时被视为肾部分切除术安全性的限制因素。我们的目的是评估肾门部肿瘤机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RAPN-H)与非肾门部肿瘤机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RAPN-NH)的围术期、肿瘤学和功能性结果:我们利用从法国肾癌研究网络(UroCCR)收集的前瞻性数据开展了一项多中心队列观察研究。该登记册包括2010年至2023年期间在法国29家医院接受RAPN治疗局部或局部晚期肾肿块的3551名患者的数据。我们研究了肾门位置对手术、术后肾功能、肿瘤特征和生存期的影响。我们还比较了三连胜的实现率(温缺血时间[WIT] 主要发现和局限性:分析对象包括3451名患者,其中2773人接受了RAPN-NH手术,678人接受了RAPN-H手术。WIT 更长(β = 2.4 分钟;P 0.05)。在平均31.9个月的随访中,无复发生存率(危险比[HR] 0.82,95% 置信区间[CI] 0.58-1.2;P = 0.3)、癌症特异性生存率(HR 1.1,95% CI 0.48-2.6;P = 0.79)或总生存率(HR 0.89,95% CI 0.52-1.53;P = 0.69)均无显著差异:患者总结:我们发现,靠近肾脏主要血管的肾脏肿瘤导致机器人辅助手术切除肿瘤的手术时间更长,并发症风险更高。然而,位于这些位置的肿瘤与肾功能丧失、癌症复发或死亡的更高风险无关。
{"title":"Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Hilar and Nonhilar Renal Masses: Comparison of Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Results in a Multicentre Prospective Cohort (NEPRAH Study, UroCCR 175).","authors":"Julien Sarkis, Cecile M Champy, Nicolas Doumerc, Franck Bruyere, Morgan Rouprêt, Nicolas Branger, Louis Surlemont, Constance Michel, Thibaut Waeckel, Bastien Parier, Jean-Baptiste Beauval, Pierre Bigot, Hervé Lang, Maxime Vallee, Julien Guillotreau, Jean-Jacques Patard, Clément Sarrazin, Stéphane de Vergie, Olivier Belas, Romain Boissier, Richard Mallet, Frédéric Panthier, Fayek Taha, Quentin-Côme Le Clerc, Lionel Hoquetis, François Audenet, Louis Vignot, Philippe Paparel, Alexis Fontenil, Jean-Christophe Bernhard, Alexandre Ingels","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.003","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>A hilar location for a renal tumour is sometimes viewed as a limiting factor for safe partial nephrectomy. Our aim was to evaluate perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for hilar tumours (RAPN-H) in comparison to RAPN for nonhilar tumours (RAPN-NH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an observational, multicentre cohort study using prospectively collected data from the French Research Network on Kidney Cancer (UroCCR). The registry includes data for 3551 patients who underwent RAPN for localised or locally advanced renal masses between 2010 and 2023 in 29 hospitals in France. We studied the impact of a hilar location on surgery, postoperative renal function, tumour characteristics, and survival. We also compared rates of trifecta achievement (warm ischaemia time [WIT] <25 min, negative surgical margins, and no perioperative complications) between the groups. Finally, we performed a subgroup analysis of RAPN without vascular clamping. Variables were compared in univariable analysis and using multivariable linear, logistic, and Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for relevant patient and tumour covariates.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>The analytical population included 3451 patients, of whom 2773 underwent RAPN-NH and 678 underwent RAPN-H. Longer WIT (β = 2.4 min; p < 0.01), longer operative time (β = 11.4 min; p < 0.01) and a higher risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.33; p = 0.05) were observed in the hilar group. Blood loss, the perioperative transfusion rate, postoperative changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, and trifecta achievement rates were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). At mean follow-up of 31.9 mo, there was no significant difference in recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.2; p = 0.3), cancer-specific survival (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.48-2.6; p = 0.79), or overall survival (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.52-1.53; p = 0.69).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>Patient and tumour characteristics rather than just hilar location should be the main determinants of the optimal surgical strategy for hilar tumours.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We found that kidney tumours located close to major kidney blood vessels led to a longer operation and a higher risk of complications during robot-assisted surgery to remove the tumour. However, tumours in these locations were not related to a higher risk of kidney function loss, cancer recurrence, or death.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141467312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Pembrolizumab plus Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone in Patients with Chemotherapy-naïve Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from KEYNOTE-365 Cohort D. Pembrolizumab联合醋酸阿比特龙和泼尼松治疗化疗无效的转移性抗阉割前列腺癌患者:KEYNOTE-365队列D的研究结果。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.013
Evan Y Yu, Cristiano Ferrario, Mark D Linch, Michael Stoeckle, Brigitte Laguerre, Jose A Arranz, Tilman Todenhöfer, Peter C Fong, Josep M Piulats, William Berry, Urban Emmenegger, Loic Mourey, Anthony M Joshua, Nataliya Mar, Leonard J Appleman, Henry J Conter, Gwenaelle Gravis, Xin Tong Li, Charles Schloss, Christian Poehlein, Johann S de Bono

Background and objective: Abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) plus prednisone is approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone in mCRPC.

Methods: In cohort D of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573), patients were chemotherapy-naïve, had disease progression ≤6 mo before screening, and had either not received prior next-generation hormonal agents for mCRPC or had received prior enzalutamide for mCRPC and had disease progression or became intolerant to enzalutamide. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus abiraterone 1000 mg orally once daily and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. The primary endpoints were safety, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR and overall survival (OS).

Key findings and limitations: For the 103 patients who were treated, median follow-up was 28 mo (interquartile range 26-31). The confirmed PSA response rate was 56% (58/103 patients). The ORR for patients with RECIST v1.1-measurable disease was 16% (6/37 patients). Median rPFS was 15 mo (95% confidence interval 9.2-22) and median OS was 30 mo (95% confidence interval 23-not reached); the estimated 24-mo OS rate was 58%. In total, 91% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events, and 39% experienced grade 3-5 events. Grade 3/4 elevation of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was observed in 12% and 6.8% of patients, respectively. One patient died due to treatment-related myasthenic syndrome. Study limitations include the single-arm design.

Conclusions: Pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. Higher incidence of grade 3/4 elevated ALT/AST occurred than was reported for the individual agents.

Patient summary: For patients with metastatic castratation-resistant prostate cancer, the drug combination of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone showed antitumor activity and acceptable safety.

背景和目的:醋酸阿比特龙(abiraterone acetate)加泼尼松已被批准用于治疗转移性抗性前列腺癌(mCRPC)。我们的目的是评估pembrolizumab加阿比特龙治疗mCRPC的疗效和安全性:在1b/2期KEYNOTE-365研究(NCT02861573)的队列D中,患者均为化疗无效患者,筛选前疾病进展≤6个月,既往未接受过新一代激素药物治疗mCRPC,或既往接受过恩杂鲁胺治疗mCRPC,但疾病进展或对恩杂鲁胺不耐受。患者每3周静脉注射200毫克pembrolizumab,同时口服阿比特龙1000毫克,每天1次;口服泼尼松5毫克,每天2次。主要终点是安全性、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)反应率,以及根据实体瘤反应评估标准1.1版(RECIST v1.1)通过盲法独立中央审查(BICR)得出的客观反应率(ORR)。次要终点包括BICR根据前列腺癌临床试验工作组3修订版RECIST v1.1得出的放射学无进展生存期(rPFS)和总生存期(OS):在接受治疗的103名患者中,中位随访时间为28个月(四分位间范围为26-31)。经证实的 PSA 反应率为 56%(58/103 例患者)。RECIST v1.1-可测量疾病患者的ORR为16%(6/37例)。中位 RPFS 为 15 个月(95% 置信区间为 9.2-22),中位 OS 为 30 个月(95% 置信区间为 23-未达到);估计 24 个月的 OS 率为 58%。91%的患者出现了治疗相关不良事件,其中39%的患者出现了3-5级不良事件。分别有12%和6.8%的患者出现3/4级丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)或天冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)升高。一名患者死于与治疗相关的肌无力综合征。研究的局限性包括单臂设计:Pembrolizumab联合阿比特龙和泼尼松对化疗无效的mCRPC患者具有抗肿瘤活性和可接受的安全性。3/4级ALT/AST升高的发生率高于个别药物:对于转移性阉割耐药前列腺癌患者,pembrolizumab加阿比特龙和泼尼松的联合用药显示出抗肿瘤活性和可接受的安全性。
{"title":"Pembrolizumab plus Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone in Patients with Chemotherapy-naïve Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from KEYNOTE-365 Cohort D.","authors":"Evan Y Yu, Cristiano Ferrario, Mark D Linch, Michael Stoeckle, Brigitte Laguerre, Jose A Arranz, Tilman Todenhöfer, Peter C Fong, Josep M Piulats, William Berry, Urban Emmenegger, Loic Mourey, Anthony M Joshua, Nataliya Mar, Leonard J Appleman, Henry J Conter, Gwenaelle Gravis, Xin Tong Li, Charles Schloss, Christian Poehlein, Johann S de Bono","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.013","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) plus prednisone is approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone in mCRPC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In cohort D of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573), patients were chemotherapy-naïve, had disease progression ≤6 mo before screening, and had either not received prior next-generation hormonal agents for mCRPC or had received prior enzalutamide for mCRPC and had disease progression or became intolerant to enzalutamide. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus abiraterone 1000 mg orally once daily and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. The primary endpoints were safety, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR and overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>For the 103 patients who were treated, median follow-up was 28 mo (interquartile range 26-31). The confirmed PSA response rate was 56% (58/103 patients). The ORR for patients with RECIST v1.1-measurable disease was 16% (6/37 patients). Median rPFS was 15 mo (95% confidence interval 9.2-22) and median OS was 30 mo (95% confidence interval 23-not reached); the estimated 24-mo OS rate was 58%. In total, 91% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events, and 39% experienced grade 3-5 events. Grade 3/4 elevation of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was observed in 12% and 6.8% of patients, respectively. One patient died due to treatment-related myasthenic syndrome. Study limitations include the single-arm design.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. Higher incidence of grade 3/4 elevated ALT/AST occurred than was reported for the individual agents.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>For patients with metastatic castratation-resistant prostate cancer, the drug combination of pembrolizumab plus abiraterone and prednisone showed antitumor activity and acceptable safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141456125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Clinical Validation of the Intermediate-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Scoring System and Substratification Model Proposed by the International Bladder Cancer Group: A Multicenter Young Academic Urologists Urothelial Working Group Collaboration. 国际膀胱癌小组提出的中危非肌层浸润性膀胱癌评分系统和分层模型的临床验证:国际膀胱癌小组提出的中危非肌层浸润性膀胱癌评分系统和基质化模型:多中心青年泌尿科医师泌尿系统工作组合作。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.004
Francesco Soria, Matteo Rosazza, Simone Livoti, Marco Moschini, Mario De Angelis, Francesco Del Giudice, Renate Pichler, Rodolfo Hurle, Stefano Mancon, Diego M Carrion, Wojciech Krajewski, Laura S Mertens, David D'Andrea, Andrea Mari, Fabrizio Di Maida, Daniele Dutto, Fulvia Colucci, Giulia Casale, Giorgia Fertitta, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Simone Albisinni, Benjamin Pradere, Jeremy Y C Teoh, Shahrokh F Shariat, Alberto Briganti, Ashish M Kamat, Paolo Gontero

Background and objective: Intermediate-risk (IR) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) encompasses a broad spectrum of disease, with heterogeneous outcomes in terms of disease recurrence and progression. The International Bladder Cancer Group (IBCG) recently proposed an updated scoring model for IR substratification that is based on five key risk factors. Our aim was to provide a clinical validation of the IBCG scoring system and substratification model for IR NMIBC.

Methods: This was an international multicenter retrospective study. Patients diagnosed with IR NMIBC between 2012 and 2022 and treated with transurethral resection of the bladder and adjuvant intravesical chemotherapy were included. According to the presence or absence of risk factors, patients with IR NMIBC were further categorized in IR-low (no risk factors), IR-intermediate (1-2 risk factors), and IR-high (≥3 risk factors) groups. The 1-yr and 3-yr rates for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated for each subgroup. Cox regression analyses were used to compare oncological outcomes between the groups.

Key findings and limitations: Of the 677 patients with IR NMIBC included in the study, 231 (34%), 364 (54%), and 82 (12%) were categorized in the IR-low, IR-intermediate, and IR-high groups, respectively. There were significant differences in RFS and PFS rates between these groups.

Conclusions and clinical implications: We provide the first clinical validation of the IBCG scoring system and model for substratification of IR NMIBC.

Patient summary: Our study demonstrates that patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer can be correctly classified into three distinct subgroups according to their risk of both disease recurrence and progression. Our results support use of this scoring system in clinical practice.

背景和目的:中危(IR)非肌浸润性膀胱癌(NMIBC)包括多种疾病,其疾病复发和进展的结果各不相同。国际膀胱癌组织(IBCG)最近提出了一个基于五个关键风险因素的IR亚分层最新评分模型。我们的目的是对IBCG评分系统和IR NMIBC分层模型进行临床验证:这是一项国际多中心回顾性研究。方法:这是一项国际多中心回顾性研究,纳入了2012年至2022年期间诊断为IR NMIBC并接受经尿道膀胱切除术和膀胱内辅助化疗的患者。根据是否存在危险因素,IR NMIBC患者被进一步分为IR-低(无危险因素)、IR-中(1-2个危险因素)和IR-高(≥3个危险因素)组。评估了每个亚组的1年和3年无复发生存率(RFS)和无进展生存率(PFS)。Cox回归分析用于比较各组间的肿瘤学结果:在纳入研究的677例IR NMIBC患者中,231例(34%)、364例(54%)和82例(12%)分别被归入IR-低、IR-中和IR-高组。这些组别的RFS和PFS率存在明显差异:患者总结:我们的研究表明,中危非肌浸润性膀胱癌患者可根据其疾病复发和进展的风险被正确分为三个不同的亚组。我们的研究结果支持在临床实践中使用这一评分系统。
{"title":"Clinical Validation of the Intermediate-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Scoring System and Substratification Model Proposed by the International Bladder Cancer Group: A Multicenter Young Academic Urologists Urothelial Working Group Collaboration.","authors":"Francesco Soria, Matteo Rosazza, Simone Livoti, Marco Moschini, Mario De Angelis, Francesco Del Giudice, Renate Pichler, Rodolfo Hurle, Stefano Mancon, Diego M Carrion, Wojciech Krajewski, Laura S Mertens, David D'Andrea, Andrea Mari, Fabrizio Di Maida, Daniele Dutto, Fulvia Colucci, Giulia Casale, Giorgia Fertitta, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Simone Albisinni, Benjamin Pradere, Jeremy Y C Teoh, Shahrokh F Shariat, Alberto Briganti, Ashish M Kamat, Paolo Gontero","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.004","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Intermediate-risk (IR) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) encompasses a broad spectrum of disease, with heterogeneous outcomes in terms of disease recurrence and progression. The International Bladder Cancer Group (IBCG) recently proposed an updated scoring model for IR substratification that is based on five key risk factors. Our aim was to provide a clinical validation of the IBCG scoring system and substratification model for IR NMIBC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an international multicenter retrospective study. Patients diagnosed with IR NMIBC between 2012 and 2022 and treated with transurethral resection of the bladder and adjuvant intravesical chemotherapy were included. According to the presence or absence of risk factors, patients with IR NMIBC were further categorized in IR-low (no risk factors), IR-intermediate (1-2 risk factors), and IR-high (≥3 risk factors) groups. The 1-yr and 3-yr rates for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated for each subgroup. Cox regression analyses were used to compare oncological outcomes between the groups.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Of the 677 patients with IR NMIBC included in the study, 231 (34%), 364 (54%), and 82 (12%) were categorized in the IR-low, IR-intermediate, and IR-high groups, respectively. There were significant differences in RFS and PFS rates between these groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>We provide the first clinical validation of the IBCG scoring system and model for substratification of IR NMIBC.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>Our study demonstrates that patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer can be correctly classified into three distinct subgroups according to their risk of both disease recurrence and progression. Our results support use of this scoring system in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141436795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Consistencies in Follow-up After Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Framework Based on Expert Practices Collaboratively Developed by the European Association of Urology Bladder Cancer Guideline Panels. 膀胱癌根治性切除术后随访的一致性:基于欧洲泌尿外科协会膀胱癌指南小组合作开发的专家实践框架。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010
Laura S Mertens, Harman Maxim Bruins, Roberto Contieri, Marek Babjuk, Bhavan P Rai, Albert Carrión Puig, Jose Luis Dominguez Escrig, Paolo Gontero, Antoine G van der Heijden, Fredrik Liedberg, Alberto Martini, Alexandra Masson-Lecomte, Richard P Meijer, Hugh Mostafid, Yann Neuzillet, Benjamin Pradere, John Redlef, Bas W G van Rhijn, Matthieu Rouanne, Morgan Rouprêt, Sæbjørn Sæbjørnsen, Thomas Seisen, Shahrokh F Shariat, Francesco Soria, Viktor Soukup, George Thalmann, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paramananthan Mariappan, J Alfred Witjes

Background and objective: There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.

Methods: We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.

Key findings and limitations: We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.

Conclusions and clinical implications: This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.

Patient summary: We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.

背景和目的:膀胱癌(BC)根治性膀胱切除术(RC)后的随访没有标准化方案。为了填补这一空白,我们开展了一项多中心研究,欧洲泌尿外科协会(EAU)膀胱癌指南小组的泌尿科医生参与了这项研究。我们的目标是确定一致的 RC 后随访策略,并根据专家意见制定一个基于实践的框架:我们使用一份预先测试过的二分法问卷,对欧洲泌尿学协会非肌层浸润性膀胱癌、肌层浸润性膀胱癌和转移性膀胱癌指南小组的 27 位泌尿学专家进行了调查。调查询问了 RC 后的随访策略以及风险适应策略的使用情况。RC后3个月开始的随访实践中,>75%的肯定回答为一致性。我们使用了描述性统计进行分析:我们收到了96%的专家组成员的回复,他们提供了来自21家欧洲医院的数据。53%的医院采用风险适应性随访,对高风险(至少≥pT3或pN+)和低风险([y]pT0/a/1N0)病例采用统一标准。在未就基于风险的随访达成一致意见的情况下,制定了非风险适应性随访框架。在最初的 3 年中,随访的一致性较高,但在随后的随访中一致性有所下降。第一年的随访最为频繁,包括患者评估、体格检查和实验室检测。胸部和腹部/骨盆的计算机断层扫描是最常见的成像方式,最初至少每半年进行一次,然后在第二年至第五年每年进行一次。RC术后10年后的持续随访缺乏一致性:在缺乏前瞻性随机研究的情况下,EAU膀胱癌专家制定的这一基于实践的RC后随访框架可为泌尿科医生提供有价值的指导。患者摘要:我们向EAU膀胱癌指南小组的泌尿科医生询问了膀胱癌手术切除后的患者随访情况。我们发现,虽然泌尿科医生的方法各不相同,但整个小组也有一些共同的随访做法。我们创建了一个实用的随访框架,对泌尿科医生的日常工作很有帮助。
{"title":"Consistencies in Follow-up After Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Framework Based on Expert Practices Collaboratively Developed by the European Association of Urology Bladder Cancer Guideline Panels.","authors":"Laura S Mertens, Harman Maxim Bruins, Roberto Contieri, Marek Babjuk, Bhavan P Rai, Albert Carrión Puig, Jose Luis Dominguez Escrig, Paolo Gontero, Antoine G van der Heijden, Fredrik Liedberg, Alberto Martini, Alexandra Masson-Lecomte, Richard P Meijer, Hugh Mostafid, Yann Neuzillet, Benjamin Pradere, John Redlef, Bas W G van Rhijn, Matthieu Rouanne, Morgan Rouprêt, Sæbjørn Sæbjørnsen, Thomas Seisen, Shahrokh F Shariat, Francesco Soria, Viktor Soukup, George Thalmann, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paramananthan Mariappan, J Alfred Witjes","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141436796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Role of Mitomycin C in Intermediate-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 丝裂霉素 C 在中危非肌层浸润性膀胱癌中的作用:系统回顾与元分析》。
IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.005
Pietro Scilipoti, Aleksander Ślusarczyk, Mario de Angelis, Francesco Soria, Benjamin Pradere, Wojciech Krajewski, David D'Andrea, Andrea Mari, Francesco Del Giudice, Renate Pichler, José Daniel Subiela, Luca Afferi, Simone Albisinni, Laura Mertens, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Keiichiro Mori, Piotr Radziszewski, Shahrokh F Shariat, Andrea Necchi, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paolo Gontero, Morgan Rouprêt, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, Marco Moschini

Background and objective: Intravesical mitomycin C (MMC) instillations are recommended to prevent recurrence of intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (IR-NMIBC); however, the optimal regimen and dose are uncertain. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of adjuvant MMC and compare different MMC regimens in preventing recurrence.

Methods: We performed a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in November 2023 for studies investigating recurrence-free survival (RFS) among patients with IR-NMIBC who received adjuvant MMC. Prospective trials with different MMC regimens or other intravesical drugs as comparators were considered eligible.

Key findings and limitations: Overall, 14 studies were eligible for systematic review and 11 for meta-analysis of RFS. Estimates of 1-yr, 2-yr, and 5-yr RFS rates were 84% (95% confidence interval [CI] 79-89%), 75% (95% CI 68-82%), and 51% (95% CI 40-63%) for patients treated with MMC induction plus maintenance, and 88% (95% CI 83-94%), 78% (95% CI 67-89%), and 66% (95% CI 57-75%) for patients treated with bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) maintenance, respectively. Estimates of 2-yr RFS rates for MMC maintenance regimens were 76% (95% CI 69-84%) for 40 mg MMC (2 studies) and 66% (95% CI 60-72%) for 30 mg MMC (4 studies). Among the studies included, BCG maintenance provided comparable 2-yr RFS to 40 mg MMC with maintenance (78% vs 76%). RFS did not differ by MMC maintenance duration (>1 yr vs 1 yr vs <1 yr).

Conclusions and clinical implications: MMC induction and maintenance regimens seem to provide short-term RFS rates equivalent to those for BCG maintenance in IR-NMIBC. For adjuvant induction and maintenance, 40 mg of MMC appears to be more effective in preventing recurrence than 30 mg. We did not observe an RFS benefit for longer maintenance regimens.

Patient summary: For patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, bladder treatments with a solution of a drug called mitomycin C (MMC) seem to be as effective as BCG (bacillus Calmette-Guérin) in preventing recurrence after tumor removal. Further trials are needed for stronger evidence on the best MMC dose and treatment time.

背景和目的:建议膀胱内注射丝裂霉素C(MMC)以预防中危非肌浸润性膀胱癌(IR-NMIBC)复发,但最佳方案和剂量尚不确定。我们的目的是评估MMC辅助治疗的有效性,并比较不同的MMC治疗方案在预防复发方面的效果:我们于 2023 年 11 月在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 上进行了一次全面搜索,以了解有关接受 MMC 辅助治疗的 IR-NMIBC 患者无复发生存率(RFS)的研究。以不同的 MMC 方案或其他膀胱内药物作为比较对象的前瞻性试验均符合条件:共有 14 项研究符合 RFS 的系统综述条件,11 项符合 RFS 的荟萃分析条件。MMC诱导加维持治疗患者的1年、2年和5年RFS估计值分别为84%(95%置信区间[CI] 79-89%)、75%(95% CI 68-82%)和51%(95% CI 40-63%);卡介苗(BCG)维持治疗患者的1年、2年和5年RFS估计值分别为88%(95% CI 83-94%)、78%(95% CI 67-89%)和66%(95% CI 57-75%)。据估计,40 毫克 MMC(2 项研究)和 30 毫克 MMC(4 项研究)维持治疗方案的 2 年 RFS 率分别为 76%(95% CI 69-84%)和 66%(95% CI 60-72%)。在纳入的研究中,卡介苗维持治疗与40毫克MMC维持治疗的2年RFS相当(78% vs 76%)。不同的 MMC 维持时间(>1 年 vs 1 年 vs 结论和临床意义)对 RFS 没有影响:在IR-NMIBC中,MMC诱导和维持方案的短期RFS率似乎与卡介苗维持方案相当。在辅助诱导和维持治疗中,40 毫克 MMC 似乎比 30 毫克更能有效预防复发。我们没有观察到较长的维持治疗方案有RFS获益:对于中危非肌浸润性膀胱癌患者,使用丝裂霉素 C(MMC)溶液进行膀胱治疗似乎与卡介苗(卡介苗)一样能有效预防肿瘤切除后的复发。关于丝裂霉素 C 的最佳剂量和治疗时间,还需要进一步的试验来提供更有力的证据。
{"title":"The Role of Mitomycin C in Intermediate-risk Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Pietro Scilipoti, Aleksander Ślusarczyk, Mario de Angelis, Francesco Soria, Benjamin Pradere, Wojciech Krajewski, David D'Andrea, Andrea Mari, Francesco Del Giudice, Renate Pichler, José Daniel Subiela, Luca Afferi, Simone Albisinni, Laura Mertens, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Keiichiro Mori, Piotr Radziszewski, Shahrokh F Shariat, Andrea Necchi, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paolo Gontero, Morgan Rouprêt, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti, Marco Moschini","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.06.005","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Intravesical mitomycin C (MMC) instillations are recommended to prevent recurrence of intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (IR-NMIBC); however, the optimal regimen and dose are uncertain. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of adjuvant MMC and compare different MMC regimens in preventing recurrence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in November 2023 for studies investigating recurrence-free survival (RFS) among patients with IR-NMIBC who received adjuvant MMC. Prospective trials with different MMC regimens or other intravesical drugs as comparators were considered eligible.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Overall, 14 studies were eligible for systematic review and 11 for meta-analysis of RFS. Estimates of 1-yr, 2-yr, and 5-yr RFS rates were 84% (95% confidence interval [CI] 79-89%), 75% (95% CI 68-82%), and 51% (95% CI 40-63%) for patients treated with MMC induction plus maintenance, and 88% (95% CI 83-94%), 78% (95% CI 67-89%), and 66% (95% CI 57-75%) for patients treated with bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) maintenance, respectively. Estimates of 2-yr RFS rates for MMC maintenance regimens were 76% (95% CI 69-84%) for 40 mg MMC (2 studies) and 66% (95% CI 60-72%) for 30 mg MMC (4 studies). Among the studies included, BCG maintenance provided comparable 2-yr RFS to 40 mg MMC with maintenance (78% vs 76%). RFS did not differ by MMC maintenance duration (>1 yr vs 1 yr vs <1 yr).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>MMC induction and maintenance regimens seem to provide short-term RFS rates equivalent to those for BCG maintenance in IR-NMIBC. For adjuvant induction and maintenance, 40 mg of MMC appears to be more effective in preventing recurrence than 30 mg. We did not observe an RFS benefit for longer maintenance regimens.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>For patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, bladder treatments with a solution of a drug called mitomycin C (MMC) seem to be as effective as BCG (bacillus Calmette-Guérin) in preventing recurrence after tumor removal. Further trials are needed for stronger evidence on the best MMC dose and treatment time.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141431697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Expert Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Among Men with Prostate Cancer Taking Poly-ADP Ribose Polymerase Inhibitor + Novel Hormonal Therapy Combination Therapy. 关于前列腺癌男性患者接受多聚-ADP核糖聚合酶抑制剂+新型荷尔蒙疗法联合疗法后治疗突发不良事件处理的专家共识建议》。
IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.009
Neal D Shore, Michael S Broder, Pedro C Barata, Tony Crispino, André P Fay, Jennifer Lloyd, Begoña Mellado, Nobuaki Matsubara, Nicklas Pfanzelter, Katrin Schlack, Paul Sieber, Andrey Soares, Hannah Dalglish, Alexander Niyazov, Saif Shaman, Michael A Zielinski, Jane Chang, Neeraj Agarwal

Background and objective: Recent clinical trials have shown improvement in progression-free survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) treated with combination poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) and novel hormonal therapy (NHT). Regulatory bodies in the USA, Canada, Europe, and Japan have recently approved this combination therapy for mPC. Common adverse events (AEs) include fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and anemia. Nuanced AE management guidance for these combinations is lacking. The panel objective was to develop expert consensus on AE management in patients with mPC treated with the combination PARPi + NHT.

Methods: The RAND/University of California Los Angeles modified Delphi Panel method was used. AEs were defined using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Twelve experts (seven medical oncologists, one advanced practice registered nurse, three urologists, and one patient advocate) reviewed the relevant literature; independently rated initial AE management options for the agent suspected of causing the AE for 419 patient scenarios on a 1-9 scale; discussed areas of agreement (AoAs) and disagreement (AoDs) at a March 2023 meeting; and repeated these ratings following the meeting. Second-round ratings formed the basis of guidelines.

Key findings and limitations: AoDs decreased from 41% to 21% between the first and second round ratings, with agreement on at least one management strategy for every AE. AoAs included the following: (1) continue therapy with symptomatic treatment for patients with mild AEs; (2) for moderate fatigue, recommend nonpharmacologic treatment, hold treatment temporarily, and restart at a reduced dose when symptoms resolve; (3) for severe nausea or any degree of vomiting where symptomatic treatment fails, hold treatment temporarily and restart at a reduced dose when symptoms resolve; and (4) for hemoglobin 7.1-8.0 g/dl and symptoms of anemia, hold treatment temporarily and restart at a reduced dose after red blood cell transfusion.

Conclusions and clinical implications: This expert guidance can support management of AEs in patients with mPC receiving combination PARPi + NHT therapy.

Patient summary: A panel of experts developed guidelines for adverse event (AE) management in patients with metastatic prostate cancer treated with a combination of poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and novel hormonal therapy. For mild AEs, continuation of cancer therapy along with symptomatic treatment is recommended. For moderate or severe AEs, cancer therapy should be stopped temporarily and restarted at the same or a reduced dose when AE resolves.

背景和目的:最近的临床试验表明,采用聚-ADP核糖聚合酶(PARP)抑制剂(PARPi)和新型激素疗法(NHT)联合治疗转移性前列腺癌(mPC)的男性患者的无进展生存期有所改善。美国、加拿大、欧洲和日本的监管机构最近批准了这种治疗前列腺癌的联合疗法。常见的不良反应(AE)包括疲劳、恶心和呕吐以及贫血。目前还缺乏针对这些联合疗法的细致入微的不良反应管理指南。专家组的目标是就接受 PARPi + NHT 联合疗法治疗的 mPC 患者的 AE 管理达成专家共识:方法:采用兰德公司/加州大学洛杉矶分校改良德尔菲小组方法。AE采用《不良事件通用术语标准》进行定义。12 位专家(7 位肿瘤内科医生、1 位高级执业注册护士、3 位泌尿科医生和 1 位患者权益倡导者)查阅了相关文献;针对 419 种患者情况,以 1-9 分制独立评定了疑似导致不良事件的药物的初步不良事件处理方案;在 2023 年 3 月的一次会议上讨论了意见一致的领域 (AoAs) 和意见分歧的领域 (AoDs);并在会后重复了这些评定。第二轮评分构成了指南的基础:在第一轮和第二轮评级之间,分歧率从 41% 降至 21%,对每种 AE 至少有一种管理策略达成了一致。共识包括以下内容:(1) 对于轻度 AE 患者,继续对症治疗;(2) 对于中度疲劳,建议采用非药物治疗,暂时停止治疗,待症状缓解后减量重新开始治疗;(3) 对于严重恶心或任何程度的呕吐,对症治疗无效时,暂时停止治疗,待症状缓解后减量重新开始治疗;(4) 对于血红蛋白 7.1-8.0 g/dl 且出现贫血症状时,应暂时停止治疗,待输注红细胞后减量重新开始治疗:患者摘要:一个专家小组为接受聚-ADP核糖聚合酶抑制剂和新型激素疗法联合治疗的转移性前列腺癌患者制定了不良事件(AE)管理指南。对于轻度 AE,建议在对症治疗的同时继续进行癌症治疗。对于中度或重度不良反应,应暂时停止癌症治疗,待不良反应缓解后再以相同剂量或减少剂量重新开始治疗。
{"title":"Expert Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Treatment-emergent Adverse Events Among Men with Prostate Cancer Taking Poly-ADP Ribose Polymerase Inhibitor + Novel Hormonal Therapy Combination Therapy.","authors":"Neal D Shore, Michael S Broder, Pedro C Barata, Tony Crispino, André P Fay, Jennifer Lloyd, Begoña Mellado, Nobuaki Matsubara, Nicklas Pfanzelter, Katrin Schlack, Paul Sieber, Andrey Soares, Hannah Dalglish, Alexander Niyazov, Saif Shaman, Michael A Zielinski, Jane Chang, Neeraj Agarwal","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.009","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Recent clinical trials have shown improvement in progression-free survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) treated with combination poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) and novel hormonal therapy (NHT). Regulatory bodies in the USA, Canada, Europe, and Japan have recently approved this combination therapy for mPC. Common adverse events (AEs) include fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and anemia. Nuanced AE management guidance for these combinations is lacking. The panel objective was to develop expert consensus on AE management in patients with mPC treated with the combination PARPi + NHT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The RAND/University of California Los Angeles modified Delphi Panel method was used. AEs were defined using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Twelve experts (seven medical oncologists, one advanced practice registered nurse, three urologists, and one patient advocate) reviewed the relevant literature; independently rated initial AE management options for the agent suspected of causing the AE for 419 patient scenarios on a 1-9 scale; discussed areas of agreement (AoAs) and disagreement (AoDs) at a March 2023 meeting; and repeated these ratings following the meeting. Second-round ratings formed the basis of guidelines.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>AoDs decreased from 41% to 21% between the first and second round ratings, with agreement on at least one management strategy for every AE. AoAs included the following: (1) continue therapy with symptomatic treatment for patients with mild AEs; (2) for moderate fatigue, recommend nonpharmacologic treatment, hold treatment temporarily, and restart at a reduced dose when symptoms resolve; (3) for severe nausea or any degree of vomiting where symptomatic treatment fails, hold treatment temporarily and restart at a reduced dose when symptoms resolve; and (4) for hemoglobin 7.1-8.0 g/dl and symptoms of anemia, hold treatment temporarily and restart at a reduced dose after red blood cell transfusion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>This expert guidance can support management of AEs in patients with mPC receiving combination PARPi + NHT therapy.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>A panel of experts developed guidelines for adverse event (AE) management in patients with metastatic prostate cancer treated with a combination of poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and novel hormonal therapy. For mild AEs, continuation of cancer therapy along with symptomatic treatment is recommended. For moderate or severe AEs, cancer therapy should be stopped temporarily and restarted at the same or a reduced dose when AE resolves.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141310409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Genomic Determinants Associated with Modes of Progression and Patterns of Failure in Metachronous Oligometastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer. 与隐匿性寡转移钙化敏感性前列腺癌的进展方式和失败模式相关的基因组决定因素
IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-06-10 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.011
Philip Sutera, Yang Song, Amol C Shetty, Keara English, Kim Van der Eecken, Ozan Cem Guler, Jarey Wang, Yufeng Cao, Soha Bazyar, Sofie Verbeke, Jo Van Dorpe, Valérie Fonteyne, Bram De Laere, Mark Mishra, Zaker Rana, Jason Molitoris, Matthew Ferris, Ana Kiess, Daniel Y Song, Theodore DeWeese, Kenneth J Pienta, Christopher Barbieri, Luigi Marchionni, Lei Ren, Amit Sawant, Nicole Simone, Alejandro Berlin, Cem Onal, Phuoc T Tran, Piet Ost, Matthew P Deek
<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (omCSPC) represents an early state in the progression of metastatic disease for which patients experience better outcomes in comparison to those with higher disease burden. Despite the generally more indolent nature, there is still much heterogeneity, with some patients experiencing a more aggressive clinical course unexplained by clinical features alone. Our aim was to investigate correlation of tumor genomics with the mode of progression (MOP) and pattern of failure (POF) following first treatment (metastasis-directed and/or systemic therapy) for omCSPC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed an international multi-institutional retrospective study of men treated for metachronous omCSPC who underwent tumor next-generation sequencing with at least 1 yr of follow-up after their first treatment. Descriptive MOP and POF results are reported with respect to the presence of genomic alterations in pathways of interest. MOP was defined as class I, long-term control (LTC; no radiographic progression at last follow-up), class II, oligoprogression (1-3 lesions), or class III, polyprogression (≥4 lesions). POF included the location of lesions at first failure. Genomic pathways of interest included TP53, ATM, RB1, BRCA1/2, SPOP, and WNT (APC, CTNNB1, RNF43). Genomic associations with MOP/POF were compared using χ<sup>2</sup> tests. Exploratory analyses revealed that the COSMIC mutational signature and differential gene expression were also correlated with MOP/POF. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via the Kaplan-Meier method from the time of first failure.</p><p><strong>Key findings and clinical implications: </strong>We included 267 patients in our analysis; the majority had either one (47%) or two (30%) metastatic lesions at oligometastasis. The 3-yr OS rate was significantly associated with MOP (71% for polyprogression vs 91% for oligoprogression; p = 0.005). TP53 mutation was associated with a significantly lower LTC rate (27.6% vs 42.3%; p = 0.04) and RB1 mutation was associated with a high rate of polyprogression (50% vs 19.9%; p = 0.022). Regarding POF, bone failure was significantly more common with tumors harboring TP53 mutations (44.8% vs25.9%; p = 0.005) and less common with SPOP mutations (7.1% vs 31.4%; p = 0.007). Visceral failure was more common with tumors harboring either WNT pathway mutations (17.2% vs 6.8%, p = 0.05) or SPOP mutations (17.9% vs 6.3%; p = 0.04). Finally, visceral and bone failures were associated with distinct gene-expression profiles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>Tumor genomics provides novel insight into MOP and POF following treatment for metachronous omCSPC. Patients with TP53 and RB1 mutations have a higher likelihood of progression, and TP53, SPOP, and WNT pathway mutations may have a role in metastatic organotropism.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We evaluated cancer p
背景和目的:低转移性阉割敏感性前列腺癌(omCSPC)是转移性疾病进展的早期状态,与疾病负担较重的患者相比,患者的预后较好。尽管前列腺癌一般较为隐匿,但仍存在很大的异质性,一些患者的临床病程更具侵袭性,而临床特征本身无法解释其原因。我们的目的是研究肿瘤基因组学与omCSPC首次治疗(转移导向和/或全身治疗)后的进展模式(MOP)和失败模式(POF)的相关性:我们开展了一项国际多机构回顾性研究,研究对象是接受过转移性omCSPC治疗的男性患者,他们在首次治疗后至少随访1年,并接受了肿瘤新一代测序。报告了相关通路基因组改变的描述性澳门巴黎人娱乐官网和 POF 结果。MOP定义为I级,长期控制(LTC;最后一次随访时无放射学进展);II级,少进展(1-3个病灶);或III级,多进展(≥4个病灶)。POF包括首次失败时病变的位置。受关注的基因组通路包括 TP53、ATM、RB1、BRCA1/2、SPOP 和 WNT(APC、CTNNB1、RNF43)。使用χ2检验比较了基因组与MOP/POF的相关性。探索性分析表明,COSMIC突变特征和差异基因表达也与MOP/POF相关。总生存期(OS)采用卡普兰-梅耶法计算,从首次失败时算起:我们在分析中纳入了267名患者;大多数患者在少转移灶有一个(47%)或两个(30%)转移病灶。3年的OS率与MOP显著相关(多发转移为71%,少发转移为91%;P = 0.005)。TP53突变与明显较低的长期生存率相关(27.6% vs 42.3%; p = 0.04),RB1突变与较高的多发性进展率相关(50% vs 19.9%; p = 0.022)。关于POF,骨衰竭在TP53突变的肿瘤中更常见(44.8% vs 25.9%;p = 0.005),而在SPOP突变的肿瘤中较少见(7.1% vs 31.4%;p = 0.007)。内脏衰竭在WNT通路突变(17.2% vs 6.8%,p = 0.05)或SPOP突变(17.9% vs 6.3%;p = 0.04)的肿瘤中更为常见。最后,内脏和骨骼衰竭与不同的基因表达谱有关:结论和临床意义:肿瘤基因组学提供了治疗远期omCSPC后MOP和POF的新见解。TP53和RB1基因突变的患者病情进展的可能性更高,TP53、SPOP和WNT通路突变可能在转移性有机体中发挥作用。患者摘要:我们评估了转移性前列腺癌首次治疗后的癌症进展情况,转移灶多达5个。我们发现,某些基因的突变与这些患者进一步转移的位置和程度有关。
{"title":"Genomic Determinants Associated with Modes of Progression and Patterns of Failure in Metachronous Oligometastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer.","authors":"Philip Sutera, Yang Song, Amol C Shetty, Keara English, Kim Van der Eecken, Ozan Cem Guler, Jarey Wang, Yufeng Cao, Soha Bazyar, Sofie Verbeke, Jo Van Dorpe, Valérie Fonteyne, Bram De Laere, Mark Mishra, Zaker Rana, Jason Molitoris, Matthew Ferris, Ana Kiess, Daniel Y Song, Theodore DeWeese, Kenneth J Pienta, Christopher Barbieri, Luigi Marchionni, Lei Ren, Amit Sawant, Nicole Simone, Alejandro Berlin, Cem Onal, Phuoc T Tran, Piet Ost, Matthew P Deek","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.011","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.011","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background and objective: &lt;/strong&gt;Oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (omCSPC) represents an early state in the progression of metastatic disease for which patients experience better outcomes in comparison to those with higher disease burden. Despite the generally more indolent nature, there is still much heterogeneity, with some patients experiencing a more aggressive clinical course unexplained by clinical features alone. Our aim was to investigate correlation of tumor genomics with the mode of progression (MOP) and pattern of failure (POF) following first treatment (metastasis-directed and/or systemic therapy) for omCSPC.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We performed an international multi-institutional retrospective study of men treated for metachronous omCSPC who underwent tumor next-generation sequencing with at least 1 yr of follow-up after their first treatment. Descriptive MOP and POF results are reported with respect to the presence of genomic alterations in pathways of interest. MOP was defined as class I, long-term control (LTC; no radiographic progression at last follow-up), class II, oligoprogression (1-3 lesions), or class III, polyprogression (≥4 lesions). POF included the location of lesions at first failure. Genomic pathways of interest included TP53, ATM, RB1, BRCA1/2, SPOP, and WNT (APC, CTNNB1, RNF43). Genomic associations with MOP/POF were compared using χ&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; tests. Exploratory analyses revealed that the COSMIC mutational signature and differential gene expression were also correlated with MOP/POF. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via the Kaplan-Meier method from the time of first failure.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Key findings and clinical implications: &lt;/strong&gt;We included 267 patients in our analysis; the majority had either one (47%) or two (30%) metastatic lesions at oligometastasis. The 3-yr OS rate was significantly associated with MOP (71% for polyprogression vs 91% for oligoprogression; p = 0.005). TP53 mutation was associated with a significantly lower LTC rate (27.6% vs 42.3%; p = 0.04) and RB1 mutation was associated with a high rate of polyprogression (50% vs 19.9%; p = 0.022). Regarding POF, bone failure was significantly more common with tumors harboring TP53 mutations (44.8% vs25.9%; p = 0.005) and less common with SPOP mutations (7.1% vs 31.4%; p = 0.007). Visceral failure was more common with tumors harboring either WNT pathway mutations (17.2% vs 6.8%, p = 0.05) or SPOP mutations (17.9% vs 6.3%; p = 0.04). Finally, visceral and bone failures were associated with distinct gene-expression profiles.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions and clinical implications: &lt;/strong&gt;Tumor genomics provides novel insight into MOP and POF following treatment for metachronous omCSPC. Patients with TP53 and RB1 mutations have a higher likelihood of progression, and TP53, SPOP, and WNT pathway mutations may have a role in metastatic organotropism.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Patient summary: &lt;/strong&gt;We evaluated cancer p","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141305829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
European urology oncology
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1