Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases最新文献

Introduction: Focal Therapy (FT) is a treatment option for the treatment of limited volume clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). We aim to systematically review outcomes of established FT modalities to assess the contemporary baseline and identify gaps in evidence that will aid in further trial and study design.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all primary studies reporting outcomes of FT using cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and irreversible electroporation (IRE). We described patient inclusion criteria, selection tools, treatment parameters, and surveillance protocols, and pooled overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), biochemical progression (BP), biopsy, secondary treatment, sexual, and urinary function outcomes. Composite failure was defined as salvage whole gland ablation, radical treatment, hormonal therapy or transition to watchful waiting.

Synthesis: We identified 49 unique cohorts of men undergoing FT between 2008 and 2024 (21 cryotherapy, 20 HIFU, and 8 IRE). Median follow-up ranged from 6 to 63 months. Pooled OS was 98.0%, CSS 99.3%, and MFS 98.5%. Pooled BP was 9.4%/year. Biopsy was mandated post-FT within 24 months in 36/49 (73.5%) cohorts, with pooled csPCa (GG ≥ 2) rates of 22.2% overall, 8.9% infield, and 12.3% outfield. The pooled rate of secondary FT was 5.0%, radical treatment 10.5%, and composite failure 14.1%. Of 35 studies reporting sexual function, 45.7% reported a low, 48.6% moderate, and 5.7% severe impact. For 34 cohorts reporting urinary function, 97.1% reported a low impact. No differences were noted between cryotherapy, HIFU, or IRE in any of the outcomes.

Conclusion: FT with cryotherapy, HIFU, and IRE is associated with good short-intermediate term oncological and functional outcomes. However, outcome reporting is heterogeneous and often incomplete. Long-term follow-up and standardized reporting are required to better define and report FT outcomes.

Background: Socioeconomic determinants of health (SDOH) are often unvalued during surgery risk stratification; hence, they might be a major source of disparity that can jeopardize outcomes related to urological surgery. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of SDOH on postoperative outcomes following minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP).

Methods: Patients who underwent MIRP between 2011 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed by using PearlDiver-Mariner, an all-payer insurance claims database. International Classification of Diseases diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify patient's characteristics, postoperative complications and SDOH. Outcomes were compared using multivariable regression models.

Results: Overall, 100,035 patients (mean age = 63.24 ± 7.07) underwent MIRP. The 60-day postoperative complication rate was 18%. Approximately 6% of patients reported at least one SDOH at baseline. SDOH were associated with higher odds of 60-day postoperative complications (OR:1.24, 95% CI:1.15-1.34), including urinary tract infection (OR:1.32, 95% CI:1.20-1.45) and acute kidney injury (OR:1.31, 95% CI:1.00-1.39). Postoperative urethral stricture (OR:1.37, 95% CI:0.92-1.98) did not reach statistical significance at multivariable analysis.

Conclusions: Patients with SDOH have a significantly higher risk of postoperative complications following MIRP, especially urinary infection and acute kidney injury. These findings are multifactorial and should prompt identifying measures that might help prevent this large-scale phenomenon.

Background: Despite the evidence supporting the use of focal therapy (FT) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa), considerable variability exists in the patient selection criteria across current studies. This study aims to review the most recent evidence concerning the optimal approach to patient selection for FT in PCa.

Methods: PubMed database was systematically queried for studies reporting patient selection criteria in FT for PCa before December 31, 2023. After excluding non-relevant articles and a quality assessment, data were extracted, and results were described qualitatively.

Results: There is no level I evidence regarding the best patient selection approach for FT in patients with PCa. Current international multidisciplinary consensus statements recommend multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) followed by MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy for all candidates. FT may be considered in clinically localized, intermediate risk (Gleason 3 + 4 and 4 + 3), and preferably unifocal disease. Patients should have an acceptable life expectancy. Those with prostate volume >50 ml and erectile dysfunction should not be excluded from FT. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of < 20 (ideally < 10) ng/mL is recommended. However, the utility of other molecular and genomic biomarkers in patient selection for FT remains unknown.

Conclusions: FT may be considered in well-selected patients with localized PCa. This review provides a comprehensive insight regarding the optimal approach for patient selection in FT.

Background: Over the past decade, the range of surgical options to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) has expanded significantly with the advent of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs). Nevertheless, the available evidence in the field is heterogeneous. Efficacy and safety thresholds are yet to be determined.

Objective: To evaluate perioperative and long-term complications after MISTs - including Aquablation, steam injection (Rezūm), Transperineal laser ablation of the prostate (TPLA), implantation of a prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND) - in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to BPO.

Evidence acquisition: A systematic literature search was conducted in January 2024 using Medline (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy used PICO criteria (Patients, Interventions, Comparisons, Outcomes) [1], focusing specifically on patients with BPH-associated LUTS who underwent MIST or other comparative treatments, aiming to assess both perioperative and long-term safety outcomes. Article selection was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias and the quality of the articles included were assessed. A dedicated data extraction form was used to collect the data of interest.

Evidence synthesis: The initial electronic search identified 3660 records, of which 24 ultimately met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Overall, Aquablation was associated with a higher major complications rate of 14% (IQR 6-22), particularly in the case of patients with prostates <70 ml. PUL showed a higher early postoperative acute urinary retention rate (10.9%, IQR 9.2-12.3%), while 1.4% of patients treated with iTIND experienced major perioperative complications. Urinary tract infections were mostly reported in series assessing TPLA and Rezūm.

Conclusions: The adoption of MISTs for LUTS due to BPH is associated with a varied spectrum of perioperative and long-term complications. Our findings showed an acceptable safety profile with specific complications dependent on the type of MIST performed, highlighting the importance of individualized patient selection and procedure-specific considerations.

Background: Intraductal carcinoma (IDC) and cribriform pattern (Crib) of prostate cancer are increasingly recognized as independent prognosticators of poor outcome, both in prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens.

Objective: The aim of our project is to assess the impact of false negative biopsies for these two characteristics on oncological outcomes.

Material and methods: Patients who underwent RP between January 2015 and December 2022 were included in the study. Predictors of Biochemical Failure were examined using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model.

Results and limitation: Among the 836 patients who underwent RP, 233 (27.9%) had Crib, and 125 (15.0%) had IDC on prostate biopsy, with 71 (8.5%) patients having both IDC and Crib. Concerning IDC/Crib status at biopsy, 217 (26%) patients had a false-negative biopsy, 332 (39.7%) had a true-negative biopsy, 256 (30.6%) showed a true-positive biopsy, and 24 (3.7%) exhibited a false-positive biopsy, with respect to either pattern. When comparing false-negative, false-positive, true-negative and true-positive biopsies for IDC/Crib, we found that patients with a false-negative biopsy for IDC/Crib versus those with a true-negative biopsy for IDC/Crib disclosed a rate of advanced pathological stage (≥pT3) which was twice that of patients with a true-negative biopsy for IDC/Crib: 56.8% versus 28.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). On multivariate Cox analysis, log PSA before RP (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07, 95% CI 1.53-2.82; p < 0.001), a higher percentage of positive cores at biopsy ( ≥ 33%) (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.07-2.63; p = 0.024), and false negative biopsy for IDC/Crib (HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.41-3.25; p < 0.001), were each significantly associated with an increased risk of BCR.

Conclusions: A false-negative biopsy for IDC/Crib is independently associated with higher risk of BCR and advanced pathological stage compared to a true negative biopsy.

Background: To explore how urologists manage prostate cancer (PCa) screening and treatment in patients undergoing endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP).

Methods: A team of experts in EEP collaboratively formulated the survey questions through an interactive process. The survey opened in January 2024 and closed in February 2024.

Results: 102 urologists responded, revealing that most use PSA and digital rectal examination for screening, with high PSA and abnormal DRE prompting prostate MRI. 75% perform pre-EEP biopsies. For incidental low-grade PCa, active surveillance is preferred. For intermediate-grade PCa, most use PSA and MRI for workup, often choosing active surveillance if post-EEP biopsies are negative. There's no consensus on abnormal post-operative PSA thresholds.

Conclusions: While urologists are aware of PCa management in EEP candidates, future work should focus on developing optimal post-EEP screening protocols.

Background: Novel therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have improved patient outcomes. However, there is uncertainty on the optimal selection of therapeutic agents for subsequent lines of therapy.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of published evidence from pivotal clinical trials and recent guidelines for the treatment of mCRPC. We further identify gaps in knowledge and areas for future research.

Results: Key considerations to help guide treatment selection for patients with mCRPC include personal treatment history, individual clinical characteristics, symptoms, prognosis, availability of clinical trials, and other patient-specific factors. Genetic testing and prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted imaging are important tools to evaluate candidacy for newer therapeutic options such as poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, alone or in combination with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, and [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-617.

Conclusion: This article provides an overview of the evolving treatment landscape of mCRPC, discussing guideline-recommended treatment options and data from key clinical trials, while highlighting ongoing trials that may impact the future treatment landscape. Recommendations for optimal treatment sequencing based on individual patient factors are provided.

Background: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies to analyze intra- and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using either DaVinci (DV-RARP) or Hugo™RAS (H-RARP) platforms.

Methods: The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024562326) and followed PRISMA guidelines. Literature search was conducted in June 2024 using academic databases, focusing on articles from 2021 to 2024. Research question focused on men with PCa (P) undergoing H-RARP (I) versus DV-RARP (C) to evaluate surgical, pathology, and functional outcomes (O), across comparative studies. Continuous variables were summarized using mean difference (MD) and categorical variables using odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I² statistics. Publication bias was evaluated with Egger's and Begg's tests. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata®17.0, with significance set at p < 0.05. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Methodological quality was evaluated with AMSTAR 2.

Results: Eight studies (three prospective, five retrospective) with 1114 patients (454 H-RARP vs. 660 DV-RARP) were included. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. No significant differences were found in overall operative time, console time, blood loss, nerve-sparing, or lymphadenectomy. Docking time was significantly longer for Hugo™RAS (MD:6 min,95% CI 4.2;7.8). Postoperative outcomes, including complications, length of stay, and catheterization time, were similar. Pathological outcomes showed no significant differences in positive surgical margins or staging, but lower node yield was observed with H-RARP (MD:-2,95% CI -3.3;-0.6). Urinary continence recovery was comparable. Risk of bias was moderate to serious.

Conclusion: The meta-analysis suggests H-RARP and DV-RARP perform not statistically different across most of analyzed outcomes, except for docking time and lymph-node yield. The longer docking time associated with the Hugo™RAS suggests demanding setup but does not translate into significantly longer operative time. Although statistically significant, the observed difference in lymph-node yield might be clinically negligible.