The cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in metastatic prostate cancer
Authors:
Študent Vladimír 1; Seifriedová Zuzana 1; Študentová Hana 2
Authors place of work:
Urologická klinika LF UP a FN Olomouc
1; Onkologická klinika LF UP a FN Olomouc
2
Published in the journal:
Klin Onkol 2022; 35(1): 55-62
Category:
Reviews
doi:
https://doi.org/10.48095/ccko202255
Summary
Background: In metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa), the standard treatment involves systemic treatment including androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), possibly in combination with new drugs called androgen receptor targeting agents (ARTA) or docetaxel. The treatment of the prostate itself in mPCa represents a new paradigm in the so-called oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPCa), which is considered to be a kind of intermediate stage between localized disease and extensive metastatic disease. Thanks to new diagnostic methods, OMPCa is an increasingly frequently diagnosed stage of mPCa. In addition to improving local control of the disease, aggressive local therapy could lower the need for ADT, or improve survival. Radiotherapy has already demonstrated the oncological benefit of OMPCa in a randomized study and is now part of the guidelines for the treatment of low volume de novo mPCa. Cytoreductive prostatectomy (CP) is still awaiting the results of randomized trials; however, retrospective data already exist to support this treatment modality. Several population-based studies have been published that have demonstrated the benefit of CP. Minor retrospective works have demonstrated the safety of CP in clinical practice. Several prospective randomized trials investigating this treatment modality are currently underway. However, the whole concept of CP in OMPCa is still shrouded in many unresolved issues such as the definition of a suitable patient and the role of another form of local therapy targeted to metastases. Purpose: This article aims to provide an overview of key published or ongoing studies related to CP in relation not only to functional and oncological results but also to the indication criteria and design of individual studies.
Keywords:
androgen deprivation therapy – local therapy – oligometastatic prostate cancer – cytoreductive prostatectomy
Zdroje
1. Epidemiologie zhoubných nádorů v České republice. [online]. Dostupné z: http: //www.svod.cz/?sec=aktuality.
2. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13; 375 (15): 1415-1424. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606220.
3. Fizazi K, Tran N, Fein L et al. Abiraterone plus prednisone in metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2017; 377 (4): 352–360. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1704174.
4. Sweeney CJ, Chen Y-H, Carducci M et al. Chemohormonal therapy in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 373 (8): 737–746. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503747.
5. Tzelepi V, Efstathiou E, Wen S et al. Persistent, biologically meaningful prostate cancer after 1 year of androgen ablation and docetaxel treatment. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29 (18): 2574–2581. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.2999.
6. Comen E, Norton L, Massagué J. Clinical implications of cancer self-seeding. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011; 8 (6): 369–377. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.64.
7. Gundem G, Van Loo P, Kremeyer B et al. The evolutionary history of lethal metastatic prostate cancer. Nature 2015; 520 (7547): 353–357. doi: 10.1038/nature14347.
8. Patrikidou A, Brureau L, Casenave J et al. Locoregional symptoms in patients with de novo metastatic prostate cancer: morbidity, management, and disease outcome. Urol Oncol Semin Orig Investig 2015; 33 (5): 202.e9–202.e17. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.01.022.
9. Boevé LMS, Hulshof MCCM, Vis AN et al. Effect on survival of androgen deprivation therapy alone compared to androgen deprivation therapy combined with concurrent radiation therapy to the prostate in patients with primary bone metastatic prostate cancer in a prospective randomised clinical tria. Eur Urol 2019; 75 (3): 410–418. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.09.008.
10. Kyriakopoulos CE, Chen Y-H, Carducci MA et al. Chemohormonal therapy in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: long-term survival analysis of the randomized phase III E3805 CHAARTED trial. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36 (11): 1080–1087. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.3657.
11. Parker CC, James ND, Brawley CD et al. Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2018; 392 (10162): 2353–2366. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (18) 32486-3.
12. Mottet N, Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN et al. EAU Guidelines: prostate cancer. [online]. Available from: https: //uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/.
13. Culp SH, Schellhammer PF, Williams MB. Might men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer benefit from definitive treatment of the primary tumor? A SEER-based study. Eur Urol 2014; 65 (6): 1058–1066. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.012.
14. Antwi S, Everson TM. Prognostic impact of definitive local therapy of the primary tumor in men with metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis: a population-based, propensity score analysis. Cancer Epidemiol 2014; 38 (4): 435–441. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2014.04.002.
15. Satkunasivam R, Kim AE, Desai M et al. Radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy vs no local therapy for survival benefit in metastatic prostate cancer: a SEER-medicare analysis. J Urol 2015; 194 (2): 378–385. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.084.
16. Fossati N, Trinh Q-D, Sammon J et al. Identifying optimal candidates for local treatment of the primary tumor among patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer: a SEER-based study. Eur Urol 2015; 67 (1): 3–6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.056.
17. Leyh-Bannurah S-R, Gazdovich S, Budäus L et al. Local therapy improves survival in metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2017; 72 (1): 118–124. doi: 10.1016/ j.eururo.2017.03.020.
18. Pompe RS, Tilki D, Preisser F et al. Survival benefit of local versus no local treatment for metastatic prostate cancer-Impact of baseline PSA and metastatic substages. Prostate 2018; 78 (10): 753–757. doi: 10.1002/pros.23519.
19. Löppenberg B, Dalela D, Karabon P et al. The impact of local treatment on overall survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer on diagnosis: a national cancer data base analysis. Eur Urol 2017; 72 (1): 14–19. doi: 10.1016/ j.eururo.2016.04.031.
20. Rusthoven CG, Jones BL, Flaig TW et al. Improved survival with prostate radiation in addition to androgen deprivation therapy for men with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34 (24): 2835–2842. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.4788.
21. Parikh RR, Byun J, Goyal S et al. Local therapy improves overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. Prostate 2017; 77 (6): 559–572. doi: 10.1002/pros.23294.
22. Gratzke C, Engel J, Stief CG. Role of radical prostatectomy in metastatic prostate cancer: data from the Munich Cancer Registry. Eur Urol 2014; 66 (3): 602–603. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.04.009.
23. Heidenreich A, Pfister D, Porres D. Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer and low volume skeletal metastases: results of a feasibility and case-control study. J Urol 2015; 193 (3): 832–838. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.09.089.
24. Sooriakumaran P, Karnes J, Stief C et al. A multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes in 106 men who underwent radical prostatectomy for distant metastatic prostate cancer at presentation. Eur Urol 2016; 69 (5): 788–794. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.023.
25. O’Shaughnessy MJ, McBride SM, Vargas HA et al. A pilot study of a multimodal treatment paradigm to accelerate drug evaluations in early-stage metastatic prostate cancer. Urology 2017; 102: 164–172. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.10.044.
26. Steuber T, Berg KD, Røder MA et al. Does cytoreductive prostatectomy really have an impact on prognosis in prostate cancer patients with low-volume bone metastasis? Results from a prospective case-control study. Eur Urol Focus 2017; 3 (6): 646–649. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.06.016.
27. Poelaert F, Verbaeys C, Rappe B et al. Cytoreductive prostatectomy for metastatic prostate cancer: first lessons learned from the multicentric prospective local treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (LoMP) trial. Urology 2017; 106: 146–152. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.051.
28. Jang WS, Kim MS, Jeong WS et al. Does robot-assisted radical prostatectomy benefit patients with prostate cancer and bone oligometastases? BJU Int 2018; 121 (2): 225–231. doi: 10.1111/bju.13992.
29. Heidenreich A, Fossati N, Pfister D et al. Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer and skeletal metastases. Eur Urol Oncol 2018; 1 (1): 46–53. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.03.002.
30. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62 (3): 405–417. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045.
31. Heidenreich A, Pfister D. Radical cytoreductive prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer and oligometastatic disease. Curr Opin Urol 2020; 30 (1): 90–97. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000691.
32. Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Stabile A et al. Radical prostatectomy in men with oligometastatic prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with long-term follow-up. Eur Urol 2017; 72 (2): 289–292. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.040.
33. US National Library of Medicine. Best systemic therapy or best systemic therapy (BST) plus definitive treatment (radiation or surgery). [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01751438.
34. US National Library of Medicine. Impact of radical prostatectomy as primary treatment in patients with prostate cancer with limited bone metastases (g-RAMPP). [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02454543.
35. Sooriakumaran P. Testing radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer and oligometastases to the bone: a randomized controlled feasibility trial. BJU Int 2017; 120 (5B): E8–E20. doi: 10.1111/bju.13925.
36. US National Library of Medicine. Androgen deprivation therapy or androgen deprivation therapy plus definitive treatment (radiation or surgery). [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02742 675.
37. US National Library of Medicine. Therapeutic effect of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in men with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT03456843.
38. US National Library of Medicine. Cytoreductive prostatectomy versus cytoreductive prostate irradiation as a local treatment option for metastatic prostate cancer: a multicentric feasibility trial (LoMP II). [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03655 886.
39. US National Library of Medicine. Standard systemic therapy with or without definitive treatment in treating participants with metastatic prostate cancer. [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03678025.
40. US National Library of Medicine. Additional treatments to the local tumour for metastatic prostate cancer: assessment of novel treatment algorithms (IP2-ATLANTA). [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03763253.
41. US National Library of Medicine. Testing radical prostatectomy in Chinese men with prostate cancer and oligometastases to the bone. [online]. Available from: https: //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03988686.
42. Tosoian JJ, Gorin MA, Ross AE et al. Oligometastatic prostate cancer: definitions, clinical outcomes, and treatment considerations. Nat Rev Urol 2017; 14 (1): 15–25. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2016.175.
43. Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive 68 Ga–prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2016; 70 (6): 926–937. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021.
44. Roach PJ, Francis R, Emmett L et al. The impact of 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT on management intent in prostate cancer: results of an Australian prospective multicenter study. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (1): 82–88. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.197160.
Štítky
Paediatric clinical oncology Surgery Clinical oncologyČlánok vyšiel v časopise
Clinical Oncology
2022 Číslo 1
- Spasmolytic Effect of Metamizole
- Metamizole at a Glance and in Practice – Effective Non-Opioid Analgesic for All Ages
- Metamizole in perioperative treatment in children under 14 years – results of a questionnaire survey from practice
- Current Insights into the Antispasmodic and Analgesic Effects of Metamizole on the Gastrointestinal Tract
- Obstacle Called Vasospasm: Which Solution Is Most Effective in Microsurgery and How to Pharmacologically Assist It?
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Practical aspects of CAR-T cell therapy
- Rehabilitation and physical activity of patients with lung cancer
- A review on the most important management of keratocystic odontogenic tumor
- IgG4 immunoglobulin subclass and related pathological conditions or how to effectively imitate cancer disease