Follow-up and treatment of patients following radical prostatectomy with positive surgical margins

Česká verzia

Authors: Ladislav Jarolím; Štěpán Veselý; Marek Schmidt; Kateřina Dušková; Joana Do Carmo; Vojtěch Novák; Marek Babjuk
Authors place of work: Urologická klinika 2. LF UK a FN Motol, Praha
Published in the journal: Ces Urol 2017; 21(2): 139-146
Category: Original Articles

Summary

Major statement:
The positive margins of the radical prostatectomy specimen is an unfavorable prognostic sign which is the indication of adjuvant treatment. Nearly a third of patients with such a finding, however, are alive with no evidence of disease and do not need further treatment.

Aim:
The finding of positive surgical margins obtained in radical prostatectomy is an adverse prognostic factor that is usually an indication for adjuvant therapy. The study focused on long-term results of follow-up and treatment in patients after radical prostatectomy with positive surgical margins. The aim of the study was to evaluate what proportion of such patients can be spared subsequent treatment with known adverse effects.

Patient cohort:
Of the 92 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and had a finding of positive surgical margins, 72 were followed in the long term and evaluated. An adverse histological finding, high level of PSA nadir, and PSA growth were indications for further treatment – adjuvant radiotherapy, androgen deprivation therapy, or salvage radiotherapy. By contrast, a low PSA level in the long term allowed for watchful waiting and a mere surveillance of the patients. The results were evaluated statistically by using a nonparametric Mann-Whitney test.

Results:
The patient cohort was divided into four groups according to treatment strategy: adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), adjuvant radiotherapy (ART), salvage radiotherapy (SRT), and watchful waiting (WW). The efficacy of delayed treatment with salvage radiotherapy was similar when compared with adjuvant therapy; with a follow-up with a median of 86 months in the ART group and 59.7 months in the SRT group, the median of the last PSA level was 0.008 and 0.010 ng/ml, respectively (p = 0.7434). Failure of radiotherapy occurred in 13.6% and 10% of patients in the ART and SRT groups, respectively. The safety of the watchful waiting strategy in the WW group is demonstrated by the median of the last PSA level of 0.029 ng/ml (p = 0.1703) with a median follow-up of 58.5 months.

Conclusion:
The presence of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy may not always indicate the need for further treatment. If administered in all the patients in the cohort, adjuvant therapy would have been unnecessary in 34.4%.

KEY WORDS:
Prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy, adjuvant radiotherapy, salvage radiotherapy.

Zdroje

1. Jarolím L, Veselý Š, Babjuk M, et al. Časná salvage radioterapie po radikální prostatektomii indikovaná u pacientů s rostoucí hladinou PSA v hodnotách nižších, než je konvenční hranice biochemické recidivy 0,2 ng/ml. Ces Urol 2012; 16(2): 92–100.

2. Nohra J, Huyghe E, Soulie M, et al. Late severe complications (G3-4 RTOG) of 3D conformal adjuvant radiotherapy for prostate KC after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol Suppl 2006; 5(2): 169.

3. Staník M, Doležel J, Čapák I, et al. Krátkodobé onkologické výsledky po radikální prostatektomii s rozšířenou pánevní lymfadenektomií a s nálezem uzlinových metastáz. Lze pomýšlet na úspěch bez systémové léčby? Ces Urol 2015, 19(2): 137–144.

4. Boccon‑Gibod L, Bertaccini A, Bono AV, et al. Management of locally advanced prostate cancer: a European Consensus. Int J Clin Pract 2003; 57(3): 187–194.

5. Bolla M, Collette L, Blank L, et al. Long‑term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): a phase III randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360(9327): 103–106.

6. Gerber GS, Thisted RA, Chodak GW, et al. Results of radical prostatectomy in men with locally advanced prostate cancer: multi‑institutional pooled analysis. Eur Urol 1997; 32(4): 385–390.

7. Yee DS, Narula N, Amin MB, Skarecky DW, Ahlering TE. Robot‑assisted radical prostatectomy: current evaluation of surgical margins in clinically low-, intermediate-, and high‑risk prostate cancer. J Endourol 2009; 23(9): 1461–1465.

8. Hsu CY, Joniau S, Roskams T, Oyen R, Van Poppel H. Comparing results after surgery in patients with clinical unilateral T3a, prostate cancer treated with or without neoadjuvant androgen-deprivaion therapy. BJU Int 2007; 99(2): 311–314.

9. Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Riedel E, et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2003; 170(6Pt1): 2292–2295.

10. Spahn M, Weiss C, Bader P, et al. Long‑term outcome of patients with high‑risk prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy and stage‑dependent adjuvant androgen deprivation. Urol Int 2010; 84(2): 164–173.

11. Briganti A, Wiegel T, Joniau S, et al. Early salvage radiation therapy does not compromise cancer control in patients with pT3N0 prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: results of a match‑controlled multi‑institutional analysis. Eur Urol 2012; 62(3): 472–487.

12. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Collette L, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 2005; 366(9485): 572–578.

13. Wiegel T, Bottke D, Steiner U, et al. Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate‑specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(18): 2924–2930.

14. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006; 296(19): 2329–2335.

15. Schiavina R, Ceci F, Borghesi M, et al. The dilemma of localizing disease relapse after radical treatment for prostate cancer: which is the value of the actual imaging techniques? Curr Radiopharm 2013; 6(2): 92–95.

16. Bartkowiak D, Bottke D, Wiegel T. Adjuvant radiotherapy or early salvage radiotherapy in pT3R0 or pT3R1 prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2013; 23(4): 360–365.

17. Pfister D, Bolla M, Briganti A, et al. Early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2014; 65(6): 1034–1043.

18. Karlin JD, Koontz BF, Freedland SJ, et al. Identifying appropriate patients for early salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy. J Urol 2013; 190(4): 1410–1415.

19. Cozzarini C. Editorial comment on: adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer – a new standard? Eur Urol 2008; 54(3): 540–541.

20. Kowalczyk KJ, Gu X, Nguyen PL, et al. Optimal timing of early versus delayed adjuvant radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2014; 32(3): 303–308.

21. Pearse M, Fraser‑Browne C, Davis ID, et al. A phase III trial to investigate the timing of radiotherapy for prostate cancer with high‑risk features: background and rationale of the radiotherapy – adjuvant versus early salvage (RAVES) trial. BJU Int 2014; 113 Suppl 2: 7–12.

22. King CR. Adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy for high‑risk prostate cancer patients. Semin Radiat Oncol 2013; 23(3): 215–221.

23. Briganti A, Karnes RJ, Joniau S, et al. Prediction of outcome following early salvage radiotherapy among patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2014; 66(3): 479–486.

24. Kinoshita H, Shimizu Y, Mizowaki T, et al. Risk factors predicting the outcome of salvage radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol. 2013; 20(8): 806–811.

25. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E, et al. EAU – ESTRO – SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer 2016 http:// uroweb.org/guideline/prostate‑cancer/ 6. 10. 12-p. 84.

26. Thompson IM, Valicenti RK, Albertsen P, et al. Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: AUA/ASTRO Guideline. J Urol. 2013; 190(2): 441–449.

27. Simon MA, Kim S, Soloway MS. Prostate specific antigen recurrence rates are low after radical retropubic prostatectomy and positive margins. J Urol 2006; 175(1): 140–144.

28. Lodde M, Lacombe L, Fradet Y. pT2-3N0M0 prostate cancer with positive and negative margins: clinical outcome and time to salvage radiotherapy. Eur Urol Suppl 2010; 9(2): 207–221.