Kishan, Amar U.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions for patients with prostate cancer across the disease spectrum. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). For patients with mCSPC, disease characteristics, such as whether metastases arose synchronously or metachronously and the degree of metastatic burden, impact therapy decisions, including how much treatment intensification is appropriate and when prostate-directed and/or metastasis-directed therapy should be considered. In the mCRPC setting, androgen deprivation therapy is continued with the sequential or concurrent addition of certain androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, biomarkers, the extent and location of metastases, symptoms, and potential side effects.

Abstract Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in two thirds of the world, with an expected doubling in both incidence and mortality in the next two decades. No strong environmental associations exist for the development of prostate cancer; therefore, lifestyle measures are unlikely to mitigate this increasing burden. The last three decades have seen rapid developments in the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape of prostate cancer, including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, robotic surgery, image‐guided hypofractionated and stereotactic radiotherapy, novel anti‐androgens and radioligand therapies. Prostate cancer is unique in that not everyone with a diagnosis needs treatment, and active surveillance is the preferred option for some. This review discusses the contemporary management of all stages of prostate cancer in the light of these modern developments, enabling holistic individualization of treatment, and describes the promise of future research to further improve outcomes.

309 Background: Standard of care (SOC) treatment options for HR-PCa include RT with long-term androgen deprivation (LT-ADT) or RP with selective use of post-operative RT +/- androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The optimal treatment approach has been assessed in retrospective population-based and multi-center comparisons, which have yielded mixed results with substantial bias. Therefore, we conducted an emulated randomized comparison of RT vs RP in HR-PCa leveraging patients enrolled in RCTs. Methods: We searched Medline for RCTs in HR-PCa with a SOC arm of an RT- or RP-based regimen. Inclusion required similar experimental treatment and contemporaneous enrollment in the same country to reduce bias. This identified 2 trials, NRG/RTOG 0521 (RT+LT-ADT +/- 6 cycles docetaxel [doce]), and CALGB 90203 (RP +/- neoadjuvant 6 cycles doce and ADT). Due to inherent difference in the biochemical recurrence criteria after RT vs RP, we chose inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM) as the primary endpoint, considering deaths as competing events. Death after DM was measured to create a harmonized metric of deaths likely attributed to PCa. To assess potential residual selection bias, death without DM to capture non-cancer associated deaths was analyzed. Results: Overall, 1290 patients (RT n=557, RP n=733) were included, with similar median follow-up of 6.4 years. Prior to IPTW, RP patients were significantly younger with lower baseline PSA compared to RT patients. Adjuvant (18%) and salvage therapy (44%) was used in RP cohort. Cumulative incidence of DM was significantly lower in patients who underwent RT compared to RP (8-year DM: 16% vs 23%; p=0.01; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.48 [95%CI 0.34-0.69], p<0.001). 8-year rates of death after DM were 10% vs 8% (p=0.72) in the RP and RT patients, respectively. RT patients had significantly greater risk of death without DM (HR 2.09 [1.01-4.34], p=0.048) with early differences measured. On a cross-arm comparison, 8-year cumulative incidence of DM when comparing SOC RT+LT-ADT group versus the doce+ADT+RP group was 18% vs 21%, respectively (sHR 0.75 [0.45-1.24], p=0.26). Conclusions: HR-PCa patients enrolled on RCTs had significantly lower incidence of DM with an RT-based strategy compared to an RP-based approach. Longer follow-up is needed to assess deaths attributed to PCa. Despite the strengths of the comparison (use of cooperative group RCT data, contemporaneous enrollment in the same country, patients fit enough for chemotherapy, and IPTW adjustments) there appears to be residual unmeasured bias, as expected, based on greater early deaths without DM in the RT arm. Utilization of post-operative radiotherapy and ADT+Doce may mitigate differences between RP and SOC RT+LT-ADT.

Bladder cancer, the sixth most common cancer in the United States, is most commonly of the urothelial carcinoma histologic subtype. The clinical spectrum of bladder cancer is divided into 3 categories that differ in prognosis, management, and therapeutic aims: (1) non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC); (2) muscle invasive, nonmetastatic disease; and (3) metastatic bladder cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer, including changes in the fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours: Urinary and Male Genital Tumours and how the NCCN Guidelines aligned with these updates; new and emerging treatment options for bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive NMIBC; and updates to systemic therapy recommendations for advanced or metastatic disease.

241 Background: We previously reported on the use of gene expression profiling to characterize four primary subtypes in an analysis of over 100,000 prostate cancer primary tumors. Here we examine these subtypes and response to radiation (RT) after prostatectomy or chemotherapy in addition to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer (mHSPC). Methods: We examined a 215-gene prostate subtyping classifier (PSC) which groups luminal and basal gene expression profiles into one of four subtypes; luminal differentiated (LD), luminal proliferating (LP), basal immune (BI) and basal neuroendocrine-like (BN). The log-rank method was used to compare (i) metastasis-free survival between patients who did and did not receive salvage RT in the META855 cohort of localized disease patients treated with radical prostatectomy (n=855) and the (ii) overall survival of patients on the Phase III mHSPC EA3805 CHAARTED trial of ADT or ADT + docetaxel chemotherapy (n=160). Results: After radical prostatectomy, patients with BI tumors derived benefit from RT in terms of metastasis-free survival ( P=9.23e-4) while those with other subtype tumors did not (Each Log-rank P≥0.5). Patients with metastatic disease and LP tumors derived benefit from docetaxel (Log-rank P=0.002) while those with other subtypes tumors did not (Log-rank P=0.2). Conclusions: Basal-luminal subtyping segments tumors by relevant biological processes with potential implications for identifying patients who benefit from salvage radiation post prostatectomy and addition of docetaxel to ADT in mHSPC.

The NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer and other urinary tract cancers (upper tract tumors, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, primary carcinoma of the urethra). These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines regarding the treatment of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer, including how to treat in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage; new roles for immune checkpoint inhibitors in non–muscle invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic bladder cancer; and the addition of antibody–drug conjugates for metastatic bladder cancer.

277 Background: The prognostic importance of local failure (LF) after definitive radiotherapy (RT) in patients with NCCN intermediate- (IRPCa) and high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) remains unclear, particularly given the likelihood that occult distant metastases (DMs) at presentation may be the true driver of natural history. Here, we leverage individual patient data (IPD) from 18 randomized control trials (RCTs) to evaluate the prognostic impact of LF and the kinetics of DM after RT. Methods: IPD for 18 RCTs were obtained from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium, comprising a total of 12533 patients (6288 HRPCa & 6245 IRPCa). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards (PH) models were developed to evaluate the relationship between overall survival (OS), PCa-specific survival (PCSS), DM-free survival (DMFS) & LF as a time-dependent covariate, adjusted for clinicodemographic parameters. Markov PH models, defined via transitions between 4 states, were developed to evaluate the aforementioned relationship. Proportional hazards assumption was imposed and examined for both models. Time is from randomization. Results: Median follow-up was 9.1 years. There were 795 (13%) LF & 1288 (21%) DM events for patients with HRPCa; these numbers were 449 (7%) & 451 (7%) for IRPCa. For HRPCa & IRPCa, 81% and 81% of DMs developed from a clinically relapse-free state (cRFS), with a median time of 46 and 60 months, respectively (p < 0.0001). 39% & 13% of DM events occurred within 2 years after RT for HRPCa & IRPCa, respectively. At later time points, DM events were more likely to emerge after an LF event for both HRPCa (9% vs. 34% between 0-2 vs. 8-10 years post-RT, p = 0.001) and IRPCa (10% vs. 34% between 0-2 vs. 8-10 years post-RT, p = 0.008). LF was significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–1.30), PCSS (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.75-2.33) & DMFS (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.75–2.15) (p < 0.01 for all) in patients with HRPCa. LF was also significantly associated with DMFS (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36–1.81) but not OS in patients with IRPCa. Patients who had not transitioned to the LF state had a significantly lower HR of transitioning to a PCa-specific death state than those who transitioned to the LF state (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21–0.50, p < 0.001). Conclusions: LF is an independent prognosticator of OS, PCSS & DMFS in HRPCa and of DMFS in IRPCa. The predominant mode of DM development is from the cRFS state, underscoring the importance of accurate upfront staging & systemic therapy. However, particularly at late time points, an increasing proportion of DM events originated after diagnosis of a LF, constituting a “second wave” of DM events. This suggests that optimizing local control is also important, though the majority of DM events appear prior to a clinically-detected LF.

327 Background: Though Black men with prostate cancer are more likely to have aggressive disease features than White men, race-specific differences in initial treatment responses in localized disease remains unknown. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained for 9259 patients (including 1674 [18.1%] Black men and 7585 [81.9%] White men) enrolled on eight randomized controlled trials evaluating definitive radiotherapy (RT) ± short-term or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT and LTADT). The primary endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), distant metastasis (DM), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Fine-Gray subdistribution HR (sHR) models were developed to evaluate the cumulative incidences of all endpoints after stratification by National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk grouping. A meta-analysis was done to estimate pair-wise comparisons of treatments within and between Black and White men, after adjusting for age, Gleason score, clinical T stage, and initial PSA. Results: Black men were more likely to have NCCN high-risk disease at enrollment (656/1674 [39.2%] vs 2506/7585 [33%], p<0.001). However, within the high-risk stratum Black men had lower 10-year rates of BCR (46.1% vs. 50.4%, p=0.02), DM (14% vs. 21.6%, p<0.001), and PCSM (4.9% vs. 9.8%, p<0.001). After adjusting for age and disease characteristics, Black men with high-risk prostate receiving RT+STADT had lower rates of BCR (sHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.86, p<0.001), DM (sHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84, p=0.001) and PCSM (sHR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.95, p=0.04). There were no differences in BCR, DM, or PCSM among men receiving RT+LTADT. The interaction between race and the impact of adding STADT to RT alone on BCR was statistically significant (p=0.003). Conclusions: Black men enrolled on randomized trials with long-term follow-up have higher risk disease at enrollment, but have better BCR, DM, and PCSM outcomes with RT-based therapy compared with White men, particularly with the addition of STADT.

295 Background: While 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT is approved in the US and recommended by the NCCN, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT is more common in Europe/Australia and recommended by the EAU. Less is known about the biology of lesions detected by either modality. 18F-fluciclovine PET relies on radiotracer uptake by amino acid transporters LAT1-4 and ASCT1-2. PSMA PET is dependent on surface expression of PSMA. We compared relative expression of PSMA and fluciclovine transporter genes in radical prostatectomy (RP) samples to determine their distribution across subtypes and correlation with outcomes. Methods: Gene expression data of 19,102 RP samples were analyzed using the Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST microarray. 1,135 patients had long term follow up. Associations between expression of PSMA and fluciclovine transporter genes (LAT1-4 and ASCT1-2) and pathologic variables, molecular subtypes, and clinical outcomes were conducted. Results: All fluciclovine transporter genes (LAT 1-4, ASCT1-2) were expressed at lower levels than PSMA (p <0.0001). PSMA expression was positively correlated with genomic risk score and pathologic Gleason score (p<0.0001), but LAT2-3 and ASCT2 were inversely correlated with genomic risk in primary tumors (p<0.0001) and less expressed in GS 9-10 tumors (p<0.0001). PSMA expression was associated with worse metastasis-free survival (MFS) (HR 1.45, p=0.001) and lymph node involvement (HR 2.14, p<0.0001). Expression of LAT2, LAT3, ASCT2 expression was associated with better MFS (HR 0.85, 0.63, 0.74, p<0.0001-0.04). After multivariable adjustment, PSMA expression remained independently prognostic of poorer MFS (HR 1.3, p=0.028). Luminal B subtype was notable for PSMA overexpression; Luminal A was enriched in ASCT2 and LAT2 (p<0.0001). PSMA expression did not correlate with ERG fusion prostate cancers, but LAT2, ASCT1, and ASCT2 were overexpressed in ERG fusion negative tumors (p<0.0001). Conclusions: PSMA expression is associated with more aggressive disease and poorer clinical outcomes than fluciclovine transporter genes in localized prostate cancer. Molecular subtypes of prostate cancer vary in PSMA and fluciclovine transporter gene expression.