Reiter, Robert E.

ImportancePlanning complex operations such as robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) requires surgeons to review 2-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to understand 3-dimensional (3D) patient anatomy. Three-dimensional digital models for planning RALP may allow better understanding of patient anatomy and may lead to better patient outcomes, although data are currently limited.ObjectiveTo determine surgical outcomes after RALP when surgeons reviewed 3D digital models during operative planning.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis study was a planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, single-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 6 large teaching hospitals in the US. The study was conducted between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022, and included patients undergoing RALP. Patients were assessed and recruited at the time of surgical consultation. Final data analysis was conducted between August and December 2023.InterventionPatients were randomized to either a control group undergoing usual preoperative planning with prostate biopsy results and multiparametric MRI only or to an intervention group in which imaging and biopsy results were supplemented with a 3D digital model. This model was viewed on the surgeon’s mobile phone in 3D format and picture-in-picture on the robotic console screen.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome measure for the overall study was oncologic outcomes after RALP, measured as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) detectability. Secondary outcomes were sexual function and urinary function, measured with Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) scores and rates of urinary incontinence, respectively, as well as use of salvage or adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Trifecta outcomes were defined as undetectable PSA without RT or ADT, SHIM score categorically the same or greater than preoperatively, and complete continence. Univariate analysis was performed to compare outcomes between groups.ResultsThis trial included 92 patients undergoing RALP (51 in the control group and 41 in the intervention group). Their mean (SD) age was 62 (7.4) years; 10 patients (10.9%) were Black and 67 (72.8%) were White. At 18 months postsurgery, the intervention group had lower rates of biochemical recurrence (PSA level >0.1 ng/mL, 0 vs 7 [17.9%]; absolute difference, 17.9% [95% CI, 1.8% to 31.8%]; P = .01) and were significantly less likely to undergo adjuvant or salvage RT (1 [3.1%] vs 12 [31.6%]; absolute difference, 28.5% [95% CI, 10.1% to 46.7%]; P = .002) compared with the control group. Sexual function at 18 months postsurgery was significantly better in the intervention group (mean [SD] SHIM score, 16.8 [8.7] vs 9.8 [7.7]; absolute difference, 7.0 [95% CI, 2.6 to 11.4]; P = .002) and urinary function was unchanged (total continence, 22 [78.6%] vs 29 [80.6%]; absolute difference, 2.0% [95% CI, −17.9% to 21.9%]; P = .84) compared with the control group. Trifecta outcomes were achieved for 12 (48.0%) patients in the intervention group and 3 patients (10.0%) in the control group (absolute difference, 38.0% [95% CI, 14.4% to 61.6%]; P = .002).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, patients whose surgical planning of RALP involved 3D digital models had better oncologic and functional outcomes. Further work should assess the effect of 3D models in a broader set of patients, physicians, and hospital settings.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03943368

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding the workup of patients with prostate cancer, risk stratification and management of localized disease, post-treatment monitoring, and treatment of recurrence and advanced disease. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on the management of metastatic castration-sensitive disease, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with treatment intensification is strongly recommended for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. For patients with nonmetastatic CRPC, ADT is continued with or without the addition of certain secondary hormone therapies depending on prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In the mCRPC setting, ADT is continued with the sequential addition of certain secondary hormone therapies, 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, the presence or absence of visceral disease, symptoms, and potential side effects.

AbstractBackgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is a clinically heterogeneous disease. The creation of an expression‐based subtyping model based on prostate‐specific biological processes was sought.MethodsUnsupervised machine learning of gene expression profiles from prospectively collected primary prostate tumors (training, n = 32,000; evaluation, n = 68,547) was used to create a prostate subtyping classifier (PSC) based on basal versus luminal cell expression patterns and other gene signatures relevant to PCa biology. Subtype molecular pathways and clinical characteristics were explored in five other clinical cohorts.ResultsClustering derived four subtypes: luminal differentiated (LD), luminal proliferating (LP), basal immune (BI), and basal neuroendocrine (BN). LP and LD tumors both had higher androgen receptor activity. LP tumors also had a higher expression of cell proliferation genes, MYC activity, and characteristics of homologous recombination deficiency. BI tumors possessed significant interferon γactivity and immune infiltration on immunohistochemistry. BN tumors were characterized by lower androgen receptor activity expression, lower immune infiltration, and enrichment with neuroendocrine expression patterns. Patients with LD tumors had less aggressive tumor characteristics and the longest time to metastasis after surgery. Only patients with BI tumors derived benefit from radiotherapy after surgery in terms of time to metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01–0.71; n = 855). In a phase 3 trial that randomized patients with metastatic PCa to androgen deprivation with or without docetaxel (n = 108), only patients with LP tumors derived survival benefit from docetaxel (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09–0.51).ConclusionsWith the use of expression profiles from over 100,000 tumors, a PSC was developed that identified four subtypes with distinct biological and clinical features.Plain language summary Prostate cancer can behave in an indolent or aggressive manner and vary in how it responds to certain treatments. To differentiate prostate cancer on the basis of biological features, we developed a novel RNA signature by using data from over 100,000 prostate tumors—the largest data set of its kind. This signature can inform patients and physicians on tumor aggressiveness and susceptibilities to treatments to help personalize cancer management.

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.

PURPOSE The sequencing of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy (RT) may affect outcomes for prostate cancer in an RT-field size-dependent manner. Herein, we investigate the impact of ADT sequencing for men receiving ADT with prostate-only RT (PORT) or whole-pelvis RT (WPRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Individual patient data from 12 randomized trials that included patients receiving neoadjuvant/concurrent or concurrent/adjuvant short-term ADT (4-6 months) with RT for localized disease were obtained from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate consortium. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed with propensity scores derived from age, initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T stage, RT dose, and mid-trial enrollment year. Metastasis-free survival (primary end point) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by IPTW-adjusted Cox regression models, analyzed independently for men receiving PORT versus WPRT. IPTW-adjusted Fine and Gray competing risk models were built to evaluate distant metastasis (DM) and prostate cancer–specific mortality. RESULTS Overall, 7,409 patients were included (6,325 neoadjuvant/concurrent and 1,084 concurrent/adjuvant) with a median follow-up of 10.2 years (interquartile range, 7.2-14.9 years). A significant interaction between ADT sequencing and RT field size was observed for all end points ( P interaction < .02 for all) except OS. With PORT (n = 4,355), compared with neoadjuvant/concurrent ADT, concurrent/adjuvant ADT was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (10-year benefit 8.0%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79; P < .0001), DM (subdistribution HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = .0046), prostate cancer–specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.54; P < .0001), and OS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.83; P = .0001). However, in patients receiving WPRT (n = 3,049), no significant difference in any end point was observed in regard to ADT sequencing except for worse DM (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.05; P = .0009) with concurrent/adjuvant ADT. CONCLUSION ADT sequencing exhibits a significant impact on clinical outcomes with a significant interaction with field size. Concurrent/adjuvant ADT should be the standard of care where short-term ADT is indicated in combination with PORT.