ABSTRACT
Background: The presence of adverse pathological features like extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, or positive margins at radical prostatectomy incurs a high risk of postoperative recurrence. Currently, adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) is the standard of care in these patients, while early salvage radiotherapy (eSRT) is a potential alternative strategy. Aims: The purpose of this paper is to review the latest evidence comparing outcomes of adjuvant versus early SRT in this clinical scenario. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of Google Scholar, PubMed/Medline, and EMBASE was done to identify relevant studies published in the English language, regarding outcomes of adjuvant radiotherapy and early SRT in post radical prostatectomy patients. Twelve studies, including six randomized trials, four retrospective studies, one systematic review, and one metanalysis were included in the final analysis. Results: We found that initial randomized trials demonstrated better event?free survival with adjuvant radiotherapy when compared to observation alone. However, ART was associated with increased risk of overtreatment and thus increased radiation?related toxicity rates. Conclusion: Preliminary evidence from recently reported RCTs suggests that eSRT may provide equivalent oncological outcomes to ART in prostate cancer patients with adverse pathology on radical prostatectomy while decreasing unnecessary treatment and radiation?related toxicity in a significant proportion of patients. However, the final verdict would be delivered after the long?term metastasis?free survival and overall survival outcomes are available.
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Recently, there has been considerable interest in the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with high‑risk prostate cancer. AIMS: The objective of our study is to report the outcome of upfront RP in our patients with high‑risk prostate cancer (Stage ≥ cT2c, a pre‑operative serum prostate specific antigen >20 ng/ml or a biopsy Gleason score [GS] 8‑10). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: From 1996 to 2010, 208 patients of prostate cancer (high risk category D’Amico’s criteria) underwent open RP with bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The data was statistically analyzed using Kaplan Meier method and log rank test to calculate progression free, metastasis free survival (MFS) and cancer specific survival (CSS). Furthermore multivariate analysis (MVA) was carried out using SPSS 14 software. (IBM company). RESULTS: At 7 and 10 years, prostate cancer‑specific survival (PCSS) was found to be 79.7% and 65%, respectively, biochemical recurrence free survival (BRFS) was 42.4% and 36.7%, respectively and the MFS was 71.1% and 64.4% respectively. High GS was highly predictable of PCSS, BRFS and MFS. Node positivity was the single poor risk factor on MVA whereas biopsy GS, pStage (P = 0.016) and seminal vesicle invasion (P = 0.045) had statistical significance in predicting the MFS. CONCLUSIONS: RP provides accurate pathologic staging of patients with high risk prostate cancer, allows better stratification of patients for further adjuvant therapy and either as an initial approach or part of a multimodal regimen, can provide durable local control and provides excellent CSS.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the efficacy and feasibility of extra-peritoneal larparoscopic radical prostatectomy (eLRP) in the treatment of patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC).Methods From February 2009 to December 2013,121 patients,who were diagnosed as HRPC according to the D'Amico definition,were received eLRP.The mean age was 70 years old (range 54 ～ 82 years old).The mean PSA level was 25.45 (range 2.40 ～ 111.31) μg/L and mean Gleason score was 8 (range 6 ～ 10).The classification of clinic stage in this study included 52 cases in cT1-cT2b,58 cases in cT2c,8 cases in cT3a,and 3 cases incT3b,respectively.The perioperative data were collected,including operative time,blood loss,intraoperative complications,urine leakage,lymph leakage,incontinent ability,erectile function and changing of PSA level.Results All the operations were successfully performed.The mean operative time was 165 minutes (range 105 ～341min),the average blood loss was 150 ml(range 50 ～ 1500ml).The intraoperative complications included hemorrhage in 4 cases and intra-operative obturator nerve injury in 3 cases.The mean duration of intestinal function recovery was 35h (range 24 ～72h) The mean interval of catheter indwelling was 9 days (range 7 ～14 days).The anastomotic leakage was found in 12 cases,including 1 day after surgery in 5 cases,2 days after surgery in 3 cases,3 days after surgery in 2 cases,4 day after surgery in 1 case and 5 day after surgery in 1 case.The anastomotic stricture in 3 cases within 2 to 4 months after operation,which the symptom improved after urethral dilation in 2 cases and urethrotomy in 1 case.Deep vein thrombosis was noticed in 1 case 5 days after the procedure.And lymphatic fistula was recorded in 1 case after the operation.Positive surgical margin,seminal vesicle invasion,and positive iliac vessel lymph node were found in 18,21,and 9 patients,respectively.The mean hospitalization duration was 10 days (range 5 ～ 22 d).Of the 107 patients followed-up,Ninety-six patients were continent in 1 year,except other 11 patients.Nerve sparing procedure was performed in 51 patients,and thirty-three of them were potent.The mean PSA level was 0.14 μg/L (range 0 ～8.75 μg/L) six weeks after the surgey.Fourty-eight patients had biochemical recurrence with 5 ～36 months followed-up,mean 18 months.Conclusions Extraperitoneal LRP is an efficacious approach for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) is a form of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) that delivers dose in single or multiple arcs. We compared IMRT plans versus single-arc field (1ARC) and multi-arc fields (3ARC) IMAT plans in high-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients were studied. Prostate (PTVP), right pelvic (PTVRtLN) and left pelvic lymph nodes (PTVLtLN), and organs at risk were contoured. PTVP, PTVRtLN, and PTVLtLN received 50.40 Gy followed by a boost to PTVB of 28.80 Gy. Three plans were per patient generated: IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC. We recorded the dose to the PTV, the mean dose (DMEAN) to the organs at risk, and volume covered by the 50% isodose. Efficiency was evaluated by monitor units (MU) and beam on time (BOT). Conformity index (CI), Paddick gradient index, and homogeneity index (HI) were also calculated. RESULTS: Average Radiation Therapy Oncology Group CI was 1.17, 1.20, and 1.15 for IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC, respectively. The plans' HI were within 1% of each other. The DMEAN of bladder was within 2% of each other. The rectum DMEAN in IMRT plans was 10% lower dose than the arc plans (p < 0.0001). The GI of the 3ARC was superior to IMRT by 27.4% (p = 0.006). The average MU was highest in the IMRT plans (1686) versus 1ARC (575) versus 3ARC (1079). The average BOT was 6 minutes for IMRT compared to 1.3 and 2.9 for 1ARC and 3ARC IMAT (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For high-risk prostate cancer, IMAT may offer a favorable dose gradient profile, conformity, MU and BOT compared to IMRT.