[Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer-data from 17,149 patients from 125 certified centers]. / Harninkontinenz nach radikaler Prostatektomie beim Prostatakarzinom ­ aktuelle Daten von 17.149 Patienten aus 125 zertifizierten Zentren.

BACKGROUND: In addition to erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence is the most common functional limitation after radical prostatectomy (RPE) for prostate cancer (PCa). The German S3 guideline recommends informing patients about possible effects of the therapy options, including incontinence. However, only little data on continence from routine care in German-speaking countries after RPE are currently available, which makes it difficult to inform patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to present data on the frequency and severity of urinary incontinence after RPE from routine care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information from the PCO (Prostate Cancer Outcomes) study is used, which was collected between 2016 and 2022 in 125 German Cancer Society (DKG)-certified prostate cancer centers in 17,149 patients using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form (EPIC-26). Changes in the "incontinence" score before (T0) and 12 months after RPE (T1) and the proportion of patients who used pads, stratified by age and risk group, are reported. RESULTS: The average score for urinary incontinence (value range: 0-worst possible to 100-best possible) was 93 points at T0 and 73 points 12 months later. At T0, 97% of the patients did not use a pad, compared to 56% at T1. 43% of the patients who did not use a pad before surgery used at least one pad a day 12 months later, while 13% use two or more. The proportion of patients using pads differs by age and risk classification. CONCLUSION: The results provide a comprehensive insight into functional outcome 12 months after RPE and can be taken into account when informing patients.

An international multi-institutional validation study of the algorithm for prostate cancer detection and Gleason grading.

Pathologic examination of prostate biopsies is time consuming due to the large number of slides per case. In this retrospective study, we validate a deep learning-based classifier for prostate cancer (PCA) detection and Gleason grading (AI tool) in biopsy samples. Five external cohorts of patients with multifocal prostate biopsy were analyzed from high-volume pathology institutes. A total of 5922 H&E sections representing 7473 biopsy cores from 423 patient cases (digitized using three scanners) were assessed concerning tumor detection. Two tumor-bearing datasets (core n = 227 and 159) were graded by an international group of pathologists including expert urologic pathologists (n = 11) to validate the Gleason grading classifier. The sensitivity, specificity, and NPV for the detection of tumor-bearing biopsies was in a range of 0.971-1.000, 0.875-0.976, and 0.988-1.000, respectively, across the different test cohorts. In several biopsy slides tumor tissue was correctly detected by the AI tool that was initially missed by pathologists. Most false positive misclassifications represented lesions suspicious for carcinoma or cancer mimickers. The quadratically weighted kappa levels for Gleason grading agreement for single pathologists was 0.62-0.80 (0.77 for AI tool) and 0.64-0.76 (0.72 for AI tool) for the two grading datasets, respectively. In cases where consensus for grading was reached among pathologists, kappa levels for AI tool were 0.903 and 0.855. The PCA detection classifier showed high accuracy for PCA detection in biopsy cases during external validation, independent of the institute and scanner used. High levels of agreement for Gleason grading were indistinguishable between experienced genitourinary pathologists and the AI tool.

Postoperative Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer: Adjuvant versus Early Salvage.

Results of three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) and early salvage radiotherapy (eSRT) of prostate carcinoma and a subsequent meta-analysis of the individual patient data from these RCTs were recently published. The results suggest that early eSRT is as effective and potentially less toxic than ART. Therefore, eSRT should be considered the standard of care. However, due to limitations in the RCTs, ART remains a valid treatment option in patients with the combination of high-risk features such as Gleason Score (GS) 8-10, positive surgical margins (R1) and pathological T-stage 3 or 4 (pT3/4). This article provides a critical appraisal of the RCTs and the rationale for recommendations adopted in the current national guidelines regarding patients with high-risk features after radical prostatectomy (RP): ART should be offered in case of pT3/pT4 and R1 and Gleason Score 8-10; ART can be offered in case of pT3/pT4 and R0 and Gleason Score 8-10 as well as in case of multifocal R1 (including pT2) and Gleason Score 8-10. In any case, the alternative treatment option of eSRT in case of rising PSA should be discussed with the patient.

Variation across operating sites in urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy in localized and locally advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The extent of variation in urinary and sexual functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RPE) between prostate cancer (PC) operating sites remains unknown. Therefore, this analysis aims to compare casemix-adjusted functional outcomes (EPIC-26 scores incontinence, irritative/obstructive function and sexual function) between operating sites 12 months after RPE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of a cohort of 7065 men treated with RPE at 88 operating sites (prostate cancer centers, "PCCs") between 2016 and 2019. Patients completed EPIC-26 and sociodemographic information surveys at baseline and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data. EPIC-26 domain scores at 12 months after RPE were adjusted for relevant confounders (including baseline domain score, clinical and sociodemographic information) using regression analysis. Differences between sites were described using minimal important differences (MIDs) and interquartile ranges (IQR). The effects of casemix adjustment on the score results were described using Cohen's d and MIDs. RESULTS: Adjusted domain scores at 12 months varied between sites, with IQRs of 66-78 (incontinence), 89-92 (irritative/obstructive function), and 20-29 (sexual function). Changes in domain scores after casemix adjustment for sites ≥ 1 MID were noted for the incontinence domain (six sites). Cohen's d ranged between - 0.07 (incontinence) and - 0.2 (sexual function), indicating a small to medium effect of casemix adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Variation between sites was greatest in the incontinence and sexual function domains for RPE patients. Future research will need to identify the factors contributing to this variation. TRIAL REGISTRY: The study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/ ) with the following ID: DRKS00010774.

[Osteoprotection in the management of metastatic prostate cancer: real-world data from Germany and decision guidance]. / Osteoprotektion als Baustein der Therapie des metastasierten Prostatakarzinoms: Behandlungsrealität in Deutschland und Entscheidungspfade zur Therapieoptimierung.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoprotective medications are a key element not only in the management of bone metastases of castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but also of hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Additionally, osteoprotective drugs can prevent androgen deprivation-induced bone loss. The aim of this study was to illustrate the practice pattern of osteoprotection for prostate cancer patients in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We designed an online survey consisting of 16 questions. The survey was sent to the nation-wide working groups "Oncology" and "Uro-Oncology" as well as to colleagues from the departments of urology of University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (Campus Lübeck), Academic Hospital Brunswick and Technical University of Munich. Furthermore, we developed flow charts for decision guidance for osteoprotection within the different stages of prostate cancer. RESULTS: Our analysis demonstrates a routine use of osteoprotection in the management of bone metastases of mCRPC. In contrast, osteoprotective medications are less often used for the treatment of bone metastases of mHSPC and for the prevention of androgen deprivation-induced bone loss. Our flow charts depict the different dosages and intervals for the administration of osteoprotective drugs in the different stages of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoprotection is not only confined to mCRPC with bone metastases. It plays a crucial role in the management of all stages of metastatic prostate cancer.

68Ga-Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography-Based Primary Staging and Histological Correlation after Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT)-based primary staging in exclusively D'Amico intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We relied on the Braunschweig institutional database and retrospectively identified D'Amico intermediate-risk PCa patients who were administered to 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT-based primary staging prior to consecutive radical prostatectomy and extended lymph node dissection. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for the detection of lymph node metastases were analyzed per-patient (n = 39), per-pelvic side (n = 78), and per-anatomic-region (external iliac artery and vein left/right vs. obturator fossa left/right vs. internal iliac artery left/right) (n = 203), respectively. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV per-patient were 20.0, 94.1, 33.3, and 88.9%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV per-pelvic-side were 16.7, 97.2, 33.3, and 93.3%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV per-anatomic-region were 16.7, 99.0, 33.3, and 97.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We recorded high rates of specificity and NPV for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT-based primary staging in D'Amico intermediate-risk PCa patients. Conversely, the sensitivity and PPV were lower than anticipated. Larger and favorably prospective trials are needed to verify our results and to unravel possible bias from such smaller studies.

PROPOSe: A Real-life Prospective Study of Proclarix, a Novel Blood-based Test to Support Challenging Biopsy Decision-making in Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based detection of prostate cancer (PCa) often leads to negative biopsy results or detection of clinically insignificant PCa, more frequently in the PSA range of 2-10 ng/ml, in men with increased prostate volume and normal digital rectal examination (DRE). OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the accuracy of Proclarix, a novel blood-based diagnostic test, to help in biopsy decision-making in this challenging patient population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Ten clinical sites prospectively enrolled 457 men presenting for prostate biopsy with PSA between 2 and 10 ng/ml, normal DRE, and prostate volume ≥35 cm3. Transrectal ultrasound-guided and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided biopsy techniques were allowed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Serum samples were tested blindly at the end of the study. Diagnostic performance of Proclarix risk score was established in correlation to systematic biopsy outcome and its performance compared with %free PSA (%fPSA) and the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator (RC) as well as Proclarix density compared with PSA density in men undergoing mpMRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The sensitivity of Proclarix risk score for clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as grade group (GG) ≥2 was 91% (n = 362), with higher specificity than both %fPSA (22% vs 14%; difference = 8% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.6-14%], p = 0.005) and RC (22% vs 15%; difference = 7% [95% CI, 0.7-12%], p = 0.028). In the subset of men undergoing mpMRI-fusion biopsy (n = 121), the specificity of Proclarix risk score was significantly higher than PSA density (26% vs 8%; difference = 18% [95% CI, 7-28%], p < 0.001), and at equal sensitivity of 97%, Proclarix density had an even higher specificity of 33% [95% CI, 23-43%]. CONCLUSIONS: In a routine use setting, Proclarix accurately discriminated csPCa from no or insignificant PCa in the most challenging patients. Proclarix represents a valuable rule-out test in the diagnostic algorithm for PCa, alone or in combination with mpMRI. PATIENT SUMMARY: Proclarix is a novel blood-based test with the potential to accurately rule out clinically significant prostate cancer, and therefore to reduce the number of unneeded biopsies.

Psychometric validation of the German version of the EPIC-26 questionnaire for patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: For patients with prostate cancer, validated and reliable instruments are essential for measuring patient-reported outcomes. The aim of this study was to validate the German version of the widely established Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite with 26 items (EPIC-26). METHODS: A German translation of the original questionnaire was tested in 3094 patients with localized or locally advanced (any T, any N and M0) prostate cancer with treatment intent (including radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, active surveillance, watchful waiting). They completed the EPIC-26 questionnaire before treatment. A total of 521 of them also completed a questionnaire 12 months afterward. Internal consistency, sensitivity to change, and construct validity were assessed. RESULTS: The internal consistency of all domains was sufficient (Cronbach's alpha between 0.64 and 0.93). Item-to-scale correlation coefficients showed acceptable associations between items and their domain score (all > 0.30), with the lowest scores for "bloody stools" (r = 0.37) and "breast problems" (r = 0.32). Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis confirmed the five-dimension structure of the EPIC-26 (comparative fit index 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric evaluation suggests that the German version of the EPIC-26 is a well-constructed instrument for measuring patient-reported health-related symptoms in patients with prostate cancer.

Elastography Targeted Prostate Biopsy in Patients under Active Surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine elastography-based prostate biopsy in prostate cancer (PCa) patients under active surveillance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We relied on PCa patients who opted for active surveillance and underwent elastography targeted and systematic follow-up biopsy at the Braunschweig Prostate Cancer Center between October 2009 and February 2015. Each prostate sextant was considered as an individual case. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy (ACC) for elastography to predict follow-up biopsy results were analyzed, respectively, and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were carried out by using 2000 bootstrapping sample analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 50 men and 300 sextants were identified. Overall, 27 (54%) men and 66 (22%) sextants harbored PCa at follow-up biopsy. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and ACC for elastography to predict follow-up biopsy results were: 19.7 (95% CI: 11.9-27.3), 86.8 (95% CI: 82.7-90.3), 29.6 (95% CI: 14.6-46.0), 79.3 (95% CI: 71.6-86.5), and 72.0% (95% CI: 65.7-78.3), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We recorded limited reliability of elastography-based prediction of follow-up biopsy results in active surveillance patients. Based on our analyses, we can neither recommend to rely exclusively on elastography-based targeted biopsies nor to delay or to omit follow-up biopsies based on elastography results during active surveillance.

[Current data on the target value of testosterone lowering and the associated research since the first administration of LHRH (GnRH) analogues to patients 40 years ago]. / Ziel: 20 statt 50! Aktuelle Daten zum Zielwert der Testosteronsenkung und die Forschung hierüber seit erster "LH-RH" (GnRH)-Analoga-Gabe an Patienten vor 40 Jahren.

When LH-RH (now: GNRH) analogues were first used for the treatment of prostate cancer, the castration level was arbitrarily defined as a testosterone level of less than 50 ng/dl. Since then, numerous studies have shown that a permanent lowering of the testosterone level, e. g. by buserelin, to values lower than 20 ng/dl is associated with a significant improvement in outcomes. This has been proven in recent studies. Therefore, a castration level with testosterone values of less than 20 ng/dl is required. In addition, hormone withdrawal with GNRH analogues continues to provide the basic therapy for new treatment options, e. g. with abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide.

[Retrospective SHI (Statutory Health Insurances) real-world study on initial GnRH antagonist and agonist therapy for advanced prostate cancer: prescription patterns and hospital costs in Germany]. / Retrospektive GKV-Versorgungsforschungsstudie über GnRH-Antagonisten/-Agonisten zur initialen Therapie des fortgeschrittenen Prostatakarzinoms ­ Verordnungsmuster und Krankenhauskosten in Deutschland.

INTRODUCTION: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plays a pivotal role in the treatment of advanced or metastasised prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this health services research was to compare real-world data on the initial use of different GnRH agonists and antagonists (GnRHa) with regard to prescription patterns, hospitalisation rates and costs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Anonymised claims data from > 70 German health insurance funds between 2010 and 2015 (n = 4 205 227) were analysed (1 year pre-observation period, 1 index quarter with initial GnRHa prescription, ≥ 2 years of follow-up (FU)). RESULTS: The study population included 2382 PCa patients (mean age 75 years). Leuprolide (Leu) was prescribed most frequently (56.6 %). At initial GnRHa administration, 70 % of patients neither had lymph node nor distant metastases. Around 11.2 % of all patients stopped GnRHa treatment after the first prescription, 17.6 % switched their initial therapy to another substance after a mean of 457 days (median: 399 days); in the hybrid (hyb) group 100 days earlier on average than in the agonist group (p = 0.016). The prevalence ranking of the most common comorbidities was consistent over time: hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes. The prevalence of hypertension increased significantly in the agonist group (16.4 %) compared with the antagonist (6.9 %, p = 0.022) and hyb group (11.6 %, p = 0.006). With regard to CVD, there were no significant differences in the relative growth rate between the 3 combined therapy classes. In total, 23.9 % of all patients died within the 3-year FU. The mortality rate was lowest for triptorelin (Trp, 22.1 %) and highest for goserelin (Gos, 29.4 %, n.s.). In the index quarter, 26.4 % of patients had at least one inpatient hospitalisation [min-max: Trp 22.4 %; Gos 30.3 %], with an average length of hospital stay/patient of 3 days [Trp 2.4; Gos 4.5]. The annual hospitalisation rate was between 36.2 and 40.7 %, the average length of hospital stay in the entire FU was between 17.6 (Trp) and 20.8 days (hyb). The average hospital costs in the index quarter were approx. EUR 1200 [Trp 988; Gos 1803] and per FU year approx. EUR 3000. In the Trp cohort, total costs (index quarter + 3 years) were more than EUR 1000 below the average costs of EUR 9476 [Trp 8116; Leu 9779; n.s.]. CONCLUSION: This comparative retrospective analysis provides real-world information on initial GnRHa treatment for advanced prostate cancer, revealing differences in treatment patterns, hospitalisation rates and hospital costs in Germany.

Only Size Matters in Stone Patients: Computed Tomography Controlled Stone-Free Rates after Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

OBJECTIVE: To examine and predicting stone-free rates (SFRs) after minimally invasive-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PNL) based on computed tomography (CT), instead of X-ray or ultrasound control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 146 mini-PNL patients with pre- and postoperative CT scans. Patient and stone characteristics were assessed. Stone-free status was defined as ≤3 mm residual fragment after mini-PNL according to postsurgery CT scan. Multivariable logistic regression analyses predicted stone-free status after mini-PNL. RESULTS: Overall, 62 (42.5%) patients achieved stone-free status after mini-PNL. In multivariable analyses, stone size was the only independent predictor for stone-free status (OR 0.9; p = 0.02). Patients with stones > 20 mm were less likely to achieve stone-free status, than those harboring stones 10-20 mm (OR 0.3; p = 0.009). SFRs according to stone size categories (< 10, 10-20, and > 20 mm) were 33.3, 50.5, and 25%. Body mass index (BMI) and stone density (Houndsfield units) were no independent predictors for stone-free status after mini-PNL. CONCLUSIONS: We report lower SFRs than expected. Stone size was the only independent predictor for stone-free status after mini-PNL. Patients with larger stones need to be informed about high risk of additional interventions. High BMI and high stone density do not represent a barrier for stone-free status after mini-PNL.

Retrospective Analysis of Patients With Prostate Cancer Initiating GnRH Agonists/Antagonists Therapy Using a German Claims Database: Epidemiological and Patient Outcomes.

Objective: The objective of this study was to obtain real-world information on gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist (GnRHa) therapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and methods: Anonymized, routine healthcare claims data from approx. 75 German statutory health insurance funds from 2010-2015 (n = 4,205,227) were analyzed. Patients had an enrolment of 1 year before GnRHa, 1 index quarter of initial GnRHa prescription and ≥2 years of follow-up. Results: In total, 2,382 patients with PCa were eligible. The most frequent index therapy was leuprolide in 56.6%. The rank order of PCa comorbidity prevalence was consistent over time (% at index and 3-years of follow-up): hypertension (71.5; 85.0), hyperlipidemia (45.2; 60.8), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (35.7; 54.1), and diabetes (28.3; 36.2). Comparing pooled therapy classes (agonists, hybrids, and antagonist), no significant differences in the incidence of CVD or diabetes were observed. For hypertension, there was a significant increase for agonists (16.4%) compared to antagonists (6.9%, p = 0.022) and leuprolide hybrid group (11.6%, p = 0.006). During the follow-up period 23.9% of all PCa patients died. There were no significant differences concerning mortality rate and discontinuation rates between the cohorts. In total, 11.2% of all patients discontinued GnRHa after first prescription; the mean time to first switch to another GnRHa therapy was 100 days earlier for hybrids than for agonists (p = 0.016). Conclusion: This comparative retrospective analysis provides real-world information about healthcare characteristics and treatment patterns, highlighting the impact of different GnRHa on clinical outcomes for patients with advanced PCa in Germany.

The German version of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC): translation, validation and minimal important difference estimation.

BACKGROUND: No official German translation exists for the 50-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), and no minimal important difference (MID) has been established yet. The aim of the study was to translate and validate a German version of the EPIC with cultural adaptation to the different German speaking countries and to establish the MID. METHODS: We translated and culturally adapted the EPIC into German. For validation, we included a consecutive subsample of 92 patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy who participated the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Cohort. Baseline and follow-up assessments took place before and six weeks after prostatectomy in 2010 and 2011. We assessed the EPIC, EORTC QLQ-PR25, Feeling Thermometer, SF-36 and a global rating of health state change variable. We calculated the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, responsiveness and MID. RESULTS: For most EPIC domains and subscales, our a priori defined criteria for reliability were fulfilled (construct reliability: Cronbach's alpha 0.7-0.9; test-retest reliability: intraclass-correlation coefficient ≥ 0.7). Cross-sectional and longitudinal correlations between EPIC and EORTC QLQ-PR25 domains ranged from 0.14-0.79, and 0.06-0.5 and 0.08-0.72 for Feeling Thermometer and SF-36, respectively. We established MID values of 10, 4, 12, and 6 for the urinary, bowel, sexual and hormonal domain. CONCLUSION: The German version of the EPIC is reliable, responsive and valid to measure HRQL in prostate cancer patients and is now available in German language. With the suggested MID we provide interpretation to what extent changes in HRQL are clinically relevant for patients. Hence, study results are of interest beyond German speaking countries.

PSA response to cabazitaxel is associated with improved progression-free survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the non-interventional QoLiTime study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and progression-free and overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with cabazitaxel. METHODS: Men with mCRPC receiving cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2, every 3 weeks) plus oral prednis(ol)one (10 mg/day) were enrolled in the non-interventional, prospective QoLiTime study. Main outcome measures were progression-free survival and overall survival, in all patients and in those who showed a ≥ 50 or a ≥ 30% decrease in PSA relative to baseline after four cycles of cabazitaxel, as well as quality-of-life parameters. RESULTS: Of the 527 men (median age 72 years), 266 received ≥ 4 cycles of cabazitaxel and had PSA response data. After four cycles, 34.6% of men achieved a PSA decrease ≥ 50% and 49.6% a decrease ≥ 30%. Median progression-free survival was 7.7 (95% CI 6.2, 9.5) months, and overall survival was 19.5 (95% CI 16.0, 30.9) months, corresponding to 1-year event rates of 39.4 and 78.8%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was longer in PSA responders versus non-responders (15.7 vs 5.5 months at 50% cut-off; 15.7 vs 5.3 months for 30% cut-off; both P < 0.0001). Overall survival (50% cut-off) was 23.3 months in responders and 16.0 months in non-responders (P = 0.068); corresponding data at the 30% cut-off are 21.7 and 16.0 months (P = 0.057). Overall, 55.4% of men experienced ≥ 1 adverse event, 59.6% of whom had a serious adverse event. CONCLUSION: PSA response after four cycles of cabazitaxel is associated with improved progression-free survival in men with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel plus prednis(ol)one.

Health-Related Quality of Life in 536 Long-Term Prostate Cancer Survivors after Treatment with Leuprorelin Acetate: A Combined Retrospective and Prospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of long-term prostate cancer patients who received leuprorelin acetate in microcapsules (LAM) for androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: The observational study was carried out by 30 office-based German urologists in 536 prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated for ≥5 years with LAM and in 116 patients of an age-matched control group (CG). Data on HRQoL and health status was collected prospectively using validated questionnaires QLQ-C30, QLQ-PR25 and Karnofsky Index. Data on effectiveness (clinical response, prostate specific antigen [PSA], testosterone) and safety was collected retrospectively from patients' health records. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data. RESULTS: The mean treatment duration was 8.6 years (range 4.5-19.8 years). General health status (QLQ-C30) was comparable for both groups. Differences were observed regarding physical - and role functioning. ADT patients rated single items slightly worse than CG. Karnofsky-Index showed comparable high values (median of 90%). QLQ-PR25 revealed more PCa-related symptoms for ADT patients. Within 6 months, median PSA level declined >90% and median testosterone levels declined below castration level from 4.0 to 0.2 ng/mL. Clinical response (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria) was observed in at least 90% of ADT patients. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term ADT with LAM is a well-accepted, tolerated, effective, and low-burden treatment option for patients with advanced, hormone-sensitive PCa.

Quality of life and pain relief in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer on cabazitaxel: the non-interventional 'QoLiTime' study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine health-related quality of life (QoL) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) on cabazitaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with mCRPC receiving cabazitaxel (25 mg/m², every 3 weeks) and 10 mg/day oral prednis(ol)one were enrolled (2011-2014) in the non-interventional prospective 'QoLiTime' study. Primary outcome was change in QoL (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item) with respect to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response after four cycles of cabazitaxel. Secondary outcomes included occurrence of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Of 527 men, 348 received four cycles of cabazitaxel and 266 had the necessary PSA level measurements. After four cycles, 92 (34.6%) men had a PSA level decrease ≥50% (responders). QoL remained stable throughout the study (P = 0.62). Change in QoL did not differ between responders and non-responders (P = 0.69). Change in PSA level and global health status between baseline and four cycles showed an inversely proportional relationship (correlation coefficient -0.14; 95% confidence interval -0.26 to -0.01; P = 0.03), with increasing PSA level corresponding to lower health status. Responders showed no change in physical functioning vs baseline (-1.75, P = 0.12); non-responders showed a reduction vs baseline (-7.00, P < 0.001) and responders (P = 0.05). Responders showed an improvement in pain vs baseline (-7.61, P = 0.05) and vs non-responders (P = 0.01). AEs occurred in 292 patients (55.4%), most commonly anaemia (16.5%), fatigue (12.3%) and diarrhoea (11.8%). Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were reported in 3.8% and 3.6% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Prostate-specific antigen level response was associated with stable physical functioning and improvement in pain. Symptom increases were seen in areas typical of chemotoxicity, but QoL was maintained.

Non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer: a call for improved guidance on clinical management.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on the clinical management of non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) generally focus on the need to continue androgen deprivation therapy and enrol patients into clinical trials of investigational agents. This guidance reflects the lack of clinical trial data with established agents in the nmCRPC patient population and the need for trials of new agents. AIM: To review the evidence base and consider ways of improving the management of nmCRPC. CONCLUSION: Upon the development of castrate resistance, it is essential to rule out the presence of metastases or micrometastases by optimising the use of bone scans and possibly newer procedures and techniques. When nmCRPC is established, management decisions should be individualised according to risk, but risk stratification in this diverse population is poorly defined. Currently, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and PSA doubling time remain the best method of assessing the risk of progression and response to treatment in nmCRPC. However, optimising imaging protocols can also help assess the changing metastatic burden in patients with CRPC. Clinical trials of novel agents in nmCRPC are limited and have problems with enrolment, and therefore, improved risk stratification and imaging may be crucial to the improved management. The statements presented in this paper, reflecting the views of the authors, provide a discussion of the most recent evidence in nmCRPC and provide some advice on how to ensure these patients receive the best management available. However, there is an urgent need for more data on the management of nmCRPC.