Reply to Xueliang Zhou and Xinwei Han's Letter to the Editor re: Thomas Van den Broeck, Roderick C.N. van den Bergh, Nicolas Arfi, et al. Prognostic Value of Biochemical Recurrence Following Treatment with Curative Intent for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2019;75:967–87

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. e16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Van den Broeck ◽  
Nicolas Mottet ◽  
Thomas Lam
2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (6) ◽  
pp. 967-987 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Van den Broeck ◽  
Roderick C.N. van den Bergh ◽  
Nicolas Arfi ◽  
Tobias Gross ◽  
Lisa Moris ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. e2140-e2142
Author(s):  
T. Van Den Broeck ◽  
R.C.N. Van Den Bergh ◽  
N. Arfi ◽  
T. Gross ◽  
L. Moris ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 155798832110248
Author(s):  
Yong Yuan ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Chaofan Xie ◽  
Tao Wu

Context: Several studies reported the application of androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostate cancer operation. Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating of endocrine therapy and radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostate cancer surgery. The primary end point was biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS). Secondary end point was overall survival (OS). Methods: A systematic review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant studies published in English up to March 2020. Twelve studies were selected for inclusion. Results: There were 11 studies included in the present study. Including two randomized controlled trials and nine cohort studies. The meta-analysis shows a significant bPFS benefit from androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostate cancer operation. (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.52–0.63; p < .001). For patients with GS < 7 and low-risk patients, combined treatment can have a benefit for BPFs (HR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37–0.76; HR: 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36–0.93). Androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence was associated with a slightly OS improvement (HR: 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57–0.93; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Compared with salvage radiotherapy alone, This meta-analysis shows a significant bPFS benefit from endocrine therapy combined with salvage radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after prostate cancer operation. And benefit more for high-risk groups. However, there was no significant benefit in group GS ≥ 8. It shows a slightly OS benefit from endocrine therapy combined with salvage radiotherapy in patients with biochemical recurrence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-25
Author(s):  
João Carvalho ◽  
Pedro Nunes ◽  
Edgar Tavares Da Silva ◽  
Rodolfo Silva ◽  
João Lima ◽  
...  

Objectives: Clinical approach of prostate cancer (PCa) biochemical recurrence (BCR) is an ever-changing topic. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography ([68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CTPSMA PET-CT) has shown good potential in this field. The aim is to evaluate PSMA PET-CT detection rate in PCa BCR and assess its impact on clinical outcome. Material and methods: Out of 319 patients with PCa who underwent PSMA PET-CT between October 2015 and June 2019, 70 had developed BCR after treatment with curative intent. Two groups were created: one with BCR after surgery (RP group) (N: 48; 68.6%) and other with BCR after radiotherapy (RT group) (N: 22; 31.4%). Clinical, analytical, pathological and PSMA PET-CT results were evaluated. Results: Initial age was different between groups (p = 0.008). RP patients were mainly at intermediate risk (85.1% vs 42.9%, p = 0.001) while RT patients were at low risk of recurrence (8.5% vs 47.6%, p = 0.001). In RP and RT groups, PSMA PETCT detected, respectively, pelvic relapse in 31.3% and 63.6%, and extrapelvic relapse in 18.8% and 31.8%. Salvage treatment was performed in 61.9% (n = 26) of RP patients and in 15% (n = 3) of RT patients, p < 0.001. Of RP patients submitted to salvage treatment, 59.1% achieved complete remission. Concerning these patients, local radiotherapy led to complete remission in 68.4% (n = 13). Of RT patients submitted to salvage treatment, two had complete remission and one had partial remission.Concerning detection rate, PSMA PET-CT was positive for pelvic relapse when pre-PET PSA ≥ 0.8 ng/mL (RP) or ≥ 2.3 ng/mL (RT) and for extrapelvic relapse when PSA ≥ 0.4 ng/mL (RP) or ≥ 3.5 ng/mL (RT), p > 0.05. Conclusions: Biochemical persistence rate after salvage therapy was similar (30-40%). The cut-off PSA values for pelvic relapse detected on PSMA PET-CT were ≥ 0.8 ng/mL (RP) and ≥ 2.3 ng/mL (RT).


Author(s):  
Mario Rivera-Izquierdo ◽  
Javier Pérez de Rojas ◽  
Virginia Martínez-Ruiz ◽  
Miguel Ángel Arrabal-Polo ◽  
Beatriz Pérez-Gómez ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e034612
Author(s):  
Athul John ◽  
Michael O'Callaghan ◽  
Rick Catterwell ◽  
Luke A Selth

IntroductionPositive surgical margins (PSM) in cancer patients are commonly associated with worse prognosis and a higher risk of secondary treatment. However, the relevance of this parameter in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial, given the inconsistencies in its ability to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) and oncological outcomes. Hence, further assessment of the utility of surgical margins for prostate cancer prognosis is required to predict these outcomes more accurately. Over the last decade, studies have used the Gleason score (GS) of positive margins to predict outcomes. Herein, the authors aim to conduct a systematic review investigating the role of GS of PSM after radical prostatectomy in predicting BCR and oncological outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will perform a search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and COCHRANE databases. The review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will screen titles and abstracts to select articles appropriate for full-text review. Studies discussing GS of PSM after RP will be included. Given the change in reporting of GS, only articles from 2005 to 2019 will be included. The quality of the studies chosen will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool for non-randomised and Cochrane risk of bias for randomised control studies. We will adopt the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation framework to comment on quality of cumulative evidence. The primary outcome measure will be time to BCR. Secondary outcome measures include secondary treatment, disease-specific survival, disease progression-free and overall mortality at follow-up period. We aim to perform a meta-analysis if the level of heterogeneity is acceptable (I2<50%).Ethics and disseminationThe review does not require ethics approval as it is a review of published literature. The findings of the review will be submitted for peer-reviewed publications and presented at scientific meetings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019131800.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document