PSMA PET/CT in diagnostics and response evaluation in patients with primary metastasized prostate cancer: A review of the impact on treatment decisions

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in man. Adequate staging is important in determining prognosis and guiding therapeutic decisions. The prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has a higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional imaging, consisting of CT-thorax/abdomen and bone scintigraphy. This ensures better visualization of metastases and therefore changes the stage, usually to a higher stage, of prostate cancer at diagnosis. The impact of this stage shift on oncologic outcomes is unclear, however it hypothetically ensures better outcomes of patients diagnosed at the same stage. It is unclear which impact this stage shift should have on therapeutic decisions. In patients with metastatic prostate cancer PSMA PET/CT findings and treatment response on the PSMA PET/CT could predict the likelihood of successful treatment

PSMA PET/CT in diagnostics and response evaluation in patients with primary metastasized prostate cancer:A review of the impact on treatment decisions

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in man. Adequate staging is important in determining prognosis and guiding therapeutic decisions. The prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has a higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional imaging, consisting of CT-thorax/abdomen and bone scintigraphy. This ensures better visualization of metastases and therefore changes the stage, usually to a higher stage, of prostate cancer at diagnosis. The impact of this stage shift on oncologic outcomes is unclear, however it hypothetically ensures better outcomes of patients diagnosed at the same stage. It is unclear which impact this stage shift should have on therapeutic decisions. In patients with metastatic prostate cancer PSMA PET/CT findings and treatment response on the PSMA PET/CT could predict the likelihood of successful treatment.</p

PSMA PET/CT in diagnostics and response evaluation in patients with primary metastasized prostate cancer:A review of the impact on treatment decisions

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in man. Adequate staging is important in determining prognosis and guiding therapeutic decisions. The prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has a higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional imaging, consisting of CT-thorax/abdomen and bone scintigraphy. This ensures better visualization of metastases and therefore changes the stage, usually to a higher stage, of prostate cancer at diagnosis. The impact of this stage shift on oncologic outcomes is unclear, however it hypothetically ensures better outcomes of patients diagnosed at the same stage. It is unclear which impact this stage shift should have on therapeutic decisions. In patients with metastatic prostate cancer PSMA PET/CT findings and treatment response on the PSMA PET/CT could predict the likelihood of successful treatment.</p

Navigating through the Controversies and Emerging Paradigms in Early Detection of Prostate Cancer:Bridging the Gap from Classic RCTs to Modern Population-Based Pilot Programs

Over the last three decades, the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the US-based Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening have steered the conversation around the early detection of prostate cancer. These two randomized trials assessed the effect of screening on prostate cancer disease-specific mortality. Elevated PSA levels were followed by a systematic sextant prostate biopsy. Standard repeat testing intervals were applied. After controversies from 2009 to 2016 due to contradicting results of the two trials, the results aligned in 2016 and showed that early PSA detection reduces prostate cancer-specific mortality. However, overdiagnosis rates of up to 50% were reported, and this sparked an intense debate on harms and benefits for almost 20 years. The balance between harms and benefits is highly debated and has initiated further research to investigate new ways of early detection. In the meantime, the knowledge and tools for the diagnostic algorithm improved. This is a continuously ongoing effort which focuses on individual risk-based screening algorithms that preserve the benefits of the purely PSA-based screening algorithms, while reducing the side effects. An important push towards investigating new techniques for early detection came from the European Commission on the 20th of September 2022. The European Commission published its updated recommendation to investigate prostate, lung, and gastric cancer early detection programs. This opened a new window of opportunity to move away from the trial setting to population-based early detection settings. With this review, we aim to review 30 years of historical evidence of prostate cancer screening, which led to the initiation of the 'The Prostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union' (PRAISE-U) project, which aims to encourage the early detection and diagnosis of PCa through customized and risk-based screening programs.</p

Arterio-ureteral fistula:a nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire analysis

PURPOSE: Arterio-ureteral fistula (AUF) is an uncommon diagnosis, but potentially lethal. Although the number of reports has increased over the past two decades, the true incidence and contemporary urologists’ experience and approach in clinical practice remains unknown. This research is conducted to provide insight in the incidence of AUF in The Netherlands, and the applied diagnostic tests and therapeutic approaches in modern practice. METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire analysis was performed by sending a survey to all registered Dutch urologists. Data collection included information on experience with patients with AUF; and their medical history, diagnostics, treatment, and follow-up, and were captured in a standardized template by two independent reviewers. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: Response rate was 62% and 56 AUFs in 53 patients were reported between 2003 and 2018. The estimated incidence of AUF in The Netherlands in this time period is 3.5 AUFs per year. Hematuria was observed in all patients; 9% intermittent microhematuria, and 91% presenting with, or building up to massive hematuria. For the final diagnosis, angiography was the most efficient modality, confirming diagnosis in 58%. Treatment comprised predominantly endovascular intervention. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis AUF should be considered in patients with persistent intermittent or massive hematuria. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03910-3

The accuracy and intra- and interobserver variability of PSMA PET/CT for the local staging of primary prostate cancer

Purpose: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/ computed tomography (PET/CT) is recognized as the most accurate imaging modality for detection of metastatic high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Its role in the local staging of disease is yet unclear. We assessed the intra- and interobserver variability, as well as the diagnostic accuracy of the PSMA PET/CT based molecular imaging local tumour stage (miT-stage) for the local tumour stage assessment in a large, multicentre cohort of patients with intermediate and high-risk primary PCa, with the radical prostatectomy specimen (pT-stage) serving as the reference standard. Methods: A total of 600 patients who underwent staging PSMA PET/CT before robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was studied. In 579 PSMA positive primary prostate tumours a comparison was made between miT-stage as assessed by four nuclear physicians and the pT-stage according to ISUP protocol. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy were determined. In a representative subset of 100 patients, the intra-and interobserver variability were assessed using Kappa-estimates. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the PSMA PET/CT based miT-stage were 58% and 59% for pT3a-stage, 30% and 97% for ≥ pT3b-stage, and 68% and 61% for overall ≥ pT3-stage, respectively. No statistically significant differences in diagnostic accuracy were found between tracers. We found a substantial intra-observer agreement for PSMA PET/CT assessment of ≥ T3-stage (k 0.70) and ≥ T3b-stage (k 0.75), whereas the interobserver agreement for the assessment of ≥ T3-stage (k 0.47) and ≥ T3b-stage (k 0.41) were moderate. Conclusion: In a large, multicentre study evaluating 600 patients with newly diagnosed intermediate and high-risk PCa, we showed that PSMA PET/CT may have a value in local tumour staging when pathological tumour stage in the radical prostatectomy specimen was used as the reference standard. The intra-observer and interobserver variability of assessment of tumour extent on PSMA PET/CT was moderate to substantial

Benefits and Risks of Primary Treatments for High-risk Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer : An International Multidisciplinary Systematic Review

Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Peer reviewedPostprin

Oncologic Outcomes of Incidental Versus Biopsy-diagnosed Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer:A Multi-institutional Study

Background and objective: Patients diagnosed with grade group (GG) 1 prostate cancer (PCa) following treatment for benign disease (“incidental” PCa) are typically managed with active surveillance (AS). It is not known how their outcomes compare with those observed in patients diagnosed with GG1 on biopsy. We aimed at determining whether long-term oncologic outcomes of AS for patients with GG1 PCa differ according to the type of diagnosis: incidental versus biopsy detected. Methods: A retrospective, multi-institutional analysis of PCa patients with GG1 on AS at eight institutions was conducted. Competing risk analyses estimated the incidence of metastases, PCa mortality, and conversion to treatment. As a secondary analysis, we estimated the risk of GG ≥2 on the first follow-up biopsy according to the type of initial diagnosis. Key findings and limitations: A total of 213 versus 1900 patients with incidental versus biopsy-diagnosed GG1 were identified. Patients with incidental cancers were followed with repeated biopsies and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging less frequently than those diagnosed on biopsy. The 10-yr incidence of treatment was 22% for incidental cancers versus 53% for biopsy (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26–0.46, p &lt; 0.001). Distant metastases developed in one patient with incidental cancer versus 17 diagnosed on biopsy and were diagnosed with molecular imaging in 13 (72%) patients. The 10-yr incidence of metastases was 0.8% for patients with incidental PCa and 2% for those diagnosed on biopsy (sHR 0.35, 95% CI 0.05–2.54, p = 0.3). The risk of GG ≥2 on the first follow-up biopsy was low if the initial diagnosis was incidental (7% vs 22%, p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions and clinical implications: Patients with GG1 incidental PCa should be evaluated further to exclude aggressive disease, preferably with a biopsy. If no cancer is found on biopsy, then they should receive the same follow-up of a patient with a negative biopsy. Further research should confirm whether imaging and biopsies can be avoided if postoperative prostate-specific antigen is low (&lt;1–2 ng/ml). Patient summary: We compared the outcomes of patients with low-grade prostate cancer on active surveillance according to the type of their initial diagnosis. Patients who have low-grade cancer diagnosed on a procedure to relieve urinary symptoms (incidental prostate cancer) are followed less intensively and undergo curative-intended treatment less frequently. We also found that patients with incidental prostate cancer are more likely to have no cancer on their first follow-up biopsy than patients who have low-grade cancer initially diagnosed on a biopsy. These patients have a more favorable prognosis than their biopsy-detected counterparts and should be managed the same way as patients with negative biopsies if they undergo a subsequent biopsy that shows no cancer.</p

Systematic Review of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer to Develop Recommendations Regarding Inclusion of Intermediate-risk Disease, Biopsy Characteristics at Inclusion and Monitoring, and Surveillance Repeat Biopsy Strategy

none38siContext: There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: To perform a qualitative systematic review (SR) to issue recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and repeat biopsy strategy. Evidence acquisition: A protocol-driven, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-adhering SR incorporating AS protocols published from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were criteria for inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, monitoring, reclassification, and repeat biopsy strategies (per protocol and/or triggered). Clinical effectiveness data were not assessed. Evidence synthesis: Of the 17 011 articles identified, 333 studies incorporating 375 AS protocols, recruiting 264 852 patients, were included. Only a minority of protocols included the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for recruitment (n = 17), follow-up (n = 47), and reclassification (n = 26). More than 50% of protocols included patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, whilst 44.1% of protocols excluded low-risk patients with more than three positive cores, and 39% of protocols excluded patients with core involvement (CI) >50% per core. Of the protocols, ≥80% mandated a confirmatory transrectal ultrasound biopsy; 72% (n = 189) of protocols mandated per-protocol repeat biopsies, with 20% performing this annually and 25% every 2 yr. Only 27 protocols (10.3%) mandated triggered biopsies, with 74% of these protocols defining progression or changes on MRI as triggers for repeat biopsy. Conclusions: For AS protocols in which the use of MRI is not mandatory or absent, we recommend the following: (1) AS can be considered in patients with low-volume International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 (three or fewer positive cores and cancer involvement ≤50% CI per core) or another single element of intermediate-risk disease, and patients with ISUP 3 should be excluded; (2) per-protocol confirmatory prostate biopsies should be performed within 2 yr, and per-protocol surveillance repeat biopsies should be performed at least once every 3 yr for the first 10 yr; and (3) for patients with low-volume, low-risk disease at recruitment, if repeat systematic biopsies reveal more than three positive cores or maximum CI >50% per core, they should be monitored closely for evidence of adverse features (eg, upgrading); patients with ISUP 2 disease with increased core positivity and/or CI to similar thresholds should be reclassified. Patient summary: We examined the literature to issue new recommendations on active surveillance (AS) for managing localised prostate cancer. The recommendations include setting criteria for including men with more aggressive disease (intermediate-risk disease), setting thresholds for close monitoring of men with low-risk but more extensive disease, and determining when to perform repeat biopsies (within 2 yr and 3 yearly thereafter).noneWillemse, Peter-Paul M; Davis, Niall F; Grivas, Nikolaos; Zattoni, Fabio; Lardas, Michael; Briers, Erik; Cumberbatch, Marcus G; De Santis, Maria; Dell'Oglio, Paolo; Donaldson, James F; Fossati, Nicola; Gandaglia, Giorgio; Gillessen, Silke; Grummet, Jeremy P; Henry, Ann M; Liew, Matthew; MacLennan, Steven; Mason, Malcolm D; Moris, Lisa; Plass, Karin; O'Hanlon, Shane; Omar, Muhammad Imran; Oprea-Lager, Daniela E; Pang, Karl H; Paterson, Catherine C; Ploussard, Guillaume; Rouvière, Olivier; Schoots, Ivo G; Tilki, Derya; van den Bergh, Roderick C N; Van den Broeck, Thomas; van der Kwast, Theodorus H; van der Poel, Henk G; Wiegel, Thomas; Yuan, Cathy Yuhong; Cornford, Philip; Mottet, Nicolas; Lam, Thomas B LWillemse, Peter-Paul M; Davis, Niall F; Grivas, Nikolaos; Zattoni, Fabio; Lardas, Michael; Briers, Erik; Cumberbatch, Marcus G; De Santis, Maria; Dell'Oglio, Paolo; Donaldson, James F; Fossati, Nicola; Gandaglia, Giorgio; Gillessen, Silke; Grummet, Jeremy P; Henry, Ann M; Liew, Matthew; Maclennan, Steven; Mason, Malcolm D; Moris, Lisa; Plass, Karin; O'Hanlon, Shane; Omar, Muhammad Imran; Oprea-Lager, Daniela E; Pang, Karl H; Paterson, Catherine C; Ploussard, Guillaume; Rouvière, Olivier; Schoots, Ivo G; Tilki, Derya; van den Bergh, Roderick C N; Van den Broeck, Thomas; van der Kwast, Theodorus H; van der Poel, Henk G; Wiegel, Thomas; Yuan, Cathy Yuhong; Cornford, Philip; Mottet, Nicolas; Lam, Thomas B

Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Nomogram Predicting the Outcome of Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy in Patients without Metastases on Restaging Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography

Background and objective: Owing to the greater use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), patient selection for local salvage radiation therapy (sRT) has changed. Our objective was to determine the short-term efficacy of sRT in patients with BCR after RARP, and to develop a novel nomogram predicting BCR-free survival after sRT in a nationwide contemporary cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT before sRT for BCR of PCa, without evidence of metastatic disease. Methods: All 302 eligible patients undergoing PCa sRT in four reference centers between September 2015 and August 2020 were included. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis using a backward elimination procedure to develop a nomogram for predicting biochemical progression of PCa, defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥0.2 ng/ml above the post-sRT nadir within 1 yr after sRT. Key findings and limitations: Biochemical progression of disease within 1 yr after sRT was observed for 56/302 (19%) of the study patients. The final predictive model included PSA at sRT initiation, pathological grade group, surgical margin status, PSA doubling time, presence of local recurrence on PSMA PET/CT, and the presence of biochemical persistence (first PSA result ≥0.1 ng/ml) after RARP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.64–0.79). Using our nomogram, patients with a predicted risk of >20% had a 30.8% chance of developing biochemical progression within 1 yr after sRT. Conclusions: Our novel nomogram may facilitate better patient counseling regarding early oncological outcome after sRT. Patients with high risk of biochemical progression may be candidates for more extensive treatment. Patient summary: We developed a new tool for predicting cancer control outcomes of radiotherapy for patients with recurrence of prostate cancer after surgical removal of their prostate. This tool may help in better counseling of these patients with recurrent cancer regarding their early expected outcome after radiotherapy