Filiberto Zattoni

EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: Treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer ☆

OBJECTIVES Our aim is to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). METHODS The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and the levels of evidence (LEs) and/or grades of recommendation (GR) were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews. RESULTS Luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Although LHRH antagonists decrease testosterone without any testosterone surge, their clinical benefit remains to be determined. Complete androgen blockade has a small survival benefit of about 5%. Intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) results in equivalent oncologic efficacy when compared with continuous androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in well-selected populations. In locally advanced and metastatic PCa, early ADT does not result in a significant survival advantage when compared with delayed ADT. Relapse after local therapy is defined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values >0.2 ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and >2 ng/ml above the nadir after radiation therapy (RT). Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage RT at PSA levels <0.5 ng/ml and salvage RP or cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in radiation failures. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and (11)C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT) are of limited importance if the PSA is <2.5 ng/ml; bone scans and CT can be omitted unless PSA is >20 ng/ml. Follow-up after ADT should include screening for the metabolic syndrome and an analysis of PSA and testosterone levels. Treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) includes second-line hormonal therapy, novel agents, and chemotherapy with docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) every 3 wk. Cabazitaxel as a second-line therapy for relapse after docetaxel might become a future option. Zoledronic acid and denusomab can be used in men with CRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications. CONCLUSION The knowledge in the field of advanced, metastatic, and CRPC is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice. A full version is available at the EAU office or online at www.uroweb.org.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Urinary Continence Recovery After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

CONTEXT Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) was proposed to improve functional outcomes in comparison with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). In the initial RARP series, 12-mo urinary continence recovery rates ranged from 84% to 97%. However, the few available studies comparing RARP with RRP or LRP published before 2008 did not permit any definitive conclusions about the superiority of any one of these techniques in terms of urinary continence recovery. OBJECTIVE The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for urinary incontinence after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve urinary continence recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP in terms of the urinary continence recovery rate. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The Medline search included only a free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy across the title and abstract fields of the records. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publication date from January 1, 2008. Searches of the Embase and Web of Science databases used the same free-text protocol, keywords, and search period. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting urinary continence outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS We analyzed 51 articles reporting urinary continence rates after RARP: 17 case series, 17 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 9 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 8 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12-mo urinary incontinence rates ranged from 4% to 31%, with a mean value of 16% using a no pad definition. Considering a no pad or safety pad definition, the incidence ranged from 8% to 11%, with a mean value of 9%. Age, body mass index, comorbidity index, lower urinary tract symptoms, and prostate volume were the most relevant preoperative predictors of urinary incontinence after RARP. Only a few comparative studies evaluated the impact of different surgical techniques on urinary continence recovery after RARP. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction with or without anterior reconstruction was associated with a small advantage in urinary continence recovery 1 mo after RARP. Only complete reconstruction was associated with a significant advantage in urinary continence 3 mo after RARP (odds ratio [OR]: 0.76; p=0.04). Cumulative analyses showed a better 12-mo urinary continence recovery after RARP in comparison with RRP (OR: 1.53; p=0.03) or LRP (OR: 2.39; p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of urinary incontinence after RARP is influenced by preoperative patient characteristics, surgeon experience, surgical technique, and methods used to collect and report data. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction seems to offer a slight advantage in terms of 1-mo urinary continence recovery. Update of a previous systematic review of literature shows, for the first time, a statistically significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with both RRP and LRP in terms of 12-mo urinary continence recovery.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Potency Rates After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND Although the initial robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) series showed 12-mo potency rates ranging from 70% to 80%, the few available comparative studies did not permit any definitive conclusion about the superiority of this technique when compared with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). OBJECTIVES The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the current prevalence and the potential risk factors of erectile dysfunction after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve the rate of potency recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting potency recovery outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS We analyzed 15 case series, 6 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 6 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 4 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12- and 24-mo potency rates ranged from 54% to 90% and from 63% to 94%, respectively. Age, baseline potency status, comorbidities index, and extension of the nerve-sparing procedure represent the most relevant preoperative and intraoperative predictors of potency recovery after RARP. Available data seem to support the use of cautery-free dissection or the use of pinpointed low-energy cauterization. Cumulative analyses showed better 12-mo potency rates after RARP in comparison with RRP (odds ratio [OR]: 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46-5.43; p=0.002). Only a nonstatistically significant trend in favor of RARP was reported after comparison with LRP (OR: 1.89; p=0.21). CONCLUSIONS The incidence of potency recovery after RARP is influenced by numerous factors. Data coming from the present systematic review support the use of a cautery-free technique. This update of previous systematic reviews of the literature showed, for the first time, a significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with RRP in terms of 12-mo potency rates.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Oncologic Outcome After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

CONTEXT Despite the large diffusion of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), literature and data on the oncologic outcome of RARP are limited. OBJECTIVE Evaluate lymph node yield, positive surgical margins (PSMs), use of adjuvant therapy, and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival following RARP and perform a cumulative analysis of all studies comparing the oncologic outcomes of RARP and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic review of the literature was performed in August 2011, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publications dating from January 1, 2008. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v.4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 11.0 SE software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS We retrieved 79 papers evaluating oncologic outcomes following RARP. The mean PSM rate was 15% in all comers and 9% in pathologically localized cancers, with some tumor characteristics being the most relevant predictors of PSMs. Several surgeon-related characteristics or procedure-related issues may play a major role in PSM rates. With regard to BCR, the very few papers with a follow-up duration >5 yr demonstrated 7-yr BCR-free survival estimates of approximately 80%. Finally, all the cumulative analyses comparing RARP with RRP and comparing RARP with LRP demonstrated similar overall PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: odds ratio [OR]: 1.21; p=0.19; RARP vs LRP: OR: 1.12; p=0.47), pT2 PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: OR: 1.25; p=0.31; RARP vs LRP: OR: 0.99; p=0.97), and BCR-free survival estimates (RARP vs RRP: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.9; p=0.526; RARP vs LRP: HR: 0.5; p=0.141), regardless of the surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS PSM rates are similar following RARP, RRP, and LRP. The few data available on BCR from high-volume centers are promising, but definitive comparisons with RRP or LRP are not currently possible. Finally, significant data on cancer-specific mortality are not currently available.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

CONTEXT Perioperative complications are a major surgical outcome for radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE Evaluate complication rates following robot-assisted RP (RARP), risk factors for complications after RARP, and surgical techniques to improve complication rates after RARP. We also performed a cumulative analysis of all studies comparing RARP with retropubic RP (RRP) or laparoscopic RP (LRP) in terms of perioperative complications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic review of the literature was performed in August 2011, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publications dating from January 1, 2008. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v.4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS We retrieved 110 papers evaluating oncologic outcomes following RARP. Overall mean operative time is 152 min; mean blood loss is 166 ml; mean transfusion rate is 2%; mean catheterization time is 6.3 d; and mean in-hospital stay is 1.9 d. The mean complication rate was 9%, with most of the complications being of low grade. Lymphocele/lymphorrea (3.1%), urine leak (1.8%), and reoperation (1.6%) are the most prevalent surgical complications. Blood loss (weighted mean difference: 582.77; p<0.00001) and transfusion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 7.55; p<0.00001) were lower in RARP than in RRP, whereas only transfusion rate (OR: 2.56; p=0.005) was lower in RARP than in LRP. All the other analyzed parameters were similar, regardless of the surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS RARP can be performed routinely with a relatively small risk of complications. Surgical experience, clinical patient characteristics, and cancer characteristics may affect the risk of complications. Cumulative analyses demonstrated that blood loss and transfusion rates were significantly lower with RARP than with RRP, and transfusion rates were lower with RARP than with LRP, although all other features were similar regardless of the surgical approach.

Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aim The increase of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is the most sensitive tool for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) recurrence, although this measure cannot distinguish between local, regional, or distant recurrence. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 18F-choline and 11C-choline PET or PET/CT in detection of locoregional or distant metastases in PCa. Materials and Methods Medline, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar search was carried out in order to select English-language articles dealing with diagnostic performance of both 18F-choline and 11C-choline PET for the detection of PCa recurrence after RP or EBRT. Articles were included only if absolute numbers of true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative test results were available or derivable from the text and regarded local, lymph node, and distant metastases. Reviews, clinical reports, and editorial articles were excluded. All complete studies were re-analyzed thus performing a quantitative analysis. Results From the years 2000 to 2012, we found 53 complete articles that critically evaluated the role of choline PET in restaging patients with PCa recurrence. The meta-analysis was carried out and dealt with 19 selected studies (12 studies for all sites of disease, 3 for lymph node metastases, and 4 for local recurrence), with a total of 1555 patients. The meta-analysis provided a pooled sensitivity of 85.6% (95% CI: 82.9%–88.1%) and pooled specificity of 92.6% (95% CI: 90.1%–94.6%) for all sites of disease (prostatic fossa, lymph nodes, and bone), a pooled sensitivity of 75.4% (95% CI: 66.9%–82.6%) and pooled specificity of 82% (95% CI: 68.6%–91.4%) for prostatic fossa recurrence, and a pooled sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 90.5%–100%) and pooled specificity of 81.8% (95% CI: 48.2%–97.7%) for lymph node metastases. The heterogeneity ranged between 0.00% and 88.6%. The diagnostic odds ratios were 62.123 (95% CI: 24.783–155.72), 5.869 (95% CI: 1.818–18.946), and 138.57 (95% CI: 11.27–1703.8), respectively, for all sites of disease, local recurrence, and lymph node disease. Conclusions Choline PET and PET/CT represent high sensitivity and specificity techniques for the detection of locoregional and distant metastases in PCa patients with recurrence of disease. Moreover, a high diagnostic odds ratio was found for the identification of lymph node disease in patients with biochemical recurrence of PCa.

Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT Determination of tumour involvement of regional lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) is of key importance for the proper planning of treatment. OBJECTIVES To provide a critical overview of published reports and to perform a meta-analysis about the diagnostic performance of 18F-choline and 11C-choline positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/computed tomography (CT) in the lymph node staging of PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A Medline, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar search was carried out to select English-language articles published before January 2012 that discussed the diagnostic performance of choline PET to individualise lymph node disease at initial staging in PCa patients. Articles were included only if absolute numbers of true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative test results were available or derivable from the text and focused on lymph node metastases. Reviews, clinical reports, and editorial articles were excluded. All complete studies were reviewed; thus qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS From the year 2000 to January 2012, we found 18 complete articles that critically evaluated the role of choline PET and PCa at initial staging. The meta-analysis was carried out and consisted of 10 selected studies with a total of 441 patients. The meta-analysis provided the following results: pooled sensitivity 49.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.9-58.4) and pooled specificity 95% (95% CI, 92-97.1). The area under the curve was 0.9446 (p<0.05). The heterogeneity ranged between 22.7% and 78.4%. The diagnostic odds ratio was 18.999 (95% CI, 7.109-50.773). CONCLUSIONS Choline PET and PET/CT provide low sensitivity in the detection of lymph node metastases prior to surgery in PCa patients. A high specificity has been reported from the overall studies. Studies carried out on a larger scale with a homogeneous patient population together with the evaluation of cost effectiveness are warranted.

Simple Enucleation is Equivalent to Traditional Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Nonrandomized, Retrospective, Comparative Study

PURPOSE The excision of the renal tumor with a substantial margin of healthy parenchyma is considered the gold standard technique for partial nephrectomy. However, simple enucleation showed excellent results in some retrospective series. We compared the oncologic outcomes after standard partial nephrectomy and simple enucleation. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 982 patients who underwent standard partial nephrectomy and 537 who had simple enucleation for localized renal cell carcinoma at 16 academic centers between 1997 and 2007. Local recurrence, cancer specific survival and progression-free survival were the main outcomes of this study. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival functions and differences were assessed with the log rank statistic. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models addressed progression-free survival and cancer specific survival. RESULTS Median followup of the patients undergoing traditional partial nephrectomy and simple enucleation was 51 ± 37.8 and 54.4 ± 36 months, respectively (p = 0.08). The 5 and 10-year progression-free survival estimates were 88.9 and 82% after standard partial nephrectomy, and 91.4% and 90.8% after simple enucleation (p = 0.09). The 5 and 10-year cancer specific survival estimates were 93.9% and 91.6% after standard partial nephrectomy, and 94.3% and 93.2% after simple enucleation (p = 0.94). On multivariable analysis the adopted nephron sparing surgery technique was not an independent predictor of progression-free survival (HR 0.8, p = 0.55) and cancer specific survival (HR 0.7, p = 0.53) when adjusted for the effect of the other covariates. CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge this is the first multicenter, comparative study showing oncologic equivalence of standard partial nephrectomy and simple enucleation.

Elective partial nephrectomy is equivalent to radical nephrectomy in patients with clinical T1 renal cell carcinoma: results of a retrospective, comparative, multi‐institutional study

Study Type – Therapy (cohort)

A multicentre matched‐pair analysis comparing robot‐assisted versus open partial nephrectomy

To compare the perioperative, pathological and functional outcomes in two contemporary, large series of patients in different institutions and who underwent open partial nephrectomy (OPN) or robot‐assisted PN (RAPN) for suspected renal tumours.