| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Cornford, Philip, et al.
(författare)
-
EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2024 Update. Part I: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent.
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European urology. - 1873-7560.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines provide recommendations for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). This paper aims to present a summary of the 2024 version of the EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised PCa.The panel performed a literature review of all new data published in English, covering the time frame between May 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated, and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is considered, a combination of targeted and regional biopsies should be performed. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography imaging is the most sensitive technique for identifying metastatic spread. Active surveillance is the appropriate management for men with low-risk PCa, as well as for selected favourable intermediate-risk patients with International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A recommendation to consider hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term intensified hormonal treatment.The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.This article is the summary of the guidelines for "curable" prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is "found" through a multistep risk-based screening process. The objective is to find as many men as possible with a curable cancer. Prostate cancer is curable if it resides in the prostate; it is then classified into low-, intermediary-, and high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. These risk classes are the basis of the treatments. Low-risk prostate cancer is treated with "active surveillance", a treatment with excellent prognosis. For low-intermediary-risk active surveillance should also be discussed as an option. In other cases, active treatments, surgery, or radiation treatment should be discussed along with the potential side effects to allow shared decision-making.
|
|
| 3. |
- Marra, Giancarlo, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of Epithelial Histological Types, Subtypes, and Growth Patterns on Oncological Outcomes for Patients with Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Treated with Curative Intent: A Systematic Review.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: European urology. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 84:1, s. 65-85
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The optimal management for men with prostate cancer (PCa) with unconventional histology (UH) is unknown. The outcome for these cancers might be worse than for conventional PCa and so different approaches may be needed.To compare oncological outcomes for conventional and UH PCa in men with localized disease treated with curative intent.A systematic review adhering to the Referred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022296013) was performed in July 2021.We screened 3651 manuscripts and identified 46 eligible studies (reporting on 1871814 men with conventional PCa and 6929 men with 10 different PCa UHs). Extraprostatic extension and lymph node metastases, but not positive margin rates, were more common with UH PCa than with conventional tumors. PCa cases with cribriform pattern, intraductal carcinoma, or ductal adenocarcinoma had higher rates of biochemical recurrence and metastases after radical prostatectomy than for conventional PCa cases. Lower cancer-specific survival rates were observed for mixed cribriform/intraductal and cribriform PCa. By contrast, pathological findings and oncological outcomes for mucinous and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like PCa were similar to those for conventional PCa. Limitations of this review include low-quality studies, a risk of reporting bias, and a scarcity of studies that included radiotherapy.Intraductal, cribriform, and ductal UHs may have worse oncological outcomes than for conventional and mucinous or PIN-like PCa. Alternative treatment approaches need to be evaluated in men with these cancers.We reviewed the literature to explore whether prostate cancers with unconventional growth patterns behave differently to conventional prostate cancers. We found that some unconventional growth patterns have worse outcomes, so we need to investigate if they need different treatments. Urologists should be aware of these growth patterns and their clinical impact.
|
|
| 4. |
- Slevin, Finbar, et al.
(författare)
-
A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Toxicity of Brachytherapy Boost Combined with External Beam Radiotherapy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: European urology oncology. - 2588-9311.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The optimum use of brachytherapy (BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localised/locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) remains uncertain.To perform a systematic review to determine the benefits and harms of EBRT-BT.Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM Reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1, 2000 and June 7, 2022, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Eligible studies compared low- or high-dose-rate EBRT-BT against EBRT±androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or radical prostatectomy (RP)±postoperative radiotherapy (RP±EBRT). The main outcomes were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), severe late genitourinary (GU)/gastrointestinal toxicity, metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS), at/beyond 5 yr. Risk of bias was assessed and confounding assessment was performed. A meta-analysis was performed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Seventy-three studies were included (two RCTs, seven prospective studies, and 64 retrospective studies). Most studies included participants with intermediate-or high-risk PCa. Most studies, including both RCTs, used ADT with EBRT-BT. Generally, EBRT-BT was associated with improved bPFS compared with EBRT, but similar MFS, CSS, and OS. A meta-analysis of the two RCTs showed superior bPFS with EBRT-BT (estimated fixed-effect hazard ratio [HR] 0.54 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.40-0.72], p<0.001), with absolute improvements in bPFS at 5-6 yr of 4.9-16%. However, no difference was seen for MFS (HR 0.84 [95% CI 0.53-1.28], p=0.4) or OS (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.63-1.19], p=0.4). Fewer studies examined RP±EBRT. There is an increased risk of severe late GU toxicity, especially with low-dose-rate EBRT-BT, with some evidence of increased prevalence of severe GU toxicity at 5-6 yr of 6.4-7% across the two RCTs.EBRT-BT can be considered for unfavourable intermediate/high-risk localised/locally advanced PCa in patients with good urinary function, although the strength of this recommendation based on the European Association of Urology guideline methodology is weak given that it is based on improvements in biochemical control.We found good evidence that radiotherapy combined with brachytherapy keeps prostate cancer controlled for longer, but it could lead to worse urinary side effects than radiotherapy without brachytherapy, and its impact on cancer spread and patient survival is less clear.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Bottke, Dirk, et al.
(författare)
-
Adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy
- 2007
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer Supplements. - 1359-6349. ; 5:5, s. 171-176
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Within 5 years following radical prostatectomy, between 15 and 60% of patients with pT3 prostate carcinomas show an increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a sign of local and/or systemic tumour progression. Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for positive margins (RI) aims to reduce residual tumour cells in the prostatic bed, thus possibly reducing the biochemical progression rate. Apart from a large number of retrospective investigations, available results are presented from three randomised studies which have either been published completely (or in abstract form). Results: For pT3 prostate carcinomas, agreeing data are presented from three randomised studies, which show around a 20% reduced biochemical progression rate (bNED) after 4 to 5 years. With these data the results of numerous retrospective studies were confirmed. The majority of the authors used total doses of 60 Gy. From one randomised study an increased local control rate was demonstrated as basis for the extended freedom of biochemical progression. The rate of acute and late side effects after three-dimensional (3-D) planned radiotherapy with 60 Gy is very small and the rate of severe side effects is below 2%. The data situation for pT2 prostate carcinomas with positive margins is worse. Here, controversial data are presented, which require further investigation. Only retrospective data demonstrated a 25% advantage for adjuvant RT. Therefore, adjuvant radiotherapy also seems reasonable for pT-2 carcinomas with positive margins. Conclusions: The effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with pT-3 tumours with positive margins with and without undetectable PSA levels with 60 Gy total dose has been demonstrated. A survival advantage has not been shown until now. 3-D treatment planning remains the standard technique for these patients. For patients with positive margins in organ-limited prostate carcinomas (pT2 R 1) randomised studies are recommended. It remains unclear whether the adjuvant RT is superior to the radiotherapy for rising PSA levels out of the undetectable range after radical prostatectomy.
|
|
| 7. |
- Budäus, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Functional Outcomes and Complications Following Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer : A Critical Analysis of the Literature
- 2012
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - Basel : Karger. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 61:1, s. 112-127
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- CONTEXT: Prostate cancer (PCa) patients have many options within the realms of surgery or radiation therapy (RT). Technical advancements in RT planning and delivery have yielded different approaches, such as external beam, brachytherapy, and newer approaches such as image-guided tomotherapy or volumetric-modulated arc therapy. The selection of the optimal RT treatment for the individual is still a point of discussion, and the debate centres on two important outcomes-namely, cancer control and reduction of side-effects. OBJECTIVE: To critically review and summarise the available literature on functional outcomes and rectal sequelae following RT for PCa treatment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A review of the literature published between 1999 and 2010 was performed using Medline and Scopus search. Relevant reports were identified using the terms prostate cancer, radiotherapy, functional outcomes, external beam radiation, brachytherapy, IMRT, quality of life, and tomotherapy and were critically reviewed and summarised. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Related to nonuniform definition of their assessed functional end points and uneven standards of reporting, only a minority of series retrieved could be selected for analyses. Moreover, patterns of patient selection for different types of RT, inherent differences in the RT modalities, and the presence or absence of hormonal treatment also limit the ability to synthesise results from different publications or perform meta-analyses across the different treatment types. Nonetheless, several studies agree that recent technical improvements in the field of RT planning and delivery enable the administration of higher doses with equal or less toxicity. Regardless of the type of RT, the most frequently considered functional end points in the published analyses are gastrointestinal (GI) complications and rectal bleeding. Established risk factors for acute or late toxicities after RT include advanced age, larger rectal volume, a history of prior abdominal surgery, the concomitant use of androgen deprivation, preexisting diabetes mellitus, haemorrhoids, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Similarly, mild acute irritative urinary symptoms are reported in several studies, whereas total urinary incontinence and other severe urinary symptoms are rare. Pretreatment genitourinary complaints, prior transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), and the presence of acute genitourinary toxicity are suggested as contributing to long-term urinary morbidity. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is not an immediate side-effect of RT, and the occurrence of spontaneous erections before treatment is the best predictor for preserving erections sufficient for intercourse. In addition, the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) permits a reduction in the dose delivered to vascular structures critical for erectile function. CONCLUSIONS: In the future, further improvement in RT planning and delivery will decrease side-effects and permit administration of higher doses. Related to the anatomy of the prostate, these higher doses may favour rectal sparing while not readily sparing the urethra and bladder neck. As a consequence, there may be a future shift from dose-limiting long-term rectal morbidity towards long-term urinary morbidity. In the absence of prospective randomised trials comparing different types of surgical and RT-based treatments in PCa, the introduction of validated tools for reporting functional and clinical outcomes is crucial for evaluating and identifying each individual's best treatment choice.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Martin, Neil E, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining a Standard Set of Patient-centered Outcomes for Men with Localized Prostate Cancer
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 67:3, s. 460-467
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Value-based health care has been proposed as a unifying force to drive improved outcomes and cost containment.OBJECTIVE: To develop a standard set of multidimensional patient-centered health outcomes for tracking, comparing, and improving localized prostate cancer (PCa) treatment value.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We convened an international working group of patients, registry experts, urologists, and radiation oncologists to review existing data and practices.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The group defined a recommended standard set representing who should be tracked, what should be measured and at what time points, and what data are necessary to make meaningful comparisons. Using a modified Delphi method over a series of teleconferences, the group reached consensus for the Standard Set.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We recommend that the Standard Set apply to men with newly diagnosed localized PCa treated with active surveillance, surgery, radiation, or other methods. The Standard Set includes acute toxicities occurring within 6 mo of treatment as well as patient-reported outcomes tracked regularly out to 10 yr. Patient-reported domains of urinary incontinence and irritation, bowel symptoms, sexual symptoms, and hormonal symptoms are included, and the recommended measurement tool is the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form. Disease control outcomes include overall, cause-specific, metastasis-free, and biochemical relapse-free survival. Baseline clinical, pathologic, and comorbidity information is included to improve the interpretability of comparisons.CONCLUSIONS: We have defined a simple, easily implemented set of outcomes that we believe should be measured in all men with localized PCa as a crucial first step in improving the value of care.PATIENT SUMMARY: Measuring, reporting, and comparing identical outcomes across treatments and treatment centers will provide patients and providers with information to make informed treatment decisions. We defined a set of outcomes that we recommend being tracked for every man being treated for localized prostate cancer.
|
|
| 11. |
- Witjes, J. Alfred, et al.
(författare)
-
EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer – An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort : Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - : Elsevier. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 77:2, s. 223-250
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.PATIENT SUMMARY: This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.
|
|
