The summary presented herein represents Part I of the two-part series dedicated to Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline discussing prognostic and treatment recommendations for patients ...with biochemical recurrence without metastatic disease after exhaustion of local treatment options as well as those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Please refer to Part II for discussion of the management of castration-resistant disease.
The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1998 to January Week 5 2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through December 2018), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 through February 6, 2019). An updated search was conducted prior to publication through January 20, 2020. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles.
The Advanced Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Such statements are summarized in figure 1Figure: see text and detailed herein.
This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to improve the level of care for these patients.
Prostate cancer harboring BRCA1/2 mutations are often exceptionally sensitive to PARP inhibitors. However, genomic alterations in other DNA damage response genes have not been consistently predictive ...of clinical response to PARP inhibition. Here, we perform genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screens in BRCA1/2-proficient prostate cancer cells and identify previously unknown genes whose loss has a profound impact on PARP inhibitor response. Specifically, MMS22L deletion, frequently observed (up to 14%) in prostate cancer, renders cells hypersensitive to PARP inhibitors by disrupting RAD51 loading required for homologous recombination repair, although this response is TP53-dependent. Unexpectedly, loss of CHEK2 confers resistance rather than sensitivity to PARP inhibition through increased expression of BRCA2, a target of CHEK2-TP53-E2F7-mediated transcriptional repression. Combined PARP and ATR inhibition overcomes PARP inhibitor resistance caused by CHEK2 loss. Our findings may inform the use of PARP inhibitors beyond BRCA1/2-deficient tumors and support reevaluation of current biomarkers for PARP inhibition in prostate cancer.
Androgen receptor (AR) is a ligand-activated transcription factor and a key driver of prostate cancer (PCa) growth and progression. Understanding the factors influencing AR-mediated gene expression ...provides new opportunities for therapeutic intervention. Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase (PARP) is a family of enzymes, which posttranslationally modify a range of proteins and regulate many different cellular processes. PARP-1 and PARP-2 are two well-characterized PARP members, whose catalytic activity is induced by DNA-strand breaks and responsible for multiple DNA damage repair pathways. PARP inhibitors are promising therapeutic agents that show synthetic lethality against many types of cancer (including PCa) with homologous recombination (HR) DNA-repair deficiency. Here, we show that, beyond DNA damage repair function, PARP-2, but not PARP-1, is a critical component in AR transcriptionalmachinery through interacting with the pioneer factor FOXA1 and facilitating AR recruitment to genome-wide prostate-specific enhancer regions. Analyses of PARP-2 expression at both mRNA and protein levels show significantly higher expression of PARP-2 in primary PCa tumors than in benign prostate tissues, and even more so in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) tumors. Selective targeting of PARP-2 by genetic or pharmacological means blocks interaction between PARP-2 and FOXA1, which in turn attenuates AR-mediated gene expression and inhibits AR-positive PCa growth. Next-generation antiandrogens act through inhibiting androgen synthesis (abiraterone) or blocking ligand binding (enzalutamide). Selective targeting of PARP-2, however, may provide an alternative therapeutic approach for AR inhibition by disruption of FOXA1 function, which may be beneficial to patients, irrespective of their DNA-repair deficiency status.
The summary presented herein represents Part II of the two-part series dedicated to Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline discussing prognostic and treatment recommendations for patients ...with castration-resistant disease. Please refer to Part I for discussion of the management of patients with biochemical recurrence without metastatic disease after exhaustion of local treatment options as well as those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.
The Advanced Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Such statements are summarized in figure 1Figure: see text and detailed herein.
The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1998 to January Week 5 2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through December 2018), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 through February 6, 2019). An updated search was conducted prior to publication through January 20, 2020. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles.
This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to improve the level of care for these patients.
Abstract Background Radical cystectomy (RC) is a morbid procedure associated with high costs. Limited population-based data exist on the complication profile and costs of robot-assisted RC (RARC) ...compared with open RC (ORC). Objective To evaluate morbidity and cost differences between ORC and RARC. Design, setting, and participants We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent RC at 279 hospitals across the United States between 2004 and 2010. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Multivariable logistic and median regression was performed to evaluate 90-d mortality, postoperative complications (Clavien classification), readmission rates, length of stay (LOS), and direct costs. To reduce selection bias, we used propensity weighting with survey weighting to obtain nationally representative estimates. Results and limitations The final weighted cohort included 34 672 ORC and 2101 RARC patients. RARC use increased from 0.6% in 2004 to 12.8% in 2010. Major complication rates (Clavien grade ≥3; 17.0% vs 19.8%, p = 0.2) were similar between ORC and RARC (odds ratio OR: 1.32; p = 0.42). RARC had 46% decreased odds of minor complications (Clavien grade 1–2; OR: 0.54; p = 0.03). RARC had $4326 higher adjusted 90-d median direct costs ( p = 0.004). Although RARC had a significantly shorter LOS (11.8 d vs 10.2 d; p = 0.008), no significant differences in room and board costs existed ( p = 0.20). Supply costs for RARC were significantly higher ($6041 vs $3638; p < 0.0001). Morbidity and cost differences were not present among the highest-volume surgeons (≥7 cases per year) and hospitals (≥19 cases per year). Limitations include use of an administrative database and lack of oncologic characteristics. Conclusions The use of RARC has increased between 2004 and 2010. Compared with ORC, RARC was associated with decreased odds of minor but not major complications and with increased expenditures attributed primarily to higher supply costs. Centralization of ORC and RARC to high-volume providers may minimize these morbidity and cost differences. Patient summary Using a US population–based cohort, we found that robotic surgery for bladder cancer decreased minor complications, had no impact on major complications and was more costly than open surgery.
Radical cystectomy is the surgical standard for invasive bladder cancer. Robot-assisted cystectomy has been proposed to provide similar oncological outcomes with lower morbidity. We aimed to compare ...progression-free survival in patients with bladder cancer treated with open cystectomy and robot-assisted cystectomy.
The RAZOR study is a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 15 medical centres in the USA. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) had biopsy-proven clinical stage T1–T4, N0–N1, M0 bladder cancer or refractory carcinoma in situ. Individuals who had previously had open abdominal or pelvic surgery, or who had any pre-existing health conditions that would preclude safe initiation or maintenance of pneumoperitoneum were excluded. Patients were centrally assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with block randomisation by institution, stratified by type of urinary diversion, clinical T stage, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, to receive robot-assisted radical cystectomy or open radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Treatment allocation was only masked from pathologists. The primary endpoint was 2-year progression-free survival, with non-inferiority established if the lower bound of the one-sided 97·5% CI for the treatment difference (robotic cystectomy minus open cystectomy) was greater than −15 percentage points. The primary analysis was done in the per-protocol population. Safety was assessed in the same population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01157676.
Between July 1, 2011, and Nov 18, 2014, 350 participants were randomly assigned to treatment. The intended treatment was robotic cystectomy in 176 patients and open cystectomy in 174 patients. 17 (10%) of 176 patients in the robotic cystectomy group did not have surgery and nine (5%) patients had a different surgery to that they were assigned. 21 (12%) of 174 patients in the open cystectomy group did not have surgery and one (1%) patient had robotic cystectomy instead of open cystectomy. Thus, 302 patients (150 in the robotic cystectomy group and 152 in the open cystectomy group) were included in the per-protocol analysis set. 2-year progression-free survival was 72·3% (95% CI 64·3 to 78·8) in the robotic cystectomy group and 71·6% (95% CI 63·6 to 78·2) in the open cystectomy group (difference 0·7%, 95% CI −9·6% to 10·9%; pnon-inferiority=0·001), indicating non-inferiority of robotic cystectomy. Adverse events occurred in 101 (67%) of 150 patients in the robotic cystectomy group and 105 (69%) of 152 patients in the open cystectomy group. The most common adverse events were urinary tract infection (53 35% in the robotic cystectomy group vs 39 26% in the open cystectomy group) and postoperative ileus (33 22% in the robotic cystectomy group vs 31 20% in the open cystectomy group).
In patients with bladder cancer, robotic cystectomy was non-inferior to open cystectomy for 2-year progression-free survival. Increased adoption of robotic surgery in clinical practice should lead to future randomised trials to assess the true value of this surgical approach in patients with other cancer types.
National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute.
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play important roles in cancer formation and progression by suppressing the production of key functional proteins at the post-transcriptional level in a sequence-specific manner. ...While differential expression of miRNAs is widely observed in cancers including prostate cancer (PCa), how these miRNAs are transcriptionally regulated is largely unknown. MiRNA-221 and miRNA-222 (miR-221/-222) are well-established oncogenes and overexpressed in breast, liver, pancreas, and lung cancer, but their expression and biological functions in PCa remain controversial. Both up and down regulation have been observed in patient samples. Specifically, studies have demonstrated miR-221/-222 function as oncogenes, and promote PCa cell proliferation and the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, the expression level of miR-221/-222 is downregulated in several miRNA expression profiling studies. In this study, we demonstrate miR-221/-222 are androgen receptor (AR)-repressed genes and reside in a long primary transcript (pri-miRNA). Derepression of miR-221/-222 after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may enhance PCa cell proliferation potential through promoting G1/S phase transition. This function is likely transient but important in the development of CRPC. Downregulation of miR-221/-222 subsequently occurs once AR activity is restored through AR overexpression in CRPC. Our findings shed light on the complexity of transcriptional regulation of miRNAs in PCa and suggest context-dependent targeting of oncogenic miRNAs.
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), a cornerstone of treatment for patients with locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, is associated with many adverse effects, including osteoporosis, ...sexual dysfunction, fatigue, and vasomotor symptoms. It is also associated with loss of muscle mass and increased adiposity. This change in body composition is likely the inciting event in the development of insulin resistance, an independent risk factor for diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. Although the occurrence of insulin resistance during ADT has been reported, it remains unclear whether this insulin resistance is primarily hepatic or muscular. Similarly, the mechanisms that lead to insulin resistance also remain unknown. The ADT & Metabolism Study was designed to address these knowledge gaps, as the elucidation of the predominant site of insulin resistance will allow prevention strategies and the use of targeted, tissue-specific insulin-sensitizing agents in patients undergoing ADT. This prospective, mechanistic, single-center, 24-week, observational cohort study will enroll treatment-naïve adult men with prostate cancer about to undergo surgical or medical ADT for at least 24 weeks (ADT group; n = 50) and a control group of men who had undergone radical prostatectomy and are in remission (non-ADT group, n = 25). The primary outcome is to determine the site of insulin resistance (skeletal muscle or liver) using frequent sampling oral glucose tolerance test at baseline and 12 and 24 weeks after commencement of ADT (ADT group) or after enrollment in the study (non-ADT group). Secondary outcomes will assess changes in hepatic and intramyocellular fat (using magnetic resonance spectroscopy), inflammatory markers, adipokines, free fatty acids, and changes in body composition (assessed using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) and their correlation with the development of insulin resistance. Exploratory outcomes will include changes in muscle performance, physical function, physical activity, vitality, and sexual drive.
PDF
