-
European Urology Apr 2020Accurate staging of high-risk localised, advanced, and metastatic prostate cancer is becoming increasingly more important in guiding local and systemic treatment.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Gallium-68 Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Advanced Prostate Cancer-Updated Diagnostic Utility, Sensitivity, Specificity, and Distribution of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-avid Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Accurate staging of high-risk localised, advanced, and metastatic prostate cancer is becoming increasingly more important in guiding local and systemic treatment. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) has increasingly been utilised globally to assess the local and metastatic burden of prostate cancer, typically in biochemically recurrent or advanced disease. Following our previous meta-analysis, a high-volume series has been reported highlighting the utility of Ga-PSMA PET in this setting.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to update reported predictors of positive Ga-PSMA PET according to prior therapy and proportion of positivity in various anatomical locations with sensitivity and specificity profiles.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed critical reviews of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Libraries, and Web of Science databases in July 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Quality assessment was performed using Quality Assessment if Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Meta-analyses of proportions were performed using a random-effect model. Summary sensitivity and specificity values were obtained by fitting bivariate hierarchical regression models.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 37 articles including 4790 patients were analysed. For patients with biochemical recurrence, positive Ga-PSMA PET scans increased with higher pre-PET prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. For PSA categories 0-0.19, 0.2-0.49, 0.5-0.99, 1-1.99, and ≥2ng/ml, the percentages of positive scans were 33%, 45%, 59%, 75%, and 95%, respectively. No significant differences in positivity were noted between Gleason sums ≤7 and ≥8. Significant differences in positivity after biochemical recurrence in the prostate bed were noted between radical prostatectomy (22%) and radiotherapy (52%) patients. On per-node analysis, high sensitivity (75%) and specificity (99%) were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Ga-68-PSMA PET improves detection of metastases with biochemical recurrence, particularly at low pre-PET PSA levels of >0.2ng/ml (33%) and 0.2-0.5ng/ml (45%). Ga-68-PSMA-PET produces favourable sensitivity and specificity profiles on meta-analysis of pooled data. This analysis highlights different anatomic patterns of metastatic spread according to PSMA PET in the primary and biochemically recurrent settings.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography is now an established imaging technique that has been developed in response to inadequacies in standard of care imaging modalities to improve the detection of metastatic disease in prostate cancer, particularly in the setting of disease recurrence. To date, this imaging modality in the setting of primary staging is controversial, given the paucity of data. In light of the growing body of evidence, we summarised the data to date to provide clinicians with an overview of this imaging modality.
Topics: Antigens, Surface; Edetic Acid; Gallium Isotopes; Gallium Radioisotopes; Glutamate Carboxypeptidase II; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Staging; Oligopeptides; Positron-Emission Tomography; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiopharmaceuticals; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 30773328
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049 -
European Urology Jul 2017There is controversy regarding the therapeutic role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa). (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
There is controversy regarding the therapeutic role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa).
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the relevant literature assessing the relative benefits and harms of PLND for oncological and non-oncological outcomes in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for PCa.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to December 2015. Comparative studies evaluating no PLND, limited, standard, and (super)-extended PLND that reported oncological and non-oncological outcomes were included. Risk-of-bias and confounding assessments were performed. A narrative synthesis was undertaken.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Overall, 66 studies recruiting a total of 275,269 patients were included (44 full-text articles and 22 conference abstracts). Oncological outcomes were addressed by 29 studies, one of which was a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Non-oncological outcomes were addressed by 43 studies, three of which were RCTs. There were high risks of bias and confounding in most studies. Conflicting results emerged when comparing biochemical and clinical recurrence, while no significant differences were observed among groups for survival. Conversely, the majority of studies showed that the more extensive the PLND, the greater the adverse outcomes in terms of operating time, blood loss, length of stay, and postoperative complications. No significant differences were observed in terms of urinary continence and erectile function recovery.
CONCLUSIONS
Although representing the most accurate staging procedure, PLND and its extension are associated with worse intraoperative and perioperative outcomes, whereas a direct therapeutic effect is still not evident from the current literature. The current poor quality of evidence indicates the need for robust and adequately powered clinical trials.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, this article summarizes the benefits and harms of removing lymph nodes during surgery to remove the prostate because of PCa. Although the quality of the data from the studies was poor, the review suggests that lymph node removal may not have any direct benefit on cancer outcomes and may instead result in more complications. Nevertheless, the procedure remains justified because it enables accurate assessment of cancer spread.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Lymph Nodes; Lymphatic Metastasis; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Grading; Neoplasm Staging; Odds Ratio; Postoperative Complications; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28126351
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003 -
International Braz J Urol : Official... 2022Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common oncologic disease among men. Radical treatment with curative intent provides good oncological results for PCa survivors,... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common oncologic disease among men. Radical treatment with curative intent provides good oncological results for PCa survivors, although definitive therapy is associated with significant number of serious side-effects. In modern-era of medicine tissue-sparing techniques, such as focal HIFU, have been proposed for PCa patients in order to provide cancer control equivalent to the standard-of-care procedures while reducing morbidities and complications. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence about focal HIFU therapy as a primary treatment for localized PCa.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive literature review of focal HIFU therapy in the MEDLINE database (PROSPERO: CRD42021235581). Articles published in the English language between 2010 and 2020 with more than 50 patients were included.
RESULTS
Clinically significant in-field recurrence and out-of-field progression were detected to 22% and 29% PCa patients, respectively. Higher ISUP grade group, more positive cores at biopsy and bilateral disease were identified as the main risk factors for disease recurrence. The most common strategy for recurrence management was definitive therapy. Six months after focal HIFU therapy 98% of patients were totally continent and 80% of patients retained sufficient erections for sexual intercourse. The majority of complications presented in the early postoperative period and were classified as low-grade.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights that focal HIFU therapy appears to be a safe procedure, while short-term cancer control rate is encouraging. Though, second-line treatment or active surveillance seems to be necessary in a significant number of patients.
Topics: Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prostatic Neoplasms; Salvage Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasound, High-Intensity Focused, Transrectal
PubMed: 34003610
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2021.0091 -
European Urology Jun 2019In men with prostate cancer (PCa) treated with curative intent, controversy exists regarding the impact of biochemical recurrence (BCR) on oncological outcomes. (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
In men with prostate cancer (PCa) treated with curative intent, controversy exists regarding the impact of biochemical recurrence (BCR) on oncological outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review of the existing literature on BCR after treatment with curative intent for nonmetastatic PCa. Objective 1 is to investigate whether oncological outcomes differ between patients with or without BCR. Objective 2 is to study which clinical factors and tumor features in patients with BCR have an independent prognostic impact on oncological outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. For objective 1, prospective and retrospective studies comparing survival outcomes of patients with or without BCR following radical prostatectomy (RP) or radical radiotherapy (RT) were included. For objective 2, all studies with at least 100 participants and reporting on prognostic patient and tumor characteristics in patients with BCR were included. Risk-of-bias and confounding assessments were performed according to the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Both a narrative synthesis and a meta-analysis were undertaken.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Overall, 77 studies were included for analysis, of which 14 addressed objective 1, recruiting 20 406 patients. Objective 2 was addressed by 71 studies with 29 057, 11 301, and 4272 patients undergoing RP, RT, and a mixed population (mix of patients undergoing RP or RT as primary treatment), respectively. There was a low risk of bias for study participation, confounders, and statistical analysis. For most studies, attrition bias, and prognostic and outcome measurements were not clearly reported. BCR was associated with worse survival rates, mainly in patients with short prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSA-DT) and a high final Gleason score after RP, or a short interval to biochemical failure (IBF) after RT and a high biopsy Gleason score.
CONCLUSIONS
BCR has an impact on survival, but this effect appears to be limited to a subgroup of patients with specific clinical risk factors. Short PSA-DT and a high final Gleason score after RP, and a short IBF after RT and a high biopsy Gleason score are the main factors that have a negative impact on survival. These factors may form the basis of new BCR risk stratification (European Association of Urology BCR Risk Groups), which needs to be validated formally.
PATIENT SUMMARY
This review looks at the risk of death in men who shows rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in the blood test performed after curative surgery or radiotherapy. For many men, rising PSA does not mean that they are at a high risk of death from prostate cancer in the longer term. Men with PSA that rises shortly after they were treated with radiotherapy or rapidly rising PSA after surgery and a high tumor grade for both treatment modalities are at the highest risk of death. These factors may form the basis of new risk stratification (European Association of Urology biochemical recurrence Risk Groups), which needs to be validated formally.
Topics: Humans; Kallikreins; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prognosis; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms; Survival Rate
PubMed: 30342843
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.011 -
International Archives of Occupational... Mar 2024The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the association between night work and the development of prostate cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the association between night work and the development of prostate cancer.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies were included based on a PECOS; the population included men in/above the working age, exposure defined as night work, outcome defined as prostate cancer, and study design restricted to cohort studies. The exclusion of articles, risk-of-bias assessment, and data extraction were performed by two reviewers. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model, including a sensitivity analysis stratified based on the risk-of-bias assessment. We evaluated publication bias using a funnel plot and Egger´s test, and the level of evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS
A total of 528 articles were identified, and eight cohort studies were included. Three studies had a moderate risk of bias, while five studies had a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 1.0 (95% CI 0.6-1.7). In the sensitivity analysis, moderate vs. high risk-of-bias studies showed a pooled HR of 1.2 (95% CI 0.3-4.1) and 0.9 (95% CI 0.6-1.3), respectively. Based on GRADE, the level of evidence was rated low.
CONCLUSION
We found no association between night work and the development of prostate cancer. The evidence was assessed as limited and inconsistent. Future studies encompassing consistent definitions of night work, including objective exposure data, are highly warranted.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms; Cohort Studies
PubMed: 38175230
DOI: 10.1007/s00420-023-02037-9 -
Cancer Epidemiology Aug 2022Since the 1990s, most nations have had a reduction or stabilisation in prostate cancer mortality. However, socioeconomic differences in disease specific mortality and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Since the 1990s, most nations have had a reduction or stabilisation in prostate cancer mortality. However, socioeconomic differences in disease specific mortality and survival have persisted. This has been partially attributed to differences in treatment choices. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to describe and quantify socioeconomic differences in use of prostate cancer treatment in the literature.
METHODS
MEDLINE, CINAHL and Embase were searched from 01 January 2000-01 April 2021 to identify articles that reported use of prostate cancer treatment by socioeconomic status. Random effects meta-analysis was used to analyse socioeconomic differences in treatment where there was more than one study for treatment type. A modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias.
RESULTS
Out of 7267 articles identified, eight met the inclusion criteria and six were analysed using meta-analysis. Meta-analysis could only be completed for non-active treatment (watchful waiting/active surveillance). Lower education was associated with non-active treatment (OR=0.90, [95% CI 0.83-0.98], p=0.02, I=67%), however, level of income was not (OR=0.87, [CI 0.75-1.02], p=0.08, I=94%). Sensitivity analysis of studies where active surveillance was the outcome (n=3), indicated no associations with level of income (OR=0.91, [95% CI 0.82-1.01], p=0.08, I=52%) or education (OR=0.88, [95% CI 0.70-1.10], p=0.25, I=79%). All studies were assessed as high-risk of bias.
DISCUSSION
The relationship between socioeconomic status and prostate cancer treatment depended on the socioeconomic variable being used, the treatment type and how it was defined in research. Considerable methodological limitations were identified. Further research should improve on previous findings and address current gaps.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Socioeconomic Factors
PubMed: 35526516
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102164 -
International Journal of Urology :... Mar 2016It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen... (Review)
Review
It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen deprivation therapy to patients on development of symptomatic progression, whereas active surveillance entails delivering curative treatment on signs of disease progression. The objectives of the two management strategies and the patients enrolled in either are different: (i) to review the role of active surveillance as a management strategy for patients with low-risk prostate cancer; and (ii) review the benefits and pitfalls of active surveillance. We carried out a systematic review of active surveillance for prostate cancer in the literature using the National Center for Biotechnology Information's electronic database, PubMed. We carried out a search in English using the terms: active surveillance, prostate cancer, watchful waiting and conservative management. Selected studies were required to have a comprehensive description of the demographic and disease characteristics of the patients at the time of diagnosis, inclusion criteria for surveillance, and a protocol for the patients' follow up. Review articles were included, but not multiple papers from the same datasets. Active surveillance appears to reduce overtreatment in patients with low-risk prostate cancer without compromising cancer-specific survival at 10 years. Therefore, active surveillance is an option for select patients who want to avoid the side-effects inherent to the different types of immediate treatment. However, inclusion criteria for active surveillance and the most appropriate method of monitoring patients on active surveillance have not yet been standardized.
Topics: Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Disease Progression; Humans; Male; Medical Overuse; Neoplasm Grading; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 26621054
DOI: 10.1111/iju.13016 -
Panminerva Medica Sep 2022Emerging evidence supports the hypothesis that metabolic syndrome is associated with cancer pathogenesis. In particular regarding prostate cancer, observational studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Emerging evidence supports the hypothesis that metabolic syndrome is associated with cancer pathogenesis. In particular regarding prostate cancer, observational studies from various settings report different results. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a quantitative estimate of the association between metabolic syndrome in prostate cancer, in particular Gleason Score >6, accounting for different study designs.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Systematic research of available literature in English language until 2020 was conducted through in Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library and NIH Registry of Clinical Trials. For each study, information regarding the study design, the population, the definition of metabolic syndrome, data relating to prostate cancer were collected, the association between MetS and outcome of interest was determined by calculating the generic inverse variance with random effects method.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
In the final sample 19 studies were included with total of 114,329 patients, 29.4% met the criteria for metabolic syndrome. We report a significant association between metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer in cross-sectional studies (OR=1.30; 95% CI: 1.13-1.49) and for patients with clinically significant prostate cancer (OR=1.56; 95% CI: 1.23-1.99). Association between metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer combining all studies, in cohort studies and case-control studies was not significant.
CONCLUSIONS
Growing evidence support the association between metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer, bias derived from observational studies might conceal further findings.
Topics: Case-Control Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Male; Metabolic Syndrome; Neoplasm Grading; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 34859640
DOI: 10.23736/S0031-0808.21.04507-9 -
Scientific Reports Nov 2016Previous studies have reported controversial results on the association between tomato consumption and prostate cancer risk. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Previous studies have reported controversial results on the association between tomato consumption and prostate cancer risk. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate this relationship. A total of 24 published studies with 15,099 cases were included. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. Tomato intake was associated with a reduced risk of prostate cancer (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98, P = 0.019; P < 0.001 for heterogeneity, I = 72.7%). When stratified by study design, the RRs for case-control and cohort studies were 0.76 (95% CI 0.61-0.94, P = 0.010) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.84-1.10, P = 0.579), respectively. In the subgroup analysis by geographical region, significant protective effects were observed in Asian (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.22-0.85, P = 0.015) and Oceania populations (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99, P = 0.035), but not in other geographical populations. Begg's test indicated a significant publication bias (P = 0.015). Overall, tomato intake may have a weak protective effect against prostate cancer. Because of the huge heterogeneity and null results in cohort studies, further prospective studies are needed to explore the potential relationship between tomato consumption and prostate cancer risk.
Topics: Food Preferences; Humans; Solanum lycopersicum; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Vegetables
PubMed: 27841367
DOI: 10.1038/srep37091 -
The Oncologist Jul 2021Prostate cancer remains the leading diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of death among American men. Despite improvements in screening modalities, diagnostics,...
Prostate cancer remains the leading diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of death among American men. Despite improvements in screening modalities, diagnostics, and treatment, disparities exist among Black men in this country. The primary objective of this systematic review is to describe the reported disparities in screening, diagnostics, and treatments as well as efforts to alleviate these disparities through community and educational outreach efforts. Critical review took place of retrospective, prospective, and socially descriptive data of English language publications in the PubMed database. Despite more advanced presentation, lower rates of screening and diagnostic procedures, and low rates of trial inclusion, subanalyses have shown that various modalities of therapy are quite effective in Black populations. Moreover, patients treated on prospective clinical trials and within equal-access care environments have shown similar outcomes regardless of race. Additional prospective studies and enhanced participation in screening, diagnostic and genetic testing, clinical trials, and community-based educational endeavors are important to ensure equitable progress in prostate cancer for all patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Notable progress has been made with therapeutic advances for prostate cancer, but racial disparities continue to exist. Differing rates in screening and utility in diagnostic procedures play a role in these disparities. Black patients often present with more advanced disease, higher prostate-specific antigen, and other adverse factors, but outcomes can be attenuated in trials or in equal-access care environments. Recent data have shown that multiple modalities of therapy are quite effective in Black populations. Novel and bold hypotheses to increase inclusion in clinical trial, enhance decentralized trial efforts, and enact successful models of patient navigation and community partnership are vital to ensure continued progress in prostate cancer disparities.
Topics: Black or African American; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; Male; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; United States
PubMed: 33683758
DOI: 10.1002/onco.13749