-
Frontiers in Oncology 2024This study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of first-line treatment options for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of first-line treatment options for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
METHODS
We systematically searched electronic databases, including PubMed and Web of Science, for studies published from their inception to April 3rd, 2023. Inclusion criteria were: 1) Completed Phase III or IV randomized controlled trials (RCTs) registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; 2) Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of mCRPC who had not previously received chemotherapy or novel endocrine therapies. We conducted a network meta-analysis using R software (version 3.4.0). Network graphs and risk of bias graphs were generated using Stata 14.0 and RevMan 5.4, respectively. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcome was the incidence of severe adverse events (SAEs).
RESULTS
Seven RCTs encompassing 6,641 patients were included. The network meta-analysis revealed that both docetaxel+prednisone (DP) and cabazitaxel+prednisone (CP) significantly improved OS compared to abiraterone. Compared to placebo, DP showed comparable results to both cabazitaxel 20 mg/m+prednisone (C20P) and cabazitaxel 25 mg/m+prednisone (C25P) in terms of OS. For SAEs, both DP and C20P were superior to C25P, with no statistical difference between C20P and DP. The probability ranking plots indicated that C25P ranked highest for OS, while DP ranked highest for SAEs.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our network meta-analysis, we recommend cabazitaxel 20 mg/m+prednisone (C20P) as the primary choice for first-line management of mCRPC, followed by DP. Enzalutamide and abiraterone are suggested as subsequent options. Radium-223 may be considered for patients presenting with bone metastases.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023443943.
PubMed: 38686197
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1378993 -
BMC Cancer Apr 2024Hypertension is associated with the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and its progression, however, it remains unclear whether antihypertensive medicines alter PCa risk or...
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is associated with the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and its progression, however, it remains unclear whether antihypertensive medicines alter PCa risk or prognosis. This systematic review evaluated the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors in the risk and prognosis of PCa. This review was performed in line with PRISMA 2020 guidelines.
METHODS
Eligible studies comprised peer-reviewed observational studies which reported the role of CCBs and RAS inhibitors in PCa, had accessible full texts, and were written in English. Using a combination of keywords, 5 electronic bibliographic databases which included Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus were searched.
RESULTS
A total of 1,346 studies were retrieved and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies reported reduced or no associated risk, improved prognosis, and survival with the use of RAS inhibitors. Studies on CCBs showed evidence of associated risk of PCa. Data extraction from retrieved studies focused on included study characteristics, setting, authors, year, outcomes of interest, and risk ratios. The quality assessment of included studies by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute study assessment tools, showed that all studies had good quality.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of RAS inhibitors was mostly associated with lower risks or improved prognosis of PCa. CCBs may also be associated with risks of PCa. This suggests that high-risk patients managed with CCBs should be actively monitored for PCa. However, there is need for further evidence from large-scale prospective, controlled cohort studies to determine any influence of CCBs on PCa.
Topics: Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms; Male; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Hypertension; Prognosis; Renin-Angiotensin System; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists
PubMed: 38684963
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12218-5 -
Asian Journal of Urology Apr 2024To analyze data available in the literature regarding a possible prognostic value of the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in... (Review)
Review
Prognostic role of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with non-metastatic and metastatic prostate cancer: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
OBJECTIVE
To analyze data available in the literature regarding a possible prognostic value of the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients stratified in non-metastatic and metastatic diseases.
METHODS
A literature search process was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In our meta-analysis, the pooled event rate estimated and the pooled hazard ratio were calculated using a random effect model.
RESULTS
Forty-two articles were selected for our analysis. The pooled risk difference for non-organ confined PCa between high and low NLR cases was 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.03-0.15) and between high and low PLR cases increased to 0.30 (95% CI: 0.16-0.43). In non-metastatic PCa cases, the pooled hazard ratio for overall mortality between high and low NLR was 1.33 (95% CI: 0.78-1.88) and between high and low PLR was 1.47 (95% CI: 0.91-2.03), whereas in metastatic PCa cases, between high and low NLR was 1.79 (95% CI: 1.44-2.13) and between high and low PLR was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.87-1.24).
CONCLUSION
The prognostic values of NLR and PLR in terms of PCa characteristics and responses after treatment show a high level of heterogeneity of results among studies. These two ratios can represent the inflammatory and immunity status of the patient related to several conditions. A higher predictive value is related to a high NLR in terms of risk for overall mortality in metastatic PCa cases under systemic treatments.
PubMed: 38680577
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2023.01.002 -
Asian Journal of Urology Apr 2024To analyze outcomes and complications of cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) for oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) in order to elucidate its role in this space. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To analyze outcomes and complications of cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) for oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) in order to elucidate its role in this space.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search using three databases (Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science). The primary endpoints were oncologic outcomes. The secondary endpoints were complication rates and functional results.
RESULTS
In all studies, overall survival was better or at least comparable variable in the groups with CRP compared to no local treatment. The greatest benefit from CRP in 5-year overall survival in one study was 67.4% for CRP versus 22.5% for no local treatment. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) showed the same trend. Several authors found significant benefits from CSS in the CRP group: from 79% . 46% to 100% . 61%. CRP was a predictor of better CSS (hazard ratio 0.264, =0.004). Positive surgical margin rates differed widely from 28.6% to 100.0%. Urinary continence in CRP versus RP for localized PCa was significantly lower (57.4% 90.8%, <0.0001). Severe incontinence occurred seldom (2.5%-18.6%). Total complication rates after CRP differed widely, from 7.0% to 43.6%. Rates of grades 1 and 2 events prevailed. Patients on ADT alone also showed a considerable number of complications varying from 5.9% to 57.7%.
CONCLUSION
CRP improves medium-term cancer control in patients with oligometastatic PCa. The morbidity and complication rates of this surgery are comparable with other approaches, but postoperative incontinence rate is higher compared with RP for localized disease.
PubMed: 38680575
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2022.03.017 -
Cancers Apr 2024Some researchers have speculated that the prostatic microbiome is involved in the development of prostate cancer (PCa) but there is no consensus on certain microbiota in... (Review)
Review
Some researchers have speculated that the prostatic microbiome is involved in the development of prostate cancer (PCa) but there is no consensus on certain microbiota in the prostatic tissue of PCa vs. healthy controls. This systematic review aims to investigate and compare the microbiome of PCa and healthy tissue to determine the microbial association with the pathogenesis of PCa. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. Articles were screened by two independent and blinded reviewers. Literature that compared the prostatic tissue microbiome of patients with PCa with benign controls was included. We found that PCa may be associated with increased , the herpesviridae and families, and , but definitive conclusions cannot be drawn from the existing data. Challenges include the difficulty of obtaining uncontaminated tissue samples and securing tissue from healthy controls. As a result, methods are varied with many studies using cancerous and "healthy" tissue from the same prostate. The organisms chosen for each study were also highly variable, making it difficult to compare studies. These issues have led to lower confidence in our results. Overall, further work is warranted to better understand the implications of the prostatic microbiome in the pathogenesis of PCa.
PubMed: 38672631
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16081549 -
Biomedicines Apr 2024Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) needs to be monitored with ultrasensitive PSA assays (uPSAs) for oncologists to be able to start salvage radiotherapy (SRT) while... (Review)
Review
Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) needs to be monitored with ultrasensitive PSA assays (uPSAs) for oncologists to be able to start salvage radiotherapy (SRT) while PSA is <0.5 µg/L for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) relapsing after a radical prostatectomy (RP). Our systematic review (SR) aimed to summarize uPSAs for patients with localized PCa. The SR was registered as InPLASY2023110084. We searched for studies on Google Scholar, PUBMED and reference lists of reviews and studies. We only included studies on uPSAs published in English and excluded studies of women, animals, sarcoidosis and reviews. Of the 115 included studies, 39 reported PSA assay methods and 76 reported clinical findings. Of 67,479 patients, 14,965 developed PSA recurrence (PSAR) and 2663 died. Extremely low PSA nadir and early developments of PSA separated PSAR-prone from non-PSAR-prone patients (cumulative value 3.7 × 10). RP patients with the lowest post-surgery PSA nadir and patients who had the lowest PSA at SRT had the fewest deaths. In conclusion, PSA for patients with localized PCa in the pre-PSAR phase of PCa is strongly associated with later PSAR and survival. A rising but still exceedingly low PSA at SRT predicts a good 5-year overall survival.
PubMed: 38672176
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12040822 -
World Journal of Urology Apr 2024To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection using povidone-iodine (PI) and antibiotic prophylaxis (AP).
OBJECTIVE
To summarize available data and compare the efficacy of rectal disinfection using PI with non-PI methods prior to TRUS-PB.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Three databases were queried through November 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing patients who underwent TRUS-PB. We compared the effectiveness of rectal disinfection between PI groups and non-PI groups with or without AP. The primary outcomes of interest were the rates of overall infectious complications, fever, and sepsis. Subgroups analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients using fluoroquinolone groups compared to those using other antibiotics groups.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We included ten RCTs in the meta-analyses. The overall rates of infectious complications were significantly lower when rectal disinfection with PI was performed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to AP monotherapy, the combination of AP and PI was associated with significantly lower risk of infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73, p < 0.001) and fever (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75, p = 0.001), but not with sepsis (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04, p = 0.06). The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was associated with a lower risk of infectious complications and fever compared to non-FQ antibiotics.
CONCLUSION
Rectal disinfection with PI significantly reduces the rates of infectious complications and fever in patients undergoing TRUS-PB. However, this approach does not show a significant impact on reducing the rate of sepsis following the procedure.
Topics: Humans; Male; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Disinfection; Image-Guided Biopsy; Povidone-Iodine; Prostate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Rectum
PubMed: 38652324
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04941-2 -
Cancers Mar 2024Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most frequently occurring malignancies. Although most cases are not life-threatening, approximately 20% endure an unfavorable... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most frequently occurring malignancies. Although most cases are not life-threatening, approximately 20% endure an unfavorable outcome. PSA-based screening reduced mortality but at the cost of an increased overdiagnosis/overtreatment of low-risk (lrPCa) and favorable intermediate-risk (firPCa) PCa. PCa risk-groups are usually identified based on serum Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), the Gleason score, and clinical T stage, which have consistent although variable specificity or subjectivity. Thus, more effective and specific tools for risk assessment are needed, ideally making use of minimally invasive methods such as liquid biopsies. In this systematic review we assessed the clinical potential and analytical performance of liquid biopsy-based biomarkers for pre-treatment risk stratification of PCa patients.
METHODS
Studies that assessed PCa pre-treatment risk were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and MedLine. PCa risk biomarkers were analyzed, and the studies' quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS
The final analysis comprised 24 full-text articles, in which case-control studies predominated, mostly reporting urine-based biomarkers (54.2%) and biomarker quantification by qPCR (41.7%). Categorization into risk groups was heterogeneous, predominantly making use of the Gleason score.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review unveils the substantial clinical promise of using circulating biomarkers in assessing the risk for prostate cancer patients. However, the standardization of groups, categories, and biomarker validation are mandatory before this technique can be implemented. Circulating biomarkers might represent a viable alternative to currently available tools, obviating the need for tissue biopsies, and allowing for faster and more cost-effective testing, with superior analytical performance, specificity, and reproducibility.
PubMed: 38611041
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16071363 -
The World Journal of Men's Health Apr 2024A high incidence of psychosocial problems in prostate cancer patients has been reported including anxiety, depression and distress. These can add to the patients'...
A Systematic Review of the Association between Psychological Resilience and Improved Psychosocial Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Patients. Could Resilience Training Have a Potential Role?
PURPOSE
A high incidence of psychosocial problems in prostate cancer patients has been reported including anxiety, depression and distress. These can add to the patients' disease burden and have been associated with unfavorable cancer treatment outcomes. Interventions designed to address them have found limited success, but psychological resilience (PR) training has never been formally tested. The measurement of PR in prostate cancer patients has been described and has been associated with more favorable psychosocial outcomes in these patients but it has never been systematically reviewed. The aim of this study was to conduct the first systematic review of those studies that have measured it using standardized scales and to determine the potential for resilience training to help overcome the significant psychosocial problems faced by prostate cancer patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched the literature to identify articles that measured PR among prostate cancer patients.
RESULTS
Of 384 articles identified by the search criteria, there were 19 studies suitable for inclusion regarding 5,417 patients. The most commonly-used scale was the original Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, or an abbreviated version of it. Possible scores range from 0 to 100, mean scores from these studies ranged from 72.9 to 87.1 (standard deviations varied between 13.2 and 16.3). PR was consistently associated with improved psychological outcomes including depression, anxiety and distress, although these were measured with a wide variety of methods making it difficult to quantify the effects. There was also evidence of PR mediating the physical effects of prostate cancer and treatment including urinary symptoms, fatigue and insomnia.
CONCLUSIONS
As resilience training has been successful in other cancer settings, it seems likely that it could improve the significant adverse psychosocial outcomes that have been reported in prostate cancer patients and trials designed to objectively test it should be encouraged.
PubMed: 38606864
DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.230319 -
European Urology Open Science May 2024The treatment landscape of metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) has evolved significantly over the past two decades. Despite this, the optimal therapy for patients with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
The treatment landscape of metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) has evolved significantly over the past two decades. Despite this, the optimal therapy for patients with mPCa has not been determined. This systematic review identifies available predictive models that assess mPCa patients' response to treatment.
METHODS
We critically reviewed MEDLINE and CENTRAL in December 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Only quantitative studies in English were included with no time restrictions. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the PROBAST tool. Data were extracted following the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews criteria.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS
The search identified 616 citations, of which 15 studies were included in our review. Nine of the included studies were validated internally or externally. Only one study had a low risk of bias and a low risk concerning applicability. Many studies failed to detail model performance adequately, resulting in a high risk of bias. Where reported, the models indicated good or excellent performance.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
Most of the identified predictive models require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before these can be implemented in clinical practice to assist with treatment decision-making for men with mPCa.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this review, we evaluate studies that predict which treatments will work best for which metastatic prostate cancer patients. We found that existing studies need further improvement before these can be used by health care professionals.
PubMed: 38596781
DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.03.012