The Oncological and Functional Prognostic Value of Unconventional Histology of Prostate Cancer in Localized Disease Treated with Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: An International Multicenter 5-Year Cohort Study.

Cribiform pattern Ductal prostate cancer Intraductal prostate cancer Prostate cancer Unusual histologies

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 02 10 2023
revised: 03 12 2023
accepted: 11 12 2023
medline: 8 1 2024
pubmed: 8 1 2024
entrez: 7 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The impact of prostate cancer of unconventional histology (UH) on oncological and functional outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) receipt is unclear. We compared the impact of cribriform pattern (CP), ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) in comparison to pure adenocarcinoma (AC) on short- to mid-term oncological and functional results and receipt of aRT after RARP. We retrospectively collected data for a large international cohort of men with localized prostate cancer treated with RARP between 2016 and 2020. The primary outcomes were biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival, erectile and continence function. aRT receipt was a secondary outcome. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox regression analyses were performed. A total of 3935 patients were included. At median follow-up of 2.8 yr, the rates for BCR incidence (AC 10.7% vs IDC 17%; p < 0.001) and aRT receipt (AC 4.5% vs DAC 6.3% [p = 0.003] vs IDC 11.2% [p < 0.001]) were higher with UH. The 5-yr BCR-free survival rate was significantly poorer for UH groups, with hazard ratios of 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-2.40; p = 0.005) for DAC, 5.22 (95% CI 3.41-8.01; p < 0.001) for IDC, and 3.45 (95% CI 2.29-5.20; p < 0.001) for CP in comparison to AC. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of UH doubled the risk of new-onset erectile dysfunction at 1 yr, in comparison to AC (grade group 1-3), with hazard ratios of 2.13 (p < 0.001) for DAC, 2.14 (p < 0.001) for IDC, and 2.01 (p = 0.011) for CP. Moreover, CP, but not IDC or DAC, was associated with a significantly higher risk of incontinence (odds ratio 1.97; p < 0.001). The study is limited by the lack of central histopathological review and relatively short follow-up. In a large cohort, UH presence was associated with worse short- to mid-term oncological outcomes after RARP. IDC independently predicted a higher rate of aRT receipt. At 1-yr follow-up after RP, patients with UH had three times higher risk of erectile dysfunction post RARP; CP was associated with a twofold higher incontinence rate. Among patients with prostate cancer who undergo robot-assisted surgery to remove the prostate, those with less common types of prostate cancer have worse results for cancer control, erection, and urinary continence and a higher probability of receiving additional radiotherapy after surgery.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The impact of prostate cancer of unconventional histology (UH) on oncological and functional outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) receipt is unclear. We compared the impact of cribriform pattern (CP), ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) in comparison to pure adenocarcinoma (AC) on short- to mid-term oncological and functional results and receipt of aRT after RARP.
METHODS METHODS
We retrospectively collected data for a large international cohort of men with localized prostate cancer treated with RARP between 2016 and 2020. The primary outcomes were biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival, erectile and continence function. aRT receipt was a secondary outcome. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox regression analyses were performed.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS UNASSIGNED
A total of 3935 patients were included. At median follow-up of 2.8 yr, the rates for BCR incidence (AC 10.7% vs IDC 17%; p < 0.001) and aRT receipt (AC 4.5% vs DAC 6.3% [p = 0.003] vs IDC 11.2% [p < 0.001]) were higher with UH. The 5-yr BCR-free survival rate was significantly poorer for UH groups, with hazard ratios of 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-2.40; p = 0.005) for DAC, 5.22 (95% CI 3.41-8.01; p < 0.001) for IDC, and 3.45 (95% CI 2.29-5.20; p < 0.001) for CP in comparison to AC. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of UH doubled the risk of new-onset erectile dysfunction at 1 yr, in comparison to AC (grade group 1-3), with hazard ratios of 2.13 (p < 0.001) for DAC, 2.14 (p < 0.001) for IDC, and 2.01 (p = 0.011) for CP. Moreover, CP, but not IDC or DAC, was associated with a significantly higher risk of incontinence (odds ratio 1.97; p < 0.001). The study is limited by the lack of central histopathological review and relatively short follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS CONCLUSIONS
In a large cohort, UH presence was associated with worse short- to mid-term oncological outcomes after RARP. IDC independently predicted a higher rate of aRT receipt. At 1-yr follow-up after RP, patients with UH had three times higher risk of erectile dysfunction post RARP; CP was associated with a twofold higher incontinence rate.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
Among patients with prostate cancer who undergo robot-assisted surgery to remove the prostate, those with less common types of prostate cancer have worse results for cancer control, erection, and urinary continence and a higher probability of receiving additional radiotherapy after surgery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38185614
pii: S2588-9311(23)00294-8
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.12.006
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

David Leung (D)

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Daniele Castellani (D)

Division of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Rossella Nicoletti (R)

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Roser Vives Dilme (RV)

Department of Urology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Jesus Mereno Sierra (JM)

Department of Urology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Sergio Serni (S)

Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Carmine Franzese (C)

Division of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Giuseppe Chiacchio (G)

Division of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Andrea Benedetto Galosi (AB)

Division of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Roberta Mazzucchelli (R)

Section of Pathological Anatomy, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, School of Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Erika Palagonia (E)

Urology Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.

Paolo Dell'Oglio (P)

Urology Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.

Antonio Galfano (A)

Urology Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.

Aldo Massimo Bocciardi (AM)

Urology Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.

Xue Zhao (X)

Department of Urology, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba, Japan.

Chi Fai Ng (CF)

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Hsiang Ying Lee (HY)

Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Shinichi Sakamoto (S)

Department of Urology, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba, Japan.

Nikhil Vasdev (N)

Department of Urology, Lister Hospital, East and North Herts NHS Trust, Stevenage, UK.

Juan Gomez Rivas (JG)

Department of Urology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Riccardo Campi (R)

Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh (JY)

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. Electronic address: jeremyteoh@surgery.cuhk.edu.hk.

Classifications MeSH