Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy and risk of prostate specific antigen failure

PURPOSE: To date there is little information on the long-term effect of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy on prostate cancer progression. We performed a prospective study to determine whether patients with prostate cancer receiving neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy (hormonal therapy group) have a lower risk of prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure than those treated with radical prostatectomy alone (prostatectomy group). We also evaluated whether type of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and duration were associated with the risk of PSA failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We followed 680 men initially treated for prostate cancer with radical prostatectomy between January 1988 and December 1997 at our university hospital. Of the patients 292 received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Median followup was 38 months. Cox regression analysis was used to assess the association between neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and PSA failure (greater than 0.3 ng./ml.) controlling for age, clinical stage, grade, initial PSA and adjuvant therapies. RESULTS: Surgical margins were positive less often in the hormonal therapy (25%) than the prostatectomy (47%) group (p = 0.0001). PSA failure was observed in 163 patients and the 5-year failure rate was 33%. No difference in risk of PSA failure was observed overall between the hormonal therapy and prostatectomy groups (hazards ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.30). Treatments with antiandrogen alone for any duration, and those combining antiandrogen and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue for 3 months or less were not associated with improved survival. However, patients receiving combined therapy for more than 3 months had a significantly lower risk of PSA failure than those treated with radical prostatectomy alone (hazards ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged neoadjuvant hormonal therapy combining antiandrogen and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue may improve disease-free survival after radical prostatectomy.     

Neoadjuvant hormone therapy and radical prostatectomy: the jury is still out

Radical prostatectomy may lead to cure as long as the cancer is confined to the prostate and all malignant cells are removed. However, clinical staging is inaccurate and a significant proportion of cT1-T2 patients have positive margins which increases the likelihood of disease progression within 5 years of surgery. Neoadjuvant hormone therapy is one option being used to increase the likelihood of prostate cancer cure after radical prostatectomy. Randomized clinical trials using neoadjuvant hormone therapy and radical prostatectomy have been conducted mainly in patients with cT1 and cT2 prostate cancer. A decrease in the number of positive surgical margins was found in cT1 and cT2 prostate cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant hormone therapy, with a further decrease in those receiving treatment over longer periods. In cT3 prostate cancer patients equivocal results have been obtained and further research is needed. None of the studies reported so far were able to define the impact of neoadjuvant treatment on the surgical management of locally advanced prostate cancer. Additional studies are required to determine the optimal type and duration of hormone treatment. Furthermore, long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate whether neoadjuvant therapy will improve overall survival. In the meantime, patients must be informed of the advantages and disadvantages of treatment to allow them to make informed treatment decisions.     

Neoadjuvant therapy before radical prostatectomy for clinical T3/T4 carcinoma of the prostate: 5-year followup,Phase II Southwest Oncology Group Study 9109

PURPOSE: Several investigators have examined the role of hormonal therapy before definitive local therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer to improve outcome. We evaluated the resectability rate and clinical response rate to 16 weeks of total androgen blockage therapy for clinically locally prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy, and progression-free survival in this multi-institutional study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Southwest Oncology Group 9109 was a phase II feasibility study designed to treat patients with clinical stage C prostate cancer (T3, T4, N0 and M0). Cases were classified by stage T3 versus T4 and bulky (greater than 4 cm.) versus nonbulky (or less 4 cm.) disease. The neoadjuvant agents used were goserelin and flutamide before radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients were accrued to the study and 1 patient was ineligible. There were 2 protocol deviations and these patients refused to undergo prostatectomy after hormonal therapy. Four patients went off protocol treatment because they were not considered surgical candidates. The racial distribution was 72% white, 20% black, 7% Hispanic and 2% Asian. Clinical stage at diagnosis was T3 in 97% and T4 in 3% of cases. Of the patients 39% were diagnosed with bulky disease. Of the 61 eligible patients 55 (90%) underwent a prostatectomy. The 5-year progression-free survival estimate was 70% (24 of 61 cases failed) and the 5-year survival estimate was 90% (11 of 61 deaths). Most of the patients in this trial would have been considered inoperable and referred to radiation oncology. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy followed by radical prostatectomy is reasonable and appropriate for clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. A progression-free and overall 5-year survival of 70% and 90%, respectively, compares favorably to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group neoadjuvant trial outcomes for this stage of prostate cancer.     

The perioperative charge equivalence of interstitial brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy with 1-year followup

PURPOSE: We compare the comprehensive 1-year charges in a consecutive group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and transperineal interstitial brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer at a single urban institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 consecutive men with clinically localized prostate cancer (T1-T2, N0, M0) were treated during a 15-month period with radical prostatectomy or interstitial brachytherapy. Hospital and outpatient records were analyzed for each patient in regard to preoperative, operative and postoperative charges. Parameters included number of encounters, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, hospitalization and operative charges, and followup visits, diagnostic tests and interventions for 1 year. All charge calculations were based arbitrarily on the 1996 Medicare fee schedule, factoring in the mandated global charge reimbursement period of 90 days for both procedures. RESULTS: Of the patients 38 underwent radical prostatectomy (prostatectomy group) and 22 underwent interstitial brachytherapy (brachytherapy group). The brachytherapy group was older with higher pretreatment serum prostate specific antigen and clinical stage disease, and more frequently received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy compared to the prostatectomy group. The 2 groups were similar in Gleason score and, when applicable, duration of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Preoperative charges were 15.3% lower for prostatectomy than for brachytherapy (not statistically significant). Conversely, operative charges for prostatectomy were 13.5% higher (p = 0.04). The major difference among preoperative, operative and postoperative charges was for those incurred postoperatively by the brachytherapy group, which were 56.0% higher than those for the prostatectomy group ($2,285.20 versus $1,007.20, p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal interstitial seed implantation is perceived by many as more cost-effective than radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. We demonstrated that when such patients were followed for 1 year, the comprehensive charges for radical prostatectomy and interstitial brachytherapy were equivalent.     

Three-month neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy: a 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcome, assessed as the level of prostate specific antigen (PSA), of a mature (more than half the events recorded) prospective randomized study with a median follow-up of 82 months of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy, as this has been suggested to decrease the rate of positive surgical margins (i.e. provide greater potential to completely excise the tumour). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From December 1991 to March 1994, 126 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were randomized between direct radical prostatectomy or a 3-month course of a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue before surgery. The patients were followed by PSA determinations and a value of > 0.5 ng/mL used to define progression. RESULTS: The incidence of positive surgical margins decreased from 45.5% to 23.6% (P = 0.016) with hormone treatment. Despite this there was no difference in PSA progression-free survival at the last follow-up; it was 51.5% for those undergoing radical prostatectomy only and 49.8% for those who received hormonal pretreatment (P = 0.588). CONCLUSIONS: Three months of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy offers no benefit to the patient and cannot be recommended for routine clinical use.     

Long-term outcome following radical prostatectomy in men with clinical stage T3 prostate cancer

PURPOSE: We evaluated patients at our institution who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinical stage T3 prostate cancer to determine their long-term clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our prospective surgical database and identified 176 men who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinical stage T3 prostate cancer from 1983 to 2003. Clinical and pathological data were reviewed and evaluated in a Cox proportional hazards model to determine preoperative predictors of biochemical recurrence. Clinical progression following biochemical recurrence was evaluated and clinical failure was defined as the development of clinical metastases or progression to hormone refractory prostate cancer. RESULTS: Of the 176 patients with cT3 prostate cancer 64 (36%) received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. At a mean followup of 6.4 years 84 (48%) patients had disease recurrence with a median time to biochemical recurrence of 4.6 years. The actuarial 10-year probability of freedom from recurrence was 44%. On multivariate analysis biopsy Gleason score, pretreatment serum prostate specific antigen and year of surgery were independent predictors of biochemical recurrence. Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy was not a significant predictor of biochemical recurrence. Following biochemical recurrence clinical failure developed in 30 of 84 (36%) men with a median time of 11 years. Overall the 5, 10 and 15-year probabilities of death from prostate cancer were 6%, 15% and 24%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: More than half (52%) of our patients remained free of disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy. In our series neoadjuvant hormonal therapy offered no advantage with respect to disease recurrence. Radical prostatectomy remains an integral component in the treatment of select patients with clinical stage T3 prostate cancer.     

The association between total and positive lymph node counts, and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE: We examined the association between the number of LNs removed, the number of positive LNs and disease progression in patients undergoing pelvic lymph node dissection and radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 5,038 consecutive patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy between 1983 and 2003. Clinicopathological parameters, including the administration of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, preoperative prostate specific antigen, specimen Gleason score, surgeon and pathological stage, were collected prospectively in our prostate cancer database. We excluded men treated with radiation or chemotherapy before surgery. BCR was defined as 2 postoperative prostate specific antigen increases greater than 0.2 ng/ml. Cox models were used to determine whether the number of nodes removed or the number of positive nodes predicted freedom from BCR after adjustment for prognostic covariates. RESULTS: The 4,611 eligible patients had a median of 9 LNs (IQR 5 to 13) removed. Positive nodes were found in 175 patients (3.8%). Overall the number of LNs removed did not predict freedom from BCR (HR per additional 10 nodes removed 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13, p = 0.7). Results were similar in patients receiving and not receiving neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Finding any LN involvement was associated with a BCR HR of 5.2 (95% CI 4.2 to 6.4, p <0.0005). However, in men without nodal involvement an increased number of nodes removed correlated significantly with freedom from BCR (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Nodal disease increased the risk of progression. Extensive lymphadenectomy enhances the accuracy of surgical staging. However, we were unable to determine that removing more nodes improves freedom from BCR uniformly. Since the proportion of patients with prostate cancer with positive nodes is low, the value of extensive lymphadenectomy requires a multi-institutional, randomized clinical trial.     

Regressive changes and neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer after neoadjuvant hormonal treatment

BACKGROUND: We studied the extent of neuroendocrine (NE) tumor cell differentiation and its relation to regressive changes in prostate cancer after 3-month hormonal treatment. METHODS: Radical prostatectomy specimens from 103 patients, randomized to 3-month neoadjuvant LH-RH-analogue treatment (neoadjuvant group) or to surgery alone (control group), were available for analysis. The effects of hormonal treatment in terms of positive surgical margins, the degree of histopathological changes, and tumor cell proliferation were evaluated in relation to NE-differentiation assessed with antibodies against chromogranin A (CGA). RESULTS: Both the number of CGA-positive cells/cm(2) (P < 0.003) and the proportion of NE-positive tumors (P = 0.07) were greater in the neoadjuvant group than in the control group. No correlation existed between NE-differentiation and the effects of the neoadjuvant hormonal treatment; nor did NE-differentiation correlate to the decrease in serum PSA. CONCLUSIONS: Neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer increases after 3 months of neoadjuvant hormonal treatment but does not correlate to the effects of hormonal treatment.     

Is neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before radical prostatectomy indicated?

INTRODUCTION: Despite the success of surgical monotherapy in treating patients with organ-confined disease, nearly half of all patients undergoing radical prostatectomy will be pathologically upstaged on evaluation of the operative specimen. One possible means of improving the proportion of patients with organ-confined disease and cancer-negative margins at surgery is implementing neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Studies evaluating the use of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) before radical prostatectomy will be reviewed, and outcomes will be discussed. METHODS: Review of the past and recent literature regarding the use and role of NHT before radical prostatectomy was performed. In particular, special attention was paid to the seven prospective, randomized studies that have been reported in the literature. In addition, review of other pertinent and appropriate texts and journals regarding the impact of hormonal therapy on histopathological evaluation and outcomes was performed. RESULTS: Upon review of the prospective, randomized, clinical trials of NHT before radical prostatectomy, there remains no clear evidence that NHT improves disease-free survival for any stage of prostate cancer. Although positive surgical margins appear to be reduced for patients with clinical stage T2 disease only, significance and validity of such an end point remain uncertain. In addition, the use of NHT appears to come with a significant cost with regard to financial expense, patient morbidity, and possibly increased surgical difficulty. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of NHT before radical prostatectomy is not justified, and only in controlled investigational trials should its use be considered.     

Adjuvant goserelin improves clinical disease-free survival and reduces disease-related mortality in patients with locally advanced or localized prostate cancer

This article reviews the clinical disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-related mortality (DRM) data from published prospective, randomized trials of goserelin, given alone as adjuvant treatment or combined with a nonsteroidal antiandrogen as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with locally advanced or localized prostate cancer. Four trials were of radiotherapy and one of radical prostatectomy. The five trials included > 3500 patients and the median follow-up was 4.8-7.1 years. There were statistically significant improvements in clinical DFS with goserelin support relative to the control treatment in all five trials (each log-rank P 相似文献   

The effect of neoadjuvant androgen suppression on prostate cancer-related outcomes after high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of neoadjuvant androgen suppression (AS) compared to no AS on cancer-related outcomes after radical high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy for men with presumed organ-confined prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1999 and January 2005, 250 patients underwent HIFU for presumed localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate; 154 had received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and 96 had not. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure, as defined by the presence of prostate cancer on the biopsy taken 6 months after HIFU. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine relationships between the use of HIFU with and with no neoadjuvant AS and treatment failure. RESULTS: The treatment failure rate was slightly lower in patients receiving neoadjuvant AS (31% vs 34%), but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.119). CONCLUSION: In this unrandomized comparison between neoadjuvant or no AS before HIFU for men with presumed organ-confined prostate cancer, there appeared to be little if any benefit associated with the previous administration of AS.     

Frequency and number of neuroendocrine tumor cells in prostate cancer: no difference between radical prostatectomy specimens from patients with and without neoadjuvant hormonal therapy

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumor cells in prostate cancer are thought to increase after hormonal therapy due to neuroendocrine differentiation of tumor cells. This assumption is based on the histological analyses of limited portions of the cancerous lesions examined. METHODS: Radical prostatectomy specimens were obtained from 122 consecutive patients with prostate adenocarcinoma, 70 of whom underwent prostatectomy alone (Group A) and 52 with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (Group B). Sections from all the 5-mm-thick slices from formalin-fixed specimens were immunostained for chromogranin-A, and the total number of choromogranin-A-positive neuroendocrine tumor cells were counted. RESULTS: No difference was found between Groups A and B in the frequency of cancer with neuroendocrine cells. The total number of neuroendocrine cells in cancer varied widely with no difference of median values in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support the assumption that hormonal therapy induces neuroendocrine differentiation, but suggest androgen-independent neuroendocrine cells existed before therapy.     

ROLE OF EARLY ADJUVANT HORMONAL THERAPY AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY FOR PROSTATE CANCER

PURPOSE: Recent prospective randomized studies have shown that adjuvant hormonal therapy combined with local treatment can significantly improve overall survival in patients with locally advanced disease. This finding challenges the previous belief that adjuvant hormonal therapy may not be beneficial for minimal stages TxN + M0 or less prostate cancer, particularly when combined with local treatment. We reviewed the benefits of adjuvant hormonal therapy in patients at risk for disease progression, especially when administered after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the current literature and evaluated clinical information on stage pT3b cancer from a large single institution prostate cancer database to determine the current role of adjuvant hormonal therapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. RESULTS: Retrospective experimental and clinical studies have proved the impact of adjuvant hormonal therapy for decreasing prostate specific antigen (PSA) and clinical disease progression in patients with regionally limited prostatic cancer. This finding applies to stage pT3b as well as to lymph node positive cancer. Our literature review and current data from the Mayo Clinic database show that adjuvant hormonal therapy after prostatectomy has a significant impact on prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression but it also decreases systemic progression and cause specific death in patients with stage pT3b and lymph node positive disease. After adjusting for preoperative PSA, margins, grade, ploidy and patient age the risk ratio for stage pT3b disease in 707 cases was 0.3 (95% confidence interval 0.2 to 0.7). A recent prospective randomized trial showed a significant decrease in cancer death in N+ cases when adjuvant hormonal therapy was administered after radical prostatectomy, supporting previous Mayo Clinic data on N+ disease that favors combination therapy. In the PSA era, that is 1987 and after, our database data on stage pTxN+ cancer indicates that radical prostatectomy and hormonal therapy for single node positive disease resulted in 94% 10-year cause specific survival, which was not significantly different from the rate in patients with N0 disease after adjusting for local stage, Gleason grade, margins, ploidy, PSA and adjuvant hormonal therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our literature review, including prospective randomized studies, and more recent results in the PSA era from our database indicate that early adjuvant hormonal therapy has a significant impact on time to progression and cause specific survival in patients with seminal vesicle invasion and limited lymph node disease who undergo radical prostatectomy, although in a retrospective nonrandomized study. Future prospective studies with longer followup are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of adjuvant treatment in regard to survival for stages pT2 and pT3a disease with unfavorable pathological variables.     

Neoadjuvant androgen ablation before radical prostatectomy in cT2bNxMo prostate cancer: 5-year results.

PURPOSE: In the initial report of the Lupron Depot Neoadjuvant Prostate Cancer Study Group patients who received 3 months of androgen deprivation had a significant decrease in the positive margin rate. We monitored these patients for 5 years and to our knowledge present the longest followup of any neoadjuvant trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional prospective randomized trial was performed between February 1992 and April 1994 involving patients with stage cT2b prostate cancer, including 138 who received 3 months of leuprolide plus flutamide before radical prostatectomy and 144 who underwent radical prostatectomy only. Patients were followed every 6 months with serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for 5 years. Biochemical recurrence was defined as PSA greater than 0.4 ng./ml. RESULTS: At 5 years there was no difference in the biochemical recurrence rate. PSA was less than 0.4 ng./ml. in 64.8% of the patients in the neoadjuvant androgen ablation plus prostatectomy and 67.6% in the prostatectomy only group (p = 0.663). CONCLUSIONS: Although 3 months of androgen deprivation before radical prostatectomy resulted in an apparently significant decrease in positive surgical margins, a 5-year followup does not indicate any difference in the recurrence rate. Until studies document improvement in biochemical or clinical recurrence with longer periods of treatment, induction androgen deprivation before radical prostatectomy is not indicated.     

Neoadjuvant hormonal deprivation for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the therapeutic effect of radical prostatectomy combined with preoperative neoadjuvant hormonal ablation therapy for prostate cancer （PCa）. In this study, a total of 31 patients with local PCa underwent radical prostatectomy; of these, 12 patients underwent preoperative hormonal deprivation with a combination of goserelin and flutamide for a period of 5.6 months. Data regarding clinical characteristics were compared between the neoadjuvant therapy and radical prostatectomy groups. A total of 31 patients received pelvic lymph node clearance, and the rate of positive lymph nodes was 12.9% （4/31）. Serum prostate-specific antigen （PSA） was 8.9 ± 1.2μg L^-1 after the neoadjuvant therapy and 0.4±0.3μg L^-1 one month after the radical prostatectomy. There were significant differences in the positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastasis between the neoadjuvant therapy group （n = 12） and the radical prostatectomy group （n = 19, P 〈 0.01）. The resulsts indicates that preoperative hormonal deprivation induced by goserelin and flutamide can decrease clinical and pathological staging, but assessment of its influence on long-term prognosis requires further study.     

Radical Prostatectomy as Primary Treatment of High-risk Prostate Cancer

High-risk prostate cancer (PCa), established according to the d’Amico criteria or other prognostic tools, remains very heterogeneous, including a third of patients with excellent prognosis in whom surgical treatment can result in long-term progression-free survival. In contrast, a substantial proportion of high risk will not be cured by local treatment alone and might benefit from a more aggressive multimodal adjuvant treatment strategy. However, to date, except in one adjuvant radiotherapy series, no neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy has shown a survival improvement after radical prostatectomy for high-risk PCa. Recent observational studies tend to prove that radical prostatectomy may offer benefits over radiotherapy in disease-free and overall survival. However, good Level 1 evidence is lacking and further prospective studies are warranted to directly compare the outcomes of radical prostatectomy to combined radiation and hormonal therapy in high-risk patients.     

Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy in radical prostatectomy and radiation-treated patients

Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) prior to radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer has regained interest in recent years but proof of its clinical benefit with respect to patient survival is still pending. We reviewed the literature regarding NHT in prostate cancer; only studies with a high evidence level were included for analysis. Five prospective randomized trials of NHT in radical prostatectomy-treated patients could be identified. Despite significantly lower numbers of positive surgical margins in the NHT group, prostate specific antigen failure rates were similar in the NHT group and the surgery only group. Data on disease-free and overall survival are not yet available. The two prospective randomized studies of NHT in radiation-treated patients could demonstrate better local control of the tumor in the NHT group. However, there was no difference in overall survival between the NHT arm and the radiation only arm. Future clinical research should consider type and duration of hormonal treatment and evaluate potential surrogate end points. To date, there is no hard evidence in favor of NHT prior to radical prostatectomy or external beam irradiation. NHT in prostate cancer should only be applied within controlled trials.     

Neoadjuvant hormonal ablative therapy before radical prostatectomy: a review. Is it indicated?

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant hormonal ablation therapy has been used to decrease the rate of positive surgical margins in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. We reviewed the available literature to determine whether this therapy is indicated and beneficial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE key word search and assessed randomized prospective articles. Data were analyzed for the rate of positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastasis as well as surgical characteristics, including operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, rate of complications and difficulty of surgical dissection. In addition, these data were evaluated for prostate specific antigen-free survival. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy decreased the rate of positive margins in 6 of the 7 randomized prospective studies. In none of 4 randomized prospective series was there an improved rate of seminal vesicle invasion with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Of 4 studies 3 showed no improvement in the rate of lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant hormonal therapy compared with that in controls. Similarly there was no improvement in prostate specific antigen-free survival and no significant difference in operative time, operative blood loss, transfusion or hospital stay in patients treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and controls. In addition, in 2 of 3 studies there was no difference in the complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the available literature revealed no significant improvement in outcome to support the routine administration of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before prostatectomy.     

Radical prostatectomy as primary monotherapy in capsular-penetrating prostate cancer. Results over 15 years

Summary Twenty-five patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (stage pT3pN0) underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical prostatectomy and were followed up thereafter for at least 15 years. No hormonal treatment was given prior to tumor progression. Overall and disease-free 15-year survival rates were observed to be 44 and 24 %, respectively. These data suggest that a cure from prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy can be expected in a quarter of patients with capsular penetration. From our results, no justification can be derived to exclude radical prostatectomy from the spectrum of treatment options for patients with capsular penetration of prostate cancer. More detailed analysis of the results depending on the local extent of the tumor and histological grade revealed distinct differences with respect to the risk of progression. Histological grade was the single most predictive parameter of progression. Out of all subgroups of patients with capsular penetration of prostate cancer, those with a poorly differentiated tumor showed the shortest progression-free interval after surgery, the highest level of overall progression and the largest proportion of tumor-related deaths. By contrast, the prognosis was only slightly influenced by the presence or absence of seminal vesicle involvement. The role of adjuvant treatment after radical prostatectomy for patients with stage pT3pN0 prostate cancer or for subgroups of them remains to be determined within the scope of prospective randomized trials.