Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019

BackgroundInnovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence.ObjectiveTo present the results from the APCCC 2019.Design, setting, and participantsSimilar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process.Results and limitationsPanellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material.ConclusionsThese voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials.Patient summaryThe Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.     

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017

Background

In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics.

Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2017

In March 2017 the ?Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference‘ (APCCC) took place in St. Gallen (Switzerland). The APCCC-panelists are internationally well known experts. With the actual data in mind they discussed treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer in order to update the international APCCC-recommendations from the previous meeting in 2015. Recently these consensus recommendations have been published in “European Urology”.A group of German experts discussed this year APCCC-votes during the meeting and the recommendations that were concluded from the votes from the German perspective. Reasons for an additional German discussion are country-specific variations that may have influenced the APCCC-votes und recommendations. Due to the concept of the APCCC-meeting the wording of the questions could not always be as necessary.One focus of this year consensus discussion was the treatment of metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (mCNPC). There are new data which may also influence the therapeutic situation of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Further points of discussion were the impact of new imaging procedures in the clinical setting as well as the treatment of oligometastatic prostate cancer.     

EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: Treatment of Advanced,Relapsing, and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

ObjectiveTo present a summary of the 2013 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).Evidence acquisitionThe working panel performed a literature review of the new data (2011–2013). The guidelines were updated, and levels of evidence and/or grades of recommendation were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature that included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.Evidence synthesisLuteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). LHRH antagonists decrease testosterone without any testosterone surge, and they may be associated with an oncologic benefit compared with LHRH analogues. Complete androgen blockade has a small survival benefit of about 5%. Intermittent androgen deprivation results in noninferior oncologic efficacy when compared with continuous androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in well-selected populations. In locally advanced and metastatic PCa, early ADT does not result in a significant survival advantage when compared with delayed ADT. Relapse after local therapy is defined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values >0.2 ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and >2 ng/ml above the nadir and after radiation therapy (RT). Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage RT (SRT) at PSA levels <0.5 ng/ml and SRP or cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in radiation failures. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are of limited importance if the PSA is <1.0 ng/ml; bone scans and CT can be omitted unless PSA is >20 ng/ml. Follow-up after ADT should include analysis of PSA and testosterone levels, and screening for cardiovascular disease and metabolic syndrome. Treatment of CRPC includes sipuleucel-T, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA/P), or chemotherapy with docetaxel at 75 mg/m² every 3 wk. Cabazitaxel, AA/P, enzalutamide, and radium-223 are available for second-line treatment of CRPC following docetaxel. Zoledronic acid and denosumab can be used in men with CRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications.ConclusionsThe knowledge in the field of advanced, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice. A full version is available at the EAU office or at www.uroweb.org.Patient summaryWe present a summary of the 2013 version of the European Association of Urology guidelines on treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).Luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). LHRH antagonists decrease testosterone without any testosterone surge, and they might be associated with an oncologic benefit compared with LHRH analogues. Complete androgen blockade has a small survival benefit of about 5%. Intermittent androgen deprivation results in noninferior oncologic efficacy when compared with continuous androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in well-selected populations. In locally advanced and metastatic PCa, early ADT does not result in a significant survival advantage when compared with delayed ADT. Relapse after local therapy is defined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values >0.2 ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and >2 ng/ml above the nadir and after radiation therapy. Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage radiation therapy at PSA levels <0.5 ng/ml and salvage RP or cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in radiation failures. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are of limited importance if the PSA is <1.0 ng/ml; bone scans, and CT can be omitted unless PSA is >20 ng/ml. Follow-up after ADT should include analysis of PSA and testosterone levels, and screening for cardiovascular disease and metabolic syndrome. Treatment of castration-resistant CRPC includes sipuleucel-T, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA/P), or chemotherapy with docetaxel 75 mg/m² every 3 wk. Cabazitaxel, AA/P, enzalutamide, and radium-223 are available for second-line treatment of CRPC following docetaxel. Zoledronic acid and denosumab can be used in men with CRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications.The guidelines reported should be adhered to in daily routine to improve the quality of care in PCa patients. As we have shown recently, guideline compliance is only in the area of 30–40%.     

Results from a Canadian consensus forum of key controversial areas in the management of advanced prostate cancer: Recommendations for Canadian healthcare providers

IntroductionRapid progress in diagnostics and therapeutics for the management of prostate cancer (PCa) has created areas where high-level evidence to guide practice is lacking. The Genitourinary Research Consortium (GURC) conducted its second Canadian consensus forum to address areas of controversy in the management of PCa and provide recommendations to guide treatment.MethodsA panel of PCa specialists discussed topics related to the management of PCa. The core scientific committee finalized the design, questions, and analysis of the consensus results. Attendees then voted to indicate their management choice regarding each statement/topic. Questions for voting were adapted from the 2019 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference. The thresholds for agreement were set at ≥75% for “consensus agreement,” >50% for “near-consensus,” and ≤50% for “no consensus.”ResultsThe panel was comprised of 29 PCa experts, including urologists (n=12), medical oncologists (n=12), and radiation oncologists (n=5). Voting took place for 65 predetermined questions and three ad hoc questions. Consensus was reached for 34 questions, spanning a variety of areas, including biochemical recurrence, treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive PCa, management of non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant PCa, bone health, and molecular profiling.ConclusionsThe consensus forum identified areas of consensus or near-consensus in more than half of the questions discussed. Areas of consensus typically aligned with available evidence, and areas of variability may indicate a lack of high-quality evidence and point to future opportunities for further research and education.     

EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer—An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort2: Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees

BackgroundAlthough guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.ObjectiveTo bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DesignA steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.SettingOnline Delphi survey and consensus conference.ParticipantsThe European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisStatements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), and 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).Results and limitationsOverall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.ConclusionsThese consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.Patient summaryThis report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.     

Focal Therapy in Prostate Cancer: International Multidisciplinary Consensus on Trial Design

Background

Focal therapy has been introduced for the treatment of localised prostate cancer (PCa). To provide the necessary data for consistent assessment, all focal therapy trials should be performed according to uniform, systematic pre- and post-treatment evaluation with well-defined end points and strict inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Objective

To obtain consensus on trial design for focal therapy in PCa.

Design, setting, and participants

A four-staged consensus project based on a modified Delphi process was conducted in which 48 experts in focal therapy of PCa participated. According to this formal consensus-building method, participants were asked to fill out an iterative sequence of questionnaires to collect data on trial design. Subsequently, a consensus meeting was held in which 13 panellists discussed acquired data, clarified the results, and defined the conclusions.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

A multidisciplinary board from oncologic centres worldwide reached consensus on patient selection, pretreatment assessment, evaluation of outcome, and follow-up.

Results and limitations

Inclusion criteria for candidates in focal therapy trials are patients with prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/ml, clinical stage T1c–T2a, Gleason score 3 + 3 or 3 + 4, life expectancy of >10 yr, and any prostate volume. The optimal biopsy strategy includes transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies to be taken between 6 mo and 12 mo after treatment. The primary objective should be focal ablation of clinically significant disease with negative biopsies at 12 mo after treatment as the primary end point.

Conclusions

This consensus report provides a standard for designing a feasible focal therapy trial.

Patient summary

A variety of ablative technologies have been introduced and applied in a focal manner for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). In this consensus report, an international panel of experts in the field of PCa determined pre- and post-treatment work-up for focal therapy research.     

ABC1 Consensus Conference - a German Perspective: First International Consensus Conference on Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC1), Lisbon, November 5, 2011

A group of German breast cancer experts (medical oncologists and gynaecologists) reviewed and commented on the results of the first international 'Advanced Breast Cancer First Consensus Conference' (ABC1) for the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer. The ABC1 Conference is an initiative of the European School of Oncology (ESO) Metastatic Breast Cancer Task Force in cooperation with the EBCC (European Breast Cancer Conference), ESMO (European Society of Medical Oncology) and the American JNCI (Journal of the National Cancer Institute). The main focus of the ABC1 Conference was metastatic breast cancer (stage IV). The ABC1 consensus is based on the vote of 33 breast cancer experts from different countries and has been specified as a guideline for therapeutic practice by the German expert group. It is the objective of the ABC1 consensus as well as of the German comments to provide an internationally standardized and evidence-based foundation for qualified decision-making in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.     

Salvage ablative therapy in prostate cancer: International multidisciplinary consensus on trial design

IntroductionSalvage ablative therapy (SAT) has been developed as a form of localized treatment for localized recurrence of prostate cancers following radiation therapy. To better address the utility of SAT, prospective clinical trials must address the aspects of accepted standards in the initial evaluation, treatment, follow-up, and outcomes in the oncology community. We undertook this study to achieve consensus on uniform standardized trial design for SAT trials.MethodsA literature search was performed and an international multidisciplinary group of experts was identified. A questionnaire was constructed and sent out to 71 participants in 3 consecutive rounds according to the Delphi method. The project was concluded with a face-to-face meeting in which the results were reviewed and conclusions were formulated.ResultsPatients with recurrent disease after radiation therapy were considered candidates for a SAT trial using any ablation scenario performed with cryotherapy or high-intensity focused ultrasound. It is feasible to compare different sources of energy or to compare with historical data on salvage radical prostatectomy outcomes. The primary objective should be to assess the efficacy of the treatment for negative biopsy rate at 12 months. Secondary objectives should include safety parameters and quality-of-life assessment. Exclusion criteria should include evidence of local or distant metastases. The optimal biopsy strategy is image-guided targeted biopsies. Follow-up includes multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, prostate-specific antigen level, and quality of life for at least 5 years.ConclusionsA multidisciplinary board from international experts reached consensus on trial design for SAT in prostate cancer and provides a standard for designing a feasible SAT trial.     

METastasis Reporting and Data System for Prostate Cancer: Practical Guidelines for Acquisition,Interpretation, and Reporting of Whole-body Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Evaluations of Multiorgan Involvement in Advanced Prostate Cancer

Context

Comparative reviews of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT; with different radiotracers) have shown that metastasis detection in advanced cancers is more accurate than with currently used CT and bone scans. However, the ability of WB-MRI and positron emission tomography/CT to assess therapeutic benefits has not been comprehensively evaluated. There is also considerable variability in the availability and quality of WB-MRI, which is an impediment to clinical development. Expert recommendations for standardising WB-MRI scans are needed, in order to assess its performance in advanced prostate cancer (APC) clinical trials.

Clinical Outcomes in Cyclin-dependent Kinase 12 Mutant Advanced Prostate Cancer

BackgroundCyclin-dependent kinase 12 (CDK12) loss occurs in 3–7% of metastatic prostate cancer patients and is characterized by a genomic instability signature, but the clinical implications of CDK12 loss are not well established.ObjectiveTo determine the clinical course of patients with CDK12 mutant advanced prostate cancer compared with other genomic subtypes.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective analysis of data from three academic medical centers, including 317 patients with advanced prostate cancer and prior next-generation sequencing from tumor tissue (n = 172) or circulating tumor DNA (n = 145), was performed. Forty-six patients had CDK12 mutations; 34 had biallelic CDK12 loss (79%).Outcome measurements and statistical analysisPatients were stratified by mutation status (CDK12, homologous recombination deficiency [HRD; BRCA1/2 and ATM], TP53, and other cohort). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate time to event outcomes: time to development of metastatic disease, time to development of castration resistance, and time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression after first-line androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) therapy in a patient subset.Results and limitationsThe median follow-up was 66.6 mo. Patients with CDK12 mutant prostate cancer exhibited shorter time to metastasis (median = 34.9 mo, p = 0.004) and development of castration-resistant disease (median = 32.7 mo, p < 0.001), compared with other genomic subtypes, with shorter time to PSA progression on first-line ARPI treatment of metastatic castration-resistant disease (median = 3.6 mo, p = 0.0219). CDK12 mutant patients did not have overall shorter time on treatment compared with other mutation subgroups, and CDK12 status did not demonstrate statistical significance in multivariate analysis. Limitations include variable center-dependent practice patterns and heterogeneity due to combining tumor and liquid biopsy data.ConclusionsOur data suggest that advanced prostate cancers harboring CDK12 mutations display aggressive clinical behavior, underscoring the need to fully delineate the molecular and clinical characteristics, and appropriate therapeutic approaches for distinct subtypes of advanced prostate cancers.Patient summaryIn this report, we evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with prostate cancer and CDK12 mutation in their tumors. These patients seem to have more aggressive disease, with more high-grade Gleason ≥8 cancers and shorter time to developing metastatic cancer. Cases of advanced CDK12-mutated prostate cancer may warrant consideration of therapy intensification or combination approaches.     

St. Gallen 2011: Summary of the Consensus Discussion

SUMMARY: The 2011 St. Gallen Consensus Conference on early breast cancer provided mostly evidence-based treatment recommendations with a broad spectrum of acceptable clinical practice for global breast cancer care. This report summarizes the results of the 2011 international panel voting procedures with regard to locoregional and endocrine treatment, chemotherapy, targeted therapy as well as adjuvant bisphosphonate use.     

经尿道前列腺切除治疗晚期前列腺癌下尿路梗阻

目的 :观察经尿道前列腺电切除术 (TURP)在治疗晚期前列腺癌相关的下尿路梗阻中的意义。　方法 :回顾性分析 2 0 0 2年 5月～ 2 0 0 3年 11月在我院接受TURP的 2 6例前列腺癌患者病史资料。　结果 :2 6例患者 ,年龄 5 6～92岁 ,中位年龄 75岁。C期 3例 ,D期 2 3例。 9例患者有尿潴留病史 ,其中 1例肾功能不全 ,膀胱造瘘 1个月后行TURP。 2 6例患者术中出血量不多 ,无 1例术中输血。术后 3～ 5d拔除导尿管后均可自行排尿 ,但并发暂时性尿失禁3例 ,经提肛肌练习后恢复正常。 9例曾有尿潴留病史的患者无 1例再次发生尿潴留 ,术后 8周国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)和一般状况评分 (Karnofsky)均明显改善 [分别为 (2 9.7± 4 .6 )vs (8.6± 3.4 )、(5 5± 2 0 )vs (77± 32 )分 ,P均 <0 .0 5 ]。　结论 :TURP治疗前列腺癌相关的下尿路梗阻安全有效。     

Management of penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: An eUROGEN accelerated Delphi consensus study

ObjectivesTo develop an international consensus on managing penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 acute waves. A major concern for patients with penile cancer during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is how the enforced safety measures will affect their disease management. Delays in diagnosis and treatment initiation may have an impact on the extent of the primary lesion as well as the cancer-specific survival because of the development and progression of inguinal lymph node metastases.Materials and methodsA review of the COVID-19 literature was conducted in conjunction with analysis of current international guidelines on the management of penile cancer. Results were presented to an international panel of experts on penile cancer and infection control by a virtual accelerated Delphi process using 4 survey rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as an agreement of ≥80%, which was used to reconfigure management pathways for penile cancer.ResultsLimited evidence is available for delaying penile cancer management. The consensus rate of agreement was 100% that penile cancer pathways should be reconfigured, and measures should be developed to prevent perioperative nosocomial transmission of COVID-19. The panel also reached a consensus on several statements aimed at reconfiguring the management of penile cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsThe international consensus panel proposed a framework for the diagnostic and invasive therapeutic procedures for penile cancer within a low-risk environment for COVID-19.     

The utility of the delphi method in defining anastomotic leak following colorectal surgery

BackgroundAlmost a decade after international guidelines defining anastomotic leak (AL) were published, the definition of AL remains inconsistent.MethodsA 3-round modified Delphi study was conducted among a national panel of 8 surgeon experts to assess consensus related to the definition of AL following colorectal resection. Consensus was defined when a scenario was rated as very important or absolutely essential by at least 85% of the experts in round 3.ResultsSeven of fifteen (47%) clinical and radiological scenarios of AL achieved consensus. 80% of clinical scenarios reached consensus. 30% of radiological scenarios reached consensus including CT demonstrating air bubbles around the anastomosis. No consensus was achieved in 70% of radiological scenarios.ConclusionsConsensus on the definition of AL is difficult to reach, in relation to international guidelines; which implies that further refinement of the definition of AL is needed to compare patient outcomes.     

Genomic Testing in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Pragmatic Guide for Clinicians

ContextGenomic testing is becoming increasingly important in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PC) and is being incorporated in clinical practice to guide treatment.ObjectiveTo review the current understanding of genomic alterations and the status of genomic testing in patients with metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC), and the potential use of genomic tests in clinical practice.Evidence acquisitionWe reviewed recent publications (past 15 yr) from PubMed, proceedings of scientific conferences, and published guidelines. Reports on mCRPC in the following areas were selected: development, testing, and validation of techniques for identifying genomic alterations; molecular characterization; and trials of genetically targeted therapies.Evidence synthesismCRPC tumors harbor molecular alterations that are possible targets for treatment, and a number of therapies are in development to exploit these alterations (eg, PD-1 inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors). Next-generation sequencing of DNA from tumor tissue can identify somatic alterations that would not be identified by germline testing. Work is ongoing to evaluate the use of less invasive somatic testing methods (eg, sequencing of cell-free circulating tumor DNA). Current international guidelines recommend germline and/or somatic testing for men with advanced and/or high-risk PC regardless of family history to identify those with homologous recombination repair gene mutations or mismatch repair defects/microsatellite instability who may be eligible for treatment with a PARP inhibitor or pembrolizumab, respectively.ConclusionsGenomic testing for mCRPC may provide information on prognostic, predictive, and resistance biomarkers. Although the incorporation of testing into clinical practice remains challenging, routine genomic testing of men with advanced PC is recommended to guide management and treatment decisions.Patient summarySimilar to many cancers, prostate cancer is caused by defects in the cancer’s DNA, which are called genetic or genomic defects. New treatments targeting these defects are approved for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Specific new tests are under development to detect these potentially treatable genetic defects.     

Advanced Prostate Cancer: Hormones and Beyond

Bilateral orchiectomy became the “gold standard” treatment option for advanced prostate cancer following the Nobel Prize winning study by Huggins and Hodges in 1941. Almost 40 yr later, the combination of a nonsteroidal antiandrogen with castration-based treatment (combined androgen blockade [CAB]) was proposed to offer superior response and survival compared with castration alone. However, 25 yr and many randomised studies later, the benefit of CAB remains controversial. Here, we present a clinical scenario that describes a patient with advanced prostate cancer and we review the available treatment options. The first part of the article focuses on androgen-dependent disease, comparing castration (surgical or medical) to either Casodex™ (bicalutamide) 150 mg monotherapy or CAB. In the CAB setting, Casodex 50 mg combined with castration-based therapy is calculated to reduce the rate of all-cause mortality by an estimated 20% compared with castration alone. The second part of the article describes treatment options for androgen-independent prostate cancer, including alternative forms of hormonal therapy, such as oestrogen therapy and ketoconazole- and docetaxel-based chemotherapy.     

Insulinemic and Inflammatory Dietary Patterns and Risk of Prostate Cancer

BackgroundHyperinsulinemia and inflammation are inter-related pathways that link diet with the risk of several chronic diseases. Evidence suggests that these pathways may also increase prostate cancer risk.ObjectiveTo determine whether hyperinsulinemic diet and inflammatory diet are associated with prostate cancer incidence and mortality.Design, setting, and participantsWe prospectively followed 41 209 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986–2014). Scores for two validated dietary patterns were calculated from food frequency questionnaires at baseline and updated every 4 yr.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisTotal, advanced, and lethal prostate cancer outcomes were assessed. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for associations between two empirical hypothesis-oriented dietary patterns—empirical dietary index for hyperinsulinemia and empirical dietary inflammatory pattern—and prostate cancer risk estimated using Cox proportional hazard regression.Results and limitationsDuring 28 yr of follow-up, 5929 incident cases of total prostate cancer, including 1019 advanced and 667 fatal, were documented. In multivariable-adjusted models, there was a 7% higher risk of advanced prostate cancer (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01–1.15) and a 9% higher risk of fatal prostate cancer (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.00–1.18) per standard deviation (SD) increase in the hyperinsulinemic diet. When stratified by age, the hyperinsulinemic diet was associated with only earlier-onset aggressive prostate cancer (men under 65 yr), with per SD HRs of 1.20 (95% CI: 1.06–1.35) for advanced, 1.22 (1.04–1.42) for fatal, and 1.20 (1.04–1.38) for lethal. The inflammatory diet was not associated with prostate cancer risk in the overall study population, but was associated with earlier-onset lethal prostate cancer (per SD increase HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.00–1.35).ConclusionsHyperinsulinemia and inflammation may be potential mechanisms linking dietary patterns with the risk of aggressive prostate cancer, particularly earlier-onset disease.Patient summaryAvoiding inflammatory and hyperinsulinemic dietary patterns may be beneficial for the prevention of clinically relevant prostate cancer, especially among younger men.     

St. Gallen/Vienna 2021: A Brief Summary of the Consensus Discussion on Customizing Therapies for Women with Early Breast Cancer

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021 St. Gallen/Vienna Consensus Conference on Early Breast Cancer Treatment Standards had to be held virtually. Despite the challenge of convening global contributors to both the conference itself as well as the important Consensus Panel, the scientific committee and the organizers managed to organize a well-received scientific conference, and also the panel discussion was well received in the worldwide scientific community, as indicated by numerous positive feedbacks already within the first 24 h. The virtual format was unusual, but opened the door for new elements such as Consensus questions proposed from the audience, but also live audience interaction on both days − the Consensus was split into 2 parts in order to accommodate as many time zones globally as possible, leading to almost a doubling of discussion time compared to previous meetings. Also, about 3,400 participants from over 100 countries and all continents came together, including many colleagues who could attend for the first time from world regions with restrictions that so far did not allow the travel to Vienna. Traditionally, the Panel votings and discussions were preceded by 3 days of high-level live-discussions about the lectures that were available on demand already a week before. Also, all the lectures and live discussions in mini-panels are made available online for at least 6 months (https://www.oncoconferences.ch/events/bcc-2021/). The traditional panel votings were once more moderated by Eric Winer from Harvard and included interactive elements such as audience votings and audience questions, presented by Michael Gnant. This rapid report by the editors-in-chief of Breast Care summarizes the results of the 2021 international panel votings with respect to locoregional and systemic treatment as a quick news update for our readers and clearly does not intend to replace the official St. Gallen Consensus publication that will follow shortly in Annals of Oncology.     

Advanced Prostate Cancer with ATM Loss: PARP and ATR Inhibitors

BackgroundDeleterious ATM alterations are found in metastatic prostate cancer (PC); PARP inhibition has antitumour activity against this subset, but only some ATM loss PCs respond.ObjectiveTo characterise ATM-deficient lethal PC and to study synthetic lethal therapeutic strategies for this subset.Design, setting, and participantsWe studied advanced PC biopsies using validated immunohistochemical (IHC) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays. In vitro cell line models modified using CRISPR-Cas9 to impair ATM function were generated and used in drug-sensitivity and functional assays, with validation in a patient-derived model.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisATM expression by IHC was correlated with clinical outcome using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test; sensitivity to different drug combinations was assessed in the preclinical models.Results and limitationsOverall, we detected ATM IHC loss in 68/631 (11%) PC patients in at least one biopsy, with synchronous and metachronous intrapatient heterogeneity; 46/71 (65%) biopsies with ATM loss had ATM mutations or deletions by NGS. ATM IHC loss was not associated with worse outcome from advanced disease, but ATM loss was associated with increased genomic instability (NtAI:number of subchromosomal regions with allelic imbalance extending to the telomere, p = 0.005; large-scale transitions, p = 0.05). In vitro, ATM loss PC models were sensitive to ATR inhibition, but had variable sensitivity to PARP inhibition; superior antitumour activity was seen with combined PARP and ATR inhibition in these models.ConclusionsATM loss in PC is not always detected by targeted NGS, associates with genomic instability, and is most sensitive to combined ATR and PARP inhibition.Patient summaryOf aggressive prostate cancers, 10% lose the DNA repair gene ATM; this loss may identify a distinct prostate cancer subtype that is most sensitive to the combination of oral drugs targeting PARP and ATR.