Open Access

Background: This study aims to test the effect of the 10 most common nonurological primary cancers (skin, rectal, colon, lymphoma, leukemia, pancreas, stomach, esophagus, liver, lung) on overall mortality (OM) after secondary prostate cancer (PCa). Material and Methods: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, patients with 10 most common primary cancers and concomitant secondary PCa (diagnosed 2004–2016) were identified and were matched in 1:4 fashion (age, year at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, treatment type, TNM stage) with primary PCa controls. OM was compared between secondary and primary PCa patients and was stratified according to primary cancer type, as well as according to time interval between primary cancer vs. secondary PCa diagnoses. Results: We identified 24,848 secondary PCa patients (skin, n = 3,871; rectal, n = 798; colon, n = 3,665; lymphoma, n = 2,583; leukemia, n = 1,102; pancreatic, n = 118; stomach, n = 361; esophagus, n = 219; liver, n = 160; lung, n = 1,328) vs. 531,732 primary PCa patients. Secondary PCa characteristics were less favorable than those of primary PCa patients (PSA and grade), and smaller proportions of secondary PCa patients received active treatment. After 1:4 matching, all secondary PCa exhibited worse OM than primary PCa patients. Finally, subgroup analyses showed that the survival disadvantage of secondary PCa patients decreased with longer time interval since primary cancer diagnosis and subsequent secondary PCa. Conclusion: Patients with secondary PCa are diagnosed with less favorable PSA and grade. Even after matching for PCa characteristics, secondary PCa patients still exhibit worse survival. However, the survival disadvantage is attenuated, when secondary PCa diagnosis is made after longer time interval, since primary cancer diagnosis.

Purpose: To test the effect of anatomic variants of the prostatic apex overlapping the membranous urethra (Lee type classification), as well as median urethral sphincter length (USL) in preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) on the very early continence in open (ORP) and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) patients. Methods: In 128 consecutive patients (01/2018–12/2019), USL and the prostatic apex classified according to Lee types A–D in mpMRI prior to ORP or RARP were retrospectively analyzed. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify anatomic characteristics for very early continence rates, defined as urine loss of ≤ 1 g in the PAD-test. Results: Of 128 patients with mpMRI prior to surgery, 76 (59.4%) underwent RARP vs. 52 (40.6%) ORP. In total, median USL was 15, 15 and 10 mm in the sagittal, coronal and axial dimensions. After stratification according to very early continence in the PAD-test (≤ 1 g vs. > 1 g), continent patients had significantly more frequently Lee type D (71.4 vs. 54.4%) and C (14.3 vs. 7.6%, p = 0.03). In multivariable logistic regression models, the sagittal median USL (odds ratio [OR] 1.03) and Lee type C (OR: 7.0) and D (OR: 4.9) were independent predictors for achieving very early continence in the PAD-test. Conclusion: Patients’ individual anatomical characteristics in mpMRI prior to radical prostatectomy can be used to predict very early continence. Lee type C and D suggest being the most favorable anatomical characteristics. Moreover, longer sagittal median USL in mpMRI seems to improve very early continence rates.

Background: The most recent overall survival (OS) and adverse event (AE) data have not been compared for the three guideline-recommended high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) treatment alternatives. Methods: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis focusing on OS and AE according to the most recent apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide reports. We systematically examined and compared apalutamide vs. enzalutamide vs. darolutamide efficacy and toxicity, relative to ADT according to PRISMA. We relied on PubMed search for most recent reports addressing prospective randomized trials with proven predefined OS benefit, relative to ADT: SPARTAN, PROSPER, and ARAMIS. OS represented the primary outcome and AEs represented secondary outcomes. Results: Overall, data originated from 4117 observations made within the three trials that were analyzed. Regarding OS benefit relative to ADT, darolutamide ranked first, followed by enzalutamide and apalutamide, in that order. In the subgroup of PSA-doubling time (PSA-DT) ≤ 6 months patients, enzalutamide ranked first, followed by darolutamide and apalutamide in that order. Conversely, in the subgroup of PSA-DT 6–10 months patients, darolutamide ranked first, followed by apalutamide and enzalutamide, in that order. Regarding grade 3+ AEs, darolutamide was most favorable, followed by enzalutamide and apalutamide, in that order. Conclusion: The current network meta-analysis suggests the highest OS efficacy and lowest grade 3+ toxicity for darolutamide. However, in the PSA-DT ≤ 6 months subgroup, the highest efficacy was recorded for enzalutamide. It is noteworthy that study design, study population, and follow-up duration represent some of the potentially critical differences that distinguish between the three studies and remained statistically unaccounted for using the network meta-analysis methodology. Those differences should be strongly considered in the interpretation of the current and any network meta-analyses.

Background: To test the effect of urological primary cancers (bladder, kidney, testis, upper tract, penile, urethral) on overall mortality (OM) after secondary prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database, patients with urological primary cancers and concomitant secondary PCa (diagnosed 2004-2016) were identified and were matched in 1:4 fashion with primary PCa controls. OM was compared between secondary and primary PCa patients and stratified according to primary urological cancer type, as well as to time interval between primary urological cancer versus secondary PCa diagnoses. Results: We identified 5,987 patients with primary urological and secondary PCa (bladder, n = 3,287; kidney, n = 2,127; testis, n = 391; upper tract, n = 125; penile, n = 47; urethral, n = 10) versus 531,732 primary PCa patients. Except for small proportions of Gleason grade group and age at diagnosis, PCa characteristics between secondary and primary PCa were comparable. Conversely, proportions of secondary PCa patients which received radical prostatectomy were smaller (29.0 vs. 33.5%), while no local treatment rates were higher (34.2 vs. 26.3%). After 1:4 matching, secondary PCa patients exhibited worse OM than primary PCa patients, except for primary testis cancer. Here, no OM differences were recorded. Finally, subgroup analyses showed that the survival disadvantage of secondary PCa patients decreased with longer time interval since primary cancer diagnosis. Conclusions: After detailed matching for PCa characteristics, secondary PCa patients exhibit worse survival, except for testis cancer patients. The survival disadvantage is attenuated, when secondary PCa diagnosis is made after longer time interval, since primary urological cancer diagnosis.

The objective of the study was to test the impact of implementing standard full functional-length urethral sphincter (FFLU) and neurovascular bundle preservation (NVBP) with intraoperative frozen section technique (IFT) on long-term urinary continence in patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We relied on an institutional tertiary-care database to identify patients who underwent RARP between 01/2014 and 09/2019. Until 10/2017, FFLU was not performed and decision for NVBP was taken without IFT. From 11/2017, FFLU and IFT-guided NVBP was routinely performed in all patients undergoing RARP. Long-term continence (≥ 12 months) was defined as the usage of no or one safety- pad. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models tested the correlation between surgical approach (standard vs FFLU + NVBP) and long-term continence. Covariates consisted of age, body mass index, prostate volume and extraprostatic extension of tumor. The study cohort consisted of 142 patients, with equally sized groups for standard vs FFLU + NVBP RARP (68 vs 74 patients). Routine FFLU + NVBP implementation resulted in a long-term continence rate of 91%, compared to 63% in standard RARP (p < 0.001). Following FFLU + NVBP RARP, 5% needed 1–2, 4% 3–5 pads/24 h and no patient (0%) suffered severe long-term incontinence (> 5 pads/24 h). No significant differences in patient or tumor characteristics were recorded between both groups. In multivariable logistic regression models, FFLU + NVBP was a robust predictor for continence (Odds ratio [OR]: 7.62; 95% CI 2.51–27.36; p < 0.001). Implementation of FFLU and NVBP in patients undergoing RARP results in improved long-term continence rates of 91%.