Matthew J O'Shaughnessy1, Sean M McBride2, Hebert Alberto Vargas3, Karim A Touijer1, Michael J Morris4, Daniel C Danila4, Vincent P Laudone1, Bernard H Bochner1, Joel Sheinfeld1, Erica S Dayan5, Lawrence P Bellomo5, Daniel D Sjoberg6, Glenn Heller6, Michael J Zelefsky2, James A Eastham1, Peter T Scardino1, Howard I Scher7. 1. Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 3. Body Imaging Service and Molecular Imaging & Therapy Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY. 4. Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 5. Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 6. Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY. 7. Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. Electronic address: scherh@mskcc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a multimodal strategy aimed at treating all sites of disease that provides a rapid readout of success or failure in men presenting with non-castrate metastatic prostate cancers that are incurable with single modality therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty selected men with oligometastatic M1a (extrapelvic nodal disease) or M1b (bone disease) at diagnosis were treated using a multimodal approach that included androgen deprivation, radical prostatectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy (retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in the presence of clinically positive retroperitoneal nodes), and stereotactic body radiotherapy to osseous disease or the primary site. Outcomes of each treatment were assessed sequentially. Androgen deprivation was discontinued in responding patients. The primary end point was an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after testosterone recovery. The goal was to eliminate all detectable disease. RESULTS: Each treatment modality contributed to the outcome: 95% of the cohort achieved an undetectable PSA with multimodal treatment, including 25% of patients after androgen deprivation alone and an additional 50% and 20% after surgery and radiotherapy, respectively. Overall, 20% of patients (95% confidence interval: 3%-38%) achieved the primary end point, which persisted for 5, 6, 27+ , and 46+ months. All patients meeting the primary end point had been classified with M1b disease at presentation. CONCLUSION: A sequentially applied multimodal treatment strategy can eliminate detectable disease in selected patients with metastatic spread at diagnosis. The end point of undetectable PSA after testosterone recovery should be considered when evaluating new approaches to rapidly set priorities for large-scale testing in early metastatic disease states and to shift the paradigm from palliation to cure.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a multimodal strategy aimed at treating all sites of disease that provides a rapid readout of success or failure in men presenting with non-castrate metastatic prostate cancers that are incurable with single modality therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty selected men with oligometastatic M1a (extrapelvic nodal disease) or M1b (bone disease) at diagnosis were treated using a multimodal approach that included androgen deprivation, radical prostatectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy (retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in the presence of clinically positive retroperitoneal nodes), and stereotactic body radiotherapy to osseous disease or the primary site. Outcomes of each treatment were assessed sequentially. Androgen deprivation was discontinued in responding patients. The primary end point was an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after testosterone recovery. The goal was to eliminate all detectable disease. RESULTS: Each treatment modality contributed to the outcome: 95% of the cohort achieved an undetectable PSA with multimodal treatment, including 25% of patients after androgen deprivation alone and an additional 50% and 20% after surgery and radiotherapy, respectively. Overall, 20% of patients (95% confidence interval: 3%-38%) achieved the primary end point, which persisted for 5, 6, 27+ , and 46+ months. All patients meeting the primary end point had been classified with M1b disease at presentation. CONCLUSION: A sequentially applied multimodal treatment strategy can eliminate detectable disease in selected patients with metastatic spread at diagnosis. The end point of undetectable PSA after testosterone recovery should be considered when evaluating new approaches to rapidly set priorities for large-scale testing in early metastatic disease states and to shift the paradigm from palliation to cure.
Authors: R C Flanigan; S E Salmon; B A Blumenstein; S I Bearman; V Roy; P C McGrath; J R Caton; N Munshi; E D Crawford Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-12-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Jeffrey Karnes; Christian Stief; Bethan Copsey; Francesco Montorsi; Peter Hammerer; Burkhard Beyer; Marco Moschini; Christian Gratzke; Thomas Steuber; Nazareno Suardi; Alberto Briganti; Lukas Manka; Tommy Nyberg; Susan J Dutton; Peter Wiklund; Markus Graefen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Vassiliki Tzelepi; Eleni Efstathiou; Sijin Wen; Patricia Troncoso; Maria Karlou; Curtis A Pettaway; Louis L Pisters; Anh Hoang; Christopher J Logothetis; Lance C Pagliaro Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-05-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M E Gleave; S L Goldenberg; J L Chin; J Warner; F Saad; L H Klotz; M Jewett; V Kassabian; M Chetner; C Dupont; S Van Rensselaer Journal: J Urol Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Edmund K Bartlett; Kristina D Simmons; Heather Wachtel; Robert E Roses; Douglas L Fraker; Rachel R Kelz; Giorgos C Karakousis Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Dana Rathkopf; Michael A Carducci; Michael J Morris; Susan F Slovin; Mario A Eisenberger; Roberto Pili; Samuel R Denmeade; Moshe Kelsen; Tracy Curley; Melinda Halter; Connie Collins; Martin Fleisher; Glenn Heller; Sharyn D Baker; Howard I Scher Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anders Widmark; Olbjørn Klepp; Arne Solberg; Jan-Erik Damber; Anders Angelsen; Per Fransson; Jo-Asmund Lund; Ilker Tasdemir; Morten Hoyer; Fredrik Wiklund; Sophie D Fosså Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Howard I Scher; Susan Halabi; Ian Tannock; Michael Morris; Cora N Sternberg; Michael A Carducci; Mario A Eisenberger; Celestia Higano; Glenn J Bubley; Robert Dreicer; Daniel Petrylak; Philip Kantoff; Ethan Basch; William Kevin Kelly; William D Figg; Eric J Small; Tomasz M Beer; George Wilding; Alison Martin; Maha Hussain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Malcolm D Mason; Wendy R Parulekar; Matthew R Sydes; Michael Brundage; Peter Kirkbride; Mary Gospodarowicz; Richard Cowan; Edmund C Kostashuk; John Anderson; Gregory Swanson; Mahesh K B Parmar; Charles Hayter; Gordana Jovic; Andrea Hiltz; John Hetherington; Jinka Sathya; James B P Barber; Michael McKenzie; Salah El-Sharkawi; Luis Souhami; P D John Hardman; Bingshu E Chen; Padraig Warde Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Min Yuen Teo; Matthew J O'Shaughnessy; Sean M McBride; Herbert A Vargas; Howard I Scher Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 66.675
Authors: Martin J Connor; Taimur T Shah; Gail Horan; Charlotte L Bevan; Mathias Winkler; Hashim U Ahmed Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 66.675