OBJECTIVE: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a mainstay of treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) and is associated with increased risks of osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Despite international guidelines to mitigate fracture risk, osteoporosis is under-diagnosed and under-treated due to poor implementation. This scoping review aims to synthesise knowledge surrounding the implementation of guidelines to inform health service interventions to reduce fracture risk in men with PCa-taking ADT (PCa-ADT).
METHODS: Four databases and additional literature were searched for studies published between January 2000 and January 2023. Studies that provided evidence influencing guidelines implementation were included. The i-PARIHS (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) implementation framework was used to inform the narrative synthesis.
RESULTS: Of the 1229 studies identified, 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, an improvement in fracture risk assessment was observed across heterogeneous study designs and outcome measures. Six studies were from Canada. Two studies involved family physicians or a community healthcare programme. Two studies incorporated patient or specialist surveys. One utilised an implementation framework. Implementation barriers included the lack of knowledge for both patients and clinicians, time constraints, unsupportive organisational structures, and challenges in transferring patient care from specialists to primary care. Effective strategies included education, novel care pathways using a multidisciplinary approach, incorporating a healthy bone prescription tool into routine care, point-of-care interventions, and bespoke clinics.
CONCLUSIONS: There is an unmet need to provide evidence-based bone healthcare in men with PCa receiving ADT. This study highlights barriers and strategies in the implementation of fracture risk assessment for PCa-ADT patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary care clinicians can play a significant role in the management of complications from long-term cancer treatment such as treatment-induced bone loss. Future studies should consult patients, families, specialists, and primary care clinicians in service re-design.

Fracture risk is increased in men with prostate cancer (PCa) receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT). However, routine assessment of fracture risk is often not systematically applied. We aimed to establish a comprehensive care pathway for fracture prevention in men with PCa starting ADT. Therefore, a multidisciplinary working group designed and implemented a care pathway using the \'Knowledge to Action\' framework, based on current Dutch guidelines for PCa, osteoporosis and fracture prevention, and an extensive literature review of other guidelines. The pathway was developed according to a five-step clinical approach including case finding, fracture risk assessment based on risk factors, bone mineral density test, vertebral fracture assessment, differential diagnosis, treatment, and annual follow-up. Our fracture prevention care pathway for patients with PCa at the time of ADT initiation was designed to promote a patient-centered, multidisciplinary approach to facilitate the implementation of early fracture prevention measures.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been associated with adverse effects on the brain. ADT leads to altered testosterone levels that may affect brain morphology as well as cognition. Considering the reliability of cortical thickness (CT) as a marker of cognitive and brain changes, e.g., in Alzheimer\'s disease, we assessed the impacts of ADT on CT and working memory. Thirty men with non-metastatic prostate cancer receiving ADT and 32 patients not receiving ADT (controls or CON), matched in age and years of education, participated in N-back task and quality-of-life (QoL) assessments as well as brain imaging at baseline and prospectively at 6 months. Imaging data were processed with published routines to estimate CT and the results of a group by time flexible factorial analysis were evaluated at a corrected threshold. ADT and CON did not differ in N-back performance or QoL across time points. Relative to CON, patients receiving ADT showed significantly higher frontopolar cortex (FPC) CT at 6-month follow-up vs. baseline. Follow-up vs. baseline FPC CT change correlated negatively with changes in 2-back correct response rate and in testosterone levels across all participants. In mediation analysis, FPC CT change mediated the association between testosterone level change and 2-back accuracy rate change. Increases in FPC CT following 6 months of ADT may reflect early neurodegenerative changes in response to androgen deprivation. While no significant impact on working memory or QoL was observed over 6 months, further research of longer duration of treatment is warranted to unravel the full spectrum of cognitive and neural consequences of ADT in prostate cancer patients.

The geriatric patient is defined by an age of over 75 years and multimorbidity or by an age of over 80 years. These patients exhibit a particular vulnerability, which, in the incidence of side effects or complications, leads to a loss of autonomy. Treatment sequalae, once they have arisen, can no longer be compensated. It is important to recognize and document treatment requirements among geriatric patients with the help of screening instruments such as the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) and Geriatric 8 (G8) scores. If a treatment requirement is identified, oncologic treatment should not be commenced uncritically but rather a focus placed on identification of functional deficits relevant to treatment, ideally using a geriatric assessment but at least based on a detailed medical history. These deficits can then be presented in a structured, examiner-independent, and forensically validated manner using special assessments. A planned treatment requires not only consideration of survival gains, but also knowledge of specific side effects and, in geriatric patients in particular, their impact on everyday life. These considerations should be compared with the patient\'s individual risk profile in order to prevent side effects from negating the effect of the treatment, for example by worsening the patient\'s self-help status. With regard to androgen deprivation in prostate cancer-which often is used uncritically-it is important to consider possible side effects such as osteoporosis, sarcopenia, anemia, and cognitive impairment in terms of a possible fall risk; an increase in cardiovascular mortality and the triggering of a metabolic syndrome on the basis of preexisting cardiac diseases or risk constellations; and to carry out a careful risk-benefit analysis.
UNASSIGNED: Der geriatrische Patient wird als über 75-jährig und multimorbid oder über 80-jährig definiert. Es liegt eine besondere Vulnerabilität vor, die bei Eintreten einer Nebenwirkung oder Therapiekomplikation zu Autonomieverlust führt. Einmal eingetretene Therapiefolgen können nicht mehr ausbalanciert werden. Es gilt, mit Unterstützung von Screening-Instrumenten wie dem ISAR-Screening („identification of seniors at risk“) oder dem G8-Screening den geriatrischen Handlungsbedarf zu erkennen und zu dokumentieren. Besteht ein solcher Handlungsbedarf, sollte nicht unkritisch mit einer onkologischen Therapie begonnen werden, sondern idealerweise mit einem geriatrischen Basis-Assessment oder zumindest durch eine genaue Anamnese therapierelevante Funktionsdefizite identifiziert werden. Diese können dann strukturiert, untersucherunabhängig und forensisch abgesichert mit speziellen Assessments dargestellt werden. Eine geplante Therapie bedarf nicht nur der Betrachtung im Hinblick auf die Verbesserung von Überleben, sondern auch der Kenntnis der speziellen Nebenwirkungen und im Besonderen bei geriatrischen Patienten deren Auswirkungen auf das tägliche Leben. Diese Abwägungen gehören mit dem individuellen Risikoprofil des Patienten abgeglichen, um zu vermeiden, dass eintretende Nebenwirkungen den Therapieeffekt etwa durch eine Verschlechterung des Selbsthilfestatus zunichtemachen. Im Hinblick auf einen oftmals unkritisch eingesetzten Androgenentzug beim Prostatakarzinom gilt es, die hierdurch möglichen Nebenwirkungen wie Osteoporose, Sarkopenie, Anämie und kognitiven Einbußen im Hinblick auf eine mögliche Sturzgefährdung, die Erhöhung der kardiovaskulären Mortalität und die Auslösung eines metabolischen Syndroms unter Berücksichtigung schon bestehender kardialen Erkrankungen bzw. Risikokonstellationen im Blick zu behalten und eine sorgfältige Nutzen-Risiko-Analyse durchzuführen.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the early metabolic response of the primary tumor using Gallium-68 (68Ga)-labeled-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT), as well as the relationship between PSMA change in the primary tumor and PSA response after definitive radiotherapy (RT), either alone or in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in intermediate risk prostate cancer (IR-PCa) patients.
METHODS: The clinical data of 71 IR-PCa patients treated with RT alone (36 patients, 50.7%) or RT and ADT (35 patients, 49.3%) were retrospectively analyzed. The difference between pre- and Posttreatment primary tumor PSMA expression and serum PSA values measured 4 months after completion of treatment were compared between treatment arms. Correlation between primary tumor metabolic response and serum PSA changes was analyzed.
RESULTS: The median duration between pre- and Posttreatment 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT for the entire patient population was 6.9 months (range, 5.6-8.4 months), and it was similar in both treatment arms. A decrease in primary tumor maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was seen in 66 patients (93.0%), with a median value of 61.2%, which is significantly lower in patients undergoing RT alone than those undergoing RT and ADT (45.1 ± 30.6% vs. 59.1 ± 24.7%; p = 0.004). The complete metabolic response rate was significantly higher in patients undergoing RT and ADT than those treated with RT alone (40% vs. 0%; p < 0.001). Although moderate and positive correlation between pretreatment SUVmax and oosttreatment SUVmax was observed, there was no significant correlation between SUV change and PSA change. For patients treated with RT and ADT, posttreatment SUVmax was significantly lower and SUV change was significantly higher in patients with PSA nadir than in those without.
CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results show that RT, with or without ADT, significantly reduces primary tumor SUVmax and serum PSA levels. Nonetheless, our findings indicate that early treatment response using 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT is not feasible for those treated with RT alone, and it may only be useful in better distinguishing patients with and without PSA nadir for those who received both RT and ADT.

BACKGROUND: Patients with BRCA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have an aggressive disease course. This study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns among patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC.
METHODS: De-identified electronic health record data from the Flatiron Health-Foundation Medicine Inc. Metastatic Prostate Cancer Clinico-Genomic Database (January 01, 2011 to June 30, 2022) were used to select patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC initiating first-line (1L) therapy with an oncologist-defined advanced line of therapy (LOT) or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy. Treatment sequences and reasons for censoring were described in 1L, and among patients who initiated a second-line (2L) therapy.
RESULTS: A total of 98 treated patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC were identified. The top 3 treatment regimens in 1L, overall, were ADT monotherapy (19%), enzalutamide (14%), and olaparib (13%). The main reason for censoring patients with ADT monotherapy was death (52.6%). Among 79 patients treated with an advanced LOT in 1L, 43.0% (n = 34) did not initiate a 2L therapy, of which, 29.4% died. In patients who initiated a 2L (n = 45), the most common 1L to 2L treatment sequence was olaparib to docetaxel (11.1%). The most prescribed 2L therapies were docetaxel (22.2%), olaparib (20.0%), abiraterone acetate (13.3%), and enzalutamide (11.1%). From 1L initiation, the median time-to-next-treatment was 6.2 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC, ADT monotherapy, enzalutamide, and olaparib were most commonly used. Prognosis of BRCA-positive patients was poor, with most patients failing initial therapy resulting in a switch to a new therapy or death. These findings highlight the need for earlier and more effective treatments for patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC.

暂无摘要。

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in American men and 2nd leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the backbone of treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Over the past several decades a number of new therapeutics, such as novel androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, targeted agents and radionuclide therapies, have been introduced for the treatment of prostate cancers. These agents have been demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes of prostate cancer patients in randomized clinical trials. In addition, new therapeutic strategies, such as early intensification of ADT, novel treatment combinations, and treatment sequencing, are expected to improve outcomes further. In this clinical review, we discuss the changing treatment landscape for advanced prostate cancer with a focus on new therapeutics.

Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignancies among men worldwide. Besides genetic alterations, epigenetic modulations including DNA methylation, histone modifications and miRNA mediated alteration of gene expression are the key driving forces for the prostate tumor development and cancer progression. Aberrant expression and/or the activity of the epigenetic modifiers/enzymes, results in aberrant expression of genes involved in DNA repair, cell cycle regulation, cell adhesion, apoptosis, autophagy, tumor suppression and hormone response and thereby disease progression. Altered epigenome is associated with prostate cancer recurrence, progression, aggressiveness and transition from androgen-dependent to androgen-independent phenotype. These epigenetic modifications are reversible and various compounds/drugs targeting the epigenetic enzymes have been developed that are effective in cancer treatment. This chapter focuses on the epigenetic alterations in prostate cancer initiation and progression, listing different epigenetic biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of the disease and their potential as therapeutic targets. This chapter also summarizes different epigenetic drugs approved for prostate cancer therapy and the drugs available for clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: A multicenter database was utilized to examine the current treatment landscape and clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) following approval of upfront androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs).
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with mHSPC who commenced treatment between February 2018 and June 2023. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess oncological outcomes, including time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), progression-free survival 2 (PFS2, duration from initial treatment to tumor progression during second-line treatment), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the impact of treatment choices on oncological outcomes. In addition, the incidence rate of adverse events was assessed.
RESULTS: In total, 829 patients were analyzed; 42.5% received ARSIs with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), 44.0% received combined androgen blockade (CAB), and 13.5% received ADT alone. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression analyses indicated higher rates of CRPC and shorter PFS2 in patients treated with CAB versus ARSIs with ADT. By contrast, CSS and OS were not significantly different between the ARSI with ADT group and the CAB group. Grades 3-4 adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients receiving CAB and 6.0% of those receiving ARSIs with ADT.
CONCLUSIONS: Initial treatment with ARSIs in combination with ADT resulted in a longer time to CRPC and longer PFS2 compared to CAB. Although CAB and ADT alone were associated with fewer adverse events, ARSIs with ADT should be considered a first-line treatment option given its superior oncological outcomes.