Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

The very-high-risk prostate cancer: a contemporary update

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 19, pages 340–348 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background:

Treatment of high-risk prostate cancer has evolved considerably over the past two decades, yet patients with very-high-risk features may still experience poor outcome despite aggressive therapy. We review the contemporary literature focusing on current definitions, role of modern imaging and treatment alternatives in very-high-risk prostate cancer.

Methods:

We searched the MEDLINE database for all clinical trials or practice guidelines published in English between 2000 and 2016, with the following search terms: ‘prostatic neoplasms’ (MeSH Terms) AND (‘high risk’ (keyword) OR ‘locally advanced’ (keyword) OR ‘node positive’ (keyword)). Abstracts pertaining to very-high-risk prostate cancer were evaluated and 40 pertinent studies served as the basis for this review.

Results:

The term ‘very’-high-risk prostate cancer remains ill defined. The European Association of Urology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines provide the only available definitions, categorizing those with clinical stage T3–4 or minimal nodal involvement as very high risk irrespective of PSA level or biopsy Gleason score. Modern imaging with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography-prostate-specific membrane antigen scans has a role in pre-treatment assessment. Local definitive therapy by external beam radiation combined with androgen deprivation is supported by several randomized clinical trials, whereas the role of surgery in the very-high-risk setting combined with adjuvant radiation/androgen deprivation therapy is emerging. Growing evidence suggest neoadjuvant taxane-based chemotherapy in the context of a multimodal approach may be beneficial.

Conclusions:

Men with very-high-risk tumors may benefit from local definitive treatment in the setting of a multimodal regimen, offering local control and possibly cure in well selected patients. Further studies are necessary to better characterize the ‘very’-high-risk category and determine the optimal therapy for the individual patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chang AJ, Autio KA, Roach M 3rd, Scher HI . High-risk prostate cancer-classification and therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2014; 11: 308–323.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 969–974.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 2007; 177: 2106–2131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 124–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mohler JL, Kantoff PW, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, Cohen M, D’Amico AV et al. Prostate cancer, version 2. 2014 J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2014; 12: 686–718.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Bianco FJ Jr, Carver BS, Serio A, Scardino PT et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol 2007; 178: 493–499 discussion 499.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nanda A, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, D'Amico AV . Gleason Pattern 5 prostate cancer: further stratification of patients with high-risk disease and implications for future randomized trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 74: 1419–1423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Patel AA, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, D'Amico AV . PSA failure following definitive treatment of prostate cancer having biopsy Gleason score 7 with tertiary grade 5. JAMA 2007; 298: 1533–1538.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pierorazio PM, Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI . Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system. BJU Int 2013; 111: 753–760.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Rusthoven CG, Waxweiler TV, DeWitt PE, Flaig TW, Raben D, Kavanagh BD . Gleason stratifications prognostic for survival in men receiving definitive external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2015; 33: 71 e11–71 e79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Serni S, Masieri L, Minervini A, Lapini A, Nesi G, Carini M . Cancer progression after anterograde radical prostatectomy for pathologic Gleason score 8 to 10 and influence of concomitant variables. Urology 2006; 67: 373–378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fischer S, Lin D, Simon RM, Howard LE, Aronson WJ, Terris MK et al. Do all men with pathological Gleason score 8-10 prostate cancer have poor outcomes? Results from the SEARCH database. BJU Int 2015; 118: 250–257.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Izumi K, Lin WJ, Miyamoto H, Huang CK, Maolake A, Kitagawa Y et al. Outcomes and predictive factors of prostate cancer patients with extremely high prostate-specific antigen level. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2014; 140: 1413–1419.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ang M, Rajcic B, Foreman D, Moretti K, O'Callaghan ME . Men presenting with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values of over 100 ng/mL. BJU Int 2016; 117: 68–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Spahn M, Joniau S, Gontero P, Fieuws S, Marchioro G, Tombal B et al. Outcome predictors of radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate-specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml: a European multi-institutional study of 712 patients. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 1–7 discussion 10–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Walz J, Joniau S, Chun FK, Isbarn H, Jeldres C, Yossepowitch O et al. Pathological results and rates of treatment failure in high-risk prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2011; 107: 765–770.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Joniau S, Briganti A, Gontero P, Gandaglia G, Tosco L, Fieuws S et al. Stratification of high-risk prostate cancer into prognostic categories: a European multi-institutional study. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 157–164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sundi D, Wang VM, Pierorazio PM, Han M, Bivalacqua TJ, Ball MW et al. Very-high-risk localized prostate cancer: definition and outcomes. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014; 17: 57–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sundi D, Wang V, Pierorazio PM, Han M, Partin AW, Tran PT et al. Identification of men with the highest risk of early disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Prostate 2014; 74: 628–636.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Cooperberg MR, Hilton JF, Carroll PR . The CAPRA-S score: a straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2011; 117: 5039–5046.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Cooperberg MR, Davicioni E, Crisan A, Jenkins RB, Ghadessi M, Karnes RJ . Combined value of validated clinical and genomic risk stratification tools for predicting prostate cancer mortality in a high-risk prostatectomy cohort. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 326–333.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zimmermann M, Delouya G, Alenizi AM, Rajih E, Zorn KC, Taussky D . CAPRA-S predicts outcome for adjuvant and salvage external beam radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Can Urol Assoc J 2016; 10: 132–136.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Ross AE, D'Amico AV, Freedland SJ . Which, when and why? Rational use of tissue-based molecular testing in localized prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2016; 19: 1–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ross AE, Johnson MH, Yousefi K, Davicioni E, Netto GJ, Marchionni L et al. Tissue-based genomics augments post-prostatectomy risk stratification in a natural history cohort of intermediate- and high-risk men. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 157–165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Klein EA, Yousefi K, Haddad Z, Choeurng V, Buerki C, Stephenson AJ et al. A genomic classifier improves prediction of metastatic disease within 5 years after surgery in node-negative high-risk prostate cancer patients managed by radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 778–786.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Edge SB, Compton CC . The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 1471–1474.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cheng L, Zincke H, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Scherer B, Bostwick DG . Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer 2001; 91: 66–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Briganti A, Karnes JR, Da Pozzo LF, Cozzarini C, Gallina A, Suardi N et al. Two positive nodes represent a significant cut-off value for cancer specific survival in patients with node positive prostate cancer. A new proposal based on a two-institution experience on 703 consecutive N+ patients treated with radical prostatectomy, extended pelvic lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 261–270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA . Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 20–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. European Association of Urology Website 2015.

  31. Appayya MB, Johnston EW, Punwani S . The role of multi-parametric MRI in loco-regional staging of men diagnosed with early prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2015; 25: 510–517.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM . Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for local staging of prostate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2016; 70: 233–245.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. deSouza NM, Riches SF, Vanas NJ, Morgan VA, Ashley SA, Fisher C et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 774–782.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hambrock T, Hoeks C, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Scheenen T, Futterer J, Bouwense S et al. Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 177–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011; 259: 453–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Somford DM, Hamoen EH, Futterer JJ, van Basten JP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Vreuls W et al. The predictive value of endorectal 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for extraprostatic extension in patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2013; 190: 1728–1734.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Maurer T, Eiber M, Schwaiger M, Gschwend JE . Current use of PSMA-PET in prostate cancer management. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13: 226–235.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Fendler WP, Schmidt DF, Wenter V, Thierfelder KM, Zach C, Stief C et al. 68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC PET/CT detects location and extent of primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2016 (e-pub ahead of print).

  39. Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Weirich G et al. Diagnostic efficacy of gallium-PSMA Positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging in lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2015; 195: 1436–1443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Platt JF, Bree RL, Schwab RE . The accuracy of CT in the staging of carcinoma of the prostate. Am J Roentgenol 1987; 149: 315–318.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Hovels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, Jager GJ, Strum S, Hoogeveen YL et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 387–395.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Evangelista L, Guttilla A, Zattoni F, Muzzio PC . Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 1040–1048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rinnab L, Blumstein NM, Mottaghy FM, Hautmann RE, Kufer R, Hohl K et al. 11C-choline positron-emission tomography/computed tomography and transrectal ultrasonography for staging localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2007; 99: 1421–1426.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Johnstone PA, Ward KC, Goodman M, Assikis V, Petros JA . Radical prostatectomy for clinical T4 prostate cancer. Cancer 2006; 106: 2603–2609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Moltzahn F, Karnes J, Gontero P, Kneitz B, Tombal B, Bader P et al. Predicting prostate cancer-specific outcome after radical prostatectomy among men with very high-risk cT3b/4 PCa: a multi-institutional outcome study of 266 patients. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2015; 18: 31–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Casey JT, Meeks JJ, Greco KA, Wu SD, Nadler RB . Outcomes of locally advanced (T3 or greater) prostate cancer in men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1519–1522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Collette L, van Cangh P, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 2005; 366: 572–578.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Tombal B, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L, de Reijke TM et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 2012; 380: 2018–2027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Thompson IM Jr., Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 2329–2335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial. J Urol 2009; 181: 956–962.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Wiegel T, Bottke D, Steiner U, Siegmann A, Golz R, Storkel S et al. Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 2924–2930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wiegel T, Bartkowiak D, Bottke D, Bronner C, Steiner U, Siegmann A et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see after radical prostatectomy: 10-year follow-up of the ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 trial. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 243–250.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Thompson IM, Valicenti RK, Albertsen P, Davis BJ, Goldenberg SL, Hahn C et al. Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: AUA/ASTRO Guideline. J Urol 2013; 190: 441–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nezolosky MD, Dinh KT, Muralidhar V, Mahal BA, Chen YW, Beard CJ et al. Significant increase in prostatectomy and decrease in radiation for clinical T3 prostate cancer from 1998 to 2012. Urol Oncol 2016; 34: 57.e15–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bolla M, Collette L, Blank L, Warde P, Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO et al. Long-term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): a phase III randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 103–106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Bolla M, Van Tienhoven G, Warde P, Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO, Storme G et al. External irradiation with or without long-term androgen suppression for prostate cancer with high metastatic risk: 10-year results of an EORTC randomised study. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 1066–1073.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Lawton CA, Winter K, Murray K, Machtay M, Mesic JB, Hanks GE et al. Updated results of the phase III Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trial 85-31 evaluating the potential benefit of androgen suppression following standard radiation therapy for unfavorable prognosis carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 49: 937–946.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Pilepich MV, Winter K, Lawton CA, Krisch RE, Wolkov HB, Movsas B et al. Androgen suppression adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in prostate carcinoma—long-term results of phase III RTOG 85-31. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61: 1285–1290.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Warde P, Mason M, Ding K, Kirkbride P, Brundage M, Cowan R et al. Combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 2104–2111.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, Damber JE, Angelsen A, Fransson P et al. Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet 2009; 373: 301–308.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Mason MD, Parulekar WR, Sydes MR, Brundage M, Kirkbride P, Gospodarowicz M et al. Final report of the Intergroup Randomized Study of Combined Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Plus Radiotherapy Versus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 2143–2150.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Pilepich MV, Winter K, John MJ, Mesic JB, Sause W, Rubin P et al. Phase III radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) trial 86-10 of androgen deprivation adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 50: 1243–1252.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Hanks GE, Pajak TF, Porter A, Grignon D, Brereton H, Venkatesan V et al. Phase III trial of long-term adjuvant androgen deprivation after neoadjuvant hormonal cytoreduction and radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate: the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 92-02. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 3972–3978.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Horwitz EM, Bae K, Hanks GE, Porter A, Grignon DJ, Brereton HD et al. Ten-year follow-up of radiation therapy oncology group protocol 92-02: a phase III trial of the duration of elective androgen deprivation in locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 2497–2504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Denham JW, Steigler A, Lamb DS, Joseph D, Mameghan H, Turner S et al. Short-term androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: results from the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 96.01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2005; 6: 841–850.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Denham JW, Steigler A, Lamb DS, Joseph D, Turner S, Matthews J et al. Short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: 10-year data from the TROG 96.01 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 451–459.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Denham JW, Joseph D, Lamb DS, Spry NA, Duchesne G, Matthews J et al. Short-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy versus intermediate-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy, with or without zoledronic acid, in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (TROG 03.04 RADAR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 factorial trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: 1076–1089.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Roach M 3rd, DeSilvio M, Lawton C, Uhl V, Machtay M, Seider MJ et al. Phase III trial comparing whole-pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant versus adjuvant combined androgen suppression: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 1904–1911.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Lawton CA, DeSilvio M, Roach M 3rd, Uhl V, Kirsch R, Seider M et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: updated analysis of RTOG 94-13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69: 646–655.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Pommier P, Chabaud S, Lagrange JL, Richaud P, Lesaunier F, Le Prise E et al. Is there a role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate adenocarcinoma? Preliminary results of GETUG-01. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5366–5373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Aizer AA, Yu JB, McKeon AM, Decker RH, Colberg JW, Peschel RE . Whole pelvic radiotherapy versus prostate only radiotherapy in the management of locally advanced or aggressive prostate adenocarcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 75: 1344–1349.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Amini A, Jones BL, Yeh N, Rusthoven CG, Armstrong H, Kavanagh BD . Survival outcomes of whole-pelvic versus prostate-only radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer patients with use of the National Cancer Data Base. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2015; 93: 1052–1063.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Sweeney CJ, Chen YH, Carducci M, Liu G, Jarrard DF, Eisenberger M et al. Chemohormonal therapy in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 737–746.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Gravis G, Fizazi K, Joly F, Oudard S, Priou F, Esterni B et al. Androgen-deprivation therapy alone or with docetaxel in non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 15): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14: 149–158.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. James ND, Sydes MR, Clarke NW, Mason MD, Dearnaley DP, Spears MR et al. Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 387: 1163–1177.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Vale CL, Burdett S, Rydzewska LH, Albiges L, Clarke NW, Fisher D et al. Addition of docetaxel or bisphosphonates to standard of care in men with localised or metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analyses of aggregate data. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 243–256.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Dreicer R, Magi-Galluzzi C, Zhou M, Rothaermel J, Reuther A, Ulchaker J et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel before radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Urology 2004; 63: 1138–1142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Magi-Galluzzi C, Zhou M, Reuther AM, Dreicer R, Klein EA . Neoadjuvant docetaxel treatment for locally advanced prostate cancer: a clinicopathologic study. Cancer 2007; 110: 1248–1254.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Vuky J, Porter C, Isacson C, Vaughan M, Kozlowski P, Picozzi V et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel and gefitinib followed by radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk, locally advanced prostate cancer. Cancer 2009; 115: 784–791.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Kim WY, Whang YE, Pruthi RS, Baggstrom MQ, Rathmell WK, Rosenman JG et al. Neoadjuvant docetaxel/estramustine prior to radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy in high risk localized prostate cancer: a phase II trial. Urol Oncol 2011; 29: 608–613.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Thalgott M, Horn T, Heck MM, Maurer T, Eiber M, Retz M et al. Long-term results of a phase II study with neoadjuvant docetaxel chemotherapy and complete androgen blockade in locally advanced and high-risk prostate cancer. J Hematol Oncol 2014; 7: 20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Zhao B, Yerram NK, Gao T, Dreicer R, Klein EA . Long-term survival of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer managed with neoadjuvant docetaxel and radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 2015; 33: 164.e119–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Sanfilippo NJ, Taneja SS, Chachoua A, Lepor H, Formenti SC . Phase I/II study of biweekly paclitaxel and radiation in androgen-ablated locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 2973–2978.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Bolla M, Hannoun-Levi JM, Ferrero JM, Maingon P, Buffet-Miny J, Bougnoux A et al. Concurrent and adjuvant docetaxel with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy plus androgen deprivation for high-risk prostate cancer: preliminary results of a multicentre phase II trial. Radiother Oncol 2010; 97: 312–317.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Hussain A, Wu Y, Mirmiran A, DiBiase S, Goloubeva O, Bridges B et al. Long-term follow-up of a prospective trial of trimodality therapy of weekly paclitaxel, radiation, and androgen deprivation in high-risk prostate cancer with or without prior prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82: 167–174.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Chen RC, Rosenman JG, Hoffman LG, Chiu WK, Wang AZ, Pruthi RS et al. Phase I study of concurrent weekly docetaxel, high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110: E721–E726.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Guttilla A, Bortolus R, Giannarini G, Ghadjar P, Zattoni F, Gnech M et al. Multimodal treatment for high-risk prostate cancer with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy preceded or not by radical prostatectomy, concurrent intensified-dose docetaxel and long-term androgen deprivation therapy: results of a prospective phase II trial. Radiat Oncol 2014; 9: 24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Rosenthal SA, Hunt D, Sartor AO, Pienta KJ, Gomella L, Grignon D et al. A phase 3 trial of 2 years of androgen suppression and radiation therapy with or without adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer: final results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Phase 3 Randomized Trial NRG Oncology RTOG 9902. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2015; 93: 294–302.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Schweizer MT, Huang P, Kattan MW, Kibel AS, de Wit R, Sternberg CN et al. Adjuvant leuprolide with or without docetaxel in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (TAX-3501): important lessons for future trials. Cancer 2013; 119: 3610–3618.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Fizazi K, Faivre L, Lesaunier F, Delva R, Gravis G, Rolland F et al. Androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel and estramustine versus androgen deprivation therapy alone for high-risk localised prostate cancer (GETUG 12): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16: 787–794.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Sandler HM, Hu C, Rosenthal SA, Sartor O, Gomella LG, Amin M et al. A phase III protocol of androgen suppression (AS) and 3DCRT/IMRT versus AS and 3DCRT/IMRT followed by chemotherapy (CT) with docetaxel and prednisone for localized, high-risk prostate cancer (RTOG 0521). ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings, Chicago, IL, USA, 2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Abdollah F, Karnes RJ, Suardi N, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Fossati N et al. Impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 3939–3947.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Briganti A, Karnes RJ, Da Pozzo LF, Cozzarini C, Capitanio U, Gallina A et al. Combination of adjuvant hormonal and radiation therapy significantly prolongs survival of patients with pT2-4 pN+ prostate cancer: results of a matched analysis. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 832–840.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Rusthoven CG, Carlson JA, Waxweiler TV, Raben D, Dewitt PE, Crawford ED et al. The impact of definitive local therapy for lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a population-based study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 88: 1064–1073.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Lin CC, Gray PJ, Jemal A, Efstathiou JA . Androgen deprivation with or without radiation therapy for clinically node-positive prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel

    R Mano & O Yossepowitch

  2. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    R Mano & O Yossepowitch

  3. Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    J Eastham

Authors
  1. R Mano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J Eastham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. O Yossepowitch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O Yossepowitch.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mano, R., Eastham, J. & Yossepowitch, O. The very-high-risk prostate cancer: a contemporary update. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19, 340–348 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2016.40

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2016.40

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links