New meta-analysis below.
The old view is that mPCa requires systemic treatment, & that a RP adds no value & simply increases morbidity.
The new view is that cancer debulking can make the disease more manageable. If so, there should be a survival advantage.
From the new paper:
"The recommended therapy ... for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without chemotherapy. The role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of mPCa is still controversial."
"Our results successfully shed light on the relationship that RP for mPCa was associated with decreased cancer-specific mortality ... and enhanced overall survival ..."
"In addition, patients with less aggressive tumors and good general health seemed to benefit the most. Moreover, no matter compared with {no local therapy} or {radiation therapy}, RP showed significant superiority in {overall survival} or {cancer-specific mortality}."
I don't suppose that Mark Scholz ("Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers") would be happy with that finding.
-Patrick
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/292...
Biosci Rep. 2017 Dec 20. pii: BSR20171379. doi: 10.1042/BSR20171379. [Epub ahead of print]
The role of radical prostatectomy for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Wang Y1, Qin Z2, Wang Y3, Chen C3, Wang Y3, Meng X3, Song N4.
Author information
Abstract
The recommended therapy by EAU guidelines for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without chemotherapy. The role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of mPCa is still controversial. Hence, a meta-analysis was conducted by comprehensively searching the databases PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for the relevant studies published before September 1st, 2017. Our results successfully shed light on the relationship that RP for mPCa was associated with decreased cancer-specific mortality (CSM) (pooled HR=0.41, 95%CI=0.36 to 0.47) and enhanced overall survival (OS) (pooled HR=0.49, 95%CI=0.44 to 0.55). Subsequent stratified analysis demonstrated that no matter how RP compared with no local therapy (NLT) or radiation therapy (RT), it was linked to a lower CSM (pooled HR=0.36, 95%CI=0.30 to 0.43 and pooled HR=0.56, 95%CI 0.43 to 0.73, respectively) and a higher OS (pooled HR=0.49, 95%CI=0.44 to 0.56 and pooled HR=0.46, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.65, separately). When comparing different levels of Gleason score , M-stage or N-stage , our results indicated that high level of Gleason score, M-stage or N-stage was associated with increased CSM. In summary, the outcomes of the present meta-analysis demonstrated that RP for mPCa was correlated with decreased CSM and enhanced OS in eligible patients of involved studies. In addition, patients with less aggressive tumors and good general health seemed to benefit the most. Moreover, no matter compared with NLT or RT, RP showed significant superiority in OS or CSM. Upcoming prospective randomized controlled trials were warranted to provide more high-quality data.
KEYWORDS:
cytoreductive prostatectomy; meta-analysis; metastatic prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy
PMID: 29263146 DOI: 10.1042/BSR20171379