Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Radical Prostatectomy for High-risk Localized or Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: Removing the Primary

  • Prostate Cancer (S Prasad, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

We reviewed the literature to determine what role, if any, radical prostatectomy should play in the treatment of high-risk and/or node-positive prostate cancer.

Recent Findings

The AUA, NCCN, and EAU all include radical prostatectomy as a treatment option for high-risk prostate cancer based on evidence that has shown improvements in biochemical-free and disease-specific survival. Lymph node-positive patients may also derive benefit from radical prostatectomy with lymph node dissection, however, only retrospective studies with high risk of selection bias have been published to date.

Summary

High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease representing a wide range of disease characteristics. Radical surgery, historically avoided in such patients, may now be considered a valid treatment option for select cases. The adverse effects of surgery using modern techniques lead to similar quality of life outcomes as radiation therapy, and treatment of the primary tumor is likely beneficial when compared to ADT alone.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(1):7–30. doi:10.3322/caac.21387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brawley OW. Prostate cancer epidemiology in the United States. World J Urol. 2012;30(2):195–200. doi:10.1007/s00345-012-0824-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Epstein MM, Edgren G, Rider JR, Mucci LA, Adami HO. Temporal trends in cause of death among Swedish and US men with prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104(17):1335–42. doi:10.1093/jnci/djs299.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Moyer VA. Force USPST. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):120–34. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-00459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Yossepowitch O, Eastham JA. Radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2008;26(3):219–24. doi:10.1007/s00345-008-0247-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Carroll PR. CaPSURE. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol. 2003;170(6 Pt 2):S21–S25; discussion S6-7. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000095025.03331.c6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990–2013. JAMA. 2015;314(1):80–2. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.6036.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gakis G, Boorjian SA, Briganti A, Joniau S, Karazanashvili G, Karnes RJ, et al. The role of radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):191–9. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gerber GS, Thisted RA, Chodak GW, Schroder FH, Frohmuller HG, Scardino PT, et al. Results of radical prostatectomy in men with locally advanced prostate cancer: multi-institutional pooled analysis. Eur Urol. 1997;32(4):385–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Bagniewski S, Bergstralh EJ, Karnes RJ, et al. Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2007;178(3 Pt 1):864–870; discussion 70-1. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Engel J, Bastian PJ, Baur H, Beer V, Chaussy C, Gschwend JE, et al. Survival benefit of radical prostatectomy in lymph node-positive patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):754–61. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gratzke C, Engel J, Stief CG. Role of radical prostatectomy in clinically non-organ-confined prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2014;15(11):455. doi:10.1007/s11934-014-0455-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Moris L, Van den Broeck T, Tosco L, Van Baelen A, Gontero P, Karnes RJ, et al. Impact of lymph node burden on survival of high-risk prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. Front Surg. 2016;3:65. doi:10.3389/fsurg.2016.00065.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Steuber T, Budaus L, Walz J, Zorn KC, Schlomm T, Chun F, et al. Radical prostatectomy improves progression-free and cancer-specific survival in men with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen era: a confirmatory study. BJU Int. 2011;107(11):1755–61. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09730.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. • Jo JK, Kook HR, Byun SS, Lee SE, Hong SK. Stratification of contemporary patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(6):2088–93. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-4183-7. High-risk prostate cancer definitions are heterogenous and cancer outcomes vary widely within the NCCN classification system. Favorable high-risk disease exhibited significantly better biochemical recurrence than unfavorable disease.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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(2):493–499; discussion 9. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM, Li YP, Lubeck DP, Flanders SC, et al. Under staging and under grading in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: results from the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor database. J Urol. 2001;165(3):851–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Emiliozzi P, Maymone S, Paterno A, Scarpone P, Amini M, Proietti G, et al. Increased accuracy of biopsy Gleason score obtained by extended needle biopsy. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Pt 1):2224–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, Upton M, Olumi AF. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;169(1):136–40. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000042811.83736.04.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ward JF, Slezak JM, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Zincke H. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int. 2005;95(6):751–6. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05394.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 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(11):969–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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(6):2106–31. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Philip J, Dutta Roy S, Ballal M, Foster CS, Javle P. Is a digital rectal examination necessary in the diagnosis and clinical staging of early prostate cancer? BJU Int. 2005;95(7):969–71. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05449.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gupta RT, Brown AF, Silverman RK, Tay KJ, Madden JF, George DJ, et al. Can radiologic staging with multiparametric MRI enhance the accuracy of the Partin tables in predicting organ-confined prostate cancer? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207(1):87–95. doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15878.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Baker LH, Hanks G, Gershenson D, Kantoff P, Lange P, Logothetis C, et al. NCCN prostate cancer practice guidelines. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Oncology (Williston Park). 1996;10(11 Suppl):265–88.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, D’Amico AV, Davis BJ, Eastham JA, et al. Prostate cancer, version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2016;14(1):19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol. 2016;69(1):16–40. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Liauw SL, Kropp LM, Dess RT, Oto A. Endorectal MRI for risk classification of localized prostate cancer: radiographic findings and influence on treatment decisions. Urol Oncol. 2016;34(9):416 e15–21. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.04.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, et al. 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1415–24. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1606220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Walsh E, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1425–37. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1606221.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, Chu H, Elliott SP. Propensity-weighted long-term risk of urinary adverse events after prostate cancer surgery, radiation, or both. Eur Urol. 2015;67(2):273–80. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Potosky AL, Davis WW, Hoffman RM, Stanford JL, Stephenson RA, Penson DF, et al. Five-year outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(18):1358–67. doi:10.1093/jnci/djh259.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2016; doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bastian PJ, Boorjian SA, Bossi A, Briganti A, Heidenreich A, Freedland SJ, et al. High-risk prostate cancer: from definition to contemporary management. Eur Urol. 2012;61(6):1096–106. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bastian PJ, Gonzalgo ML, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Amling CL, et al. Clinical and pathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients with a preoperative Gleason sum of 8 to 10. Cancer. 2006;107(6):1265–72. doi:10.1002/cncr.22116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ Jr, Yossepowitch O, Vickers AJ, et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(26):4300–5. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.18.2501.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Schreiber D, Wong AT, Rineer J, Weedon J, Schwartz D. Prostate biopsy concordance in a large population-based sample: a Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results study. J Clin Pathol. 2015;68(6):453–7. doi:10.1136/jclinpath-2014-202767.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pal SK, Ruel N, Vogelzang N, Chang M, Wilson TG, Jones JO, et al. Preoperative androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer: delayed biochemical recurrence in high-risk disease. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2014;12(3):149–54. doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2013.11.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bergstrom CP, Ruffell B, Ho CM, Higano CS, Ellis WJ, Garzotto M, et al. Docetaxel and mitoxantrone before radical prostatectomy in men with high-risk prostate cancer: 10-year follow-up and immune correlates. Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2017;28(1):120–6. doi:10.1097/CAD.0000000000000438.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cha EK, Eastham JA. Chemotherapy and novel therapeutics before radical prostatectomy for high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2015;33(5):217–25. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.11.020.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Febbo PG, Richie JP, George DJ, Loda M, Manola J, Shankar S, et al. Neoadjuvant docetaxel before radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(14):5233–40. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0299.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 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(7):787–94. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00011-X.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Garzotto M, Higano CS, O'Brien C, Rademacher BL, Janeba N, Fazli L, et al. Phase 1/2 study of preoperative docetaxel and mitoxantrone for high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(7):1699–708. doi:10.1002/cncr.24960.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. 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(6):608–13. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.09.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Konety BR, Eastham JA, Reuter VE, Scardino PT, Donat SM, Dalbagni G, et al. Feasibility of radical prostatectomy after neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy for patients with high risk or locally advanced prostate cancer: results of a phase I/II study. J Urol. 2004;171(2 Pt 1):709–13. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000108122.36893.5a.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Prayer-Galetti T, Sacco E, Pagano F, Gardiman M, Cisternino A, Betto G, et al. Long-term follow-up of a neoadjuvant chemohormonal taxane-based phase II trial before radical prostatectomy in patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2007;100(2):274–80. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06760.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ross RW, Galsky MD, Febbo P, Barry M, Richie JP, Xie W, et al. Phase 2 study of neoadjuvant docetaxel plus bevacizumab in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer: a Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium trial. Cancer. 2012;118(19):4777–84. doi:10.1002/cncr.27416.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Shepard DR, Dreicer R, Garcia J, Elson P, Magi-Galluzzi C, Raghavan D, et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel in high risk patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2009;181(4):1672–1677; discussion 7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.121.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. 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. doi:10.1186/1756-8722-7-20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. 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(4):784–91. doi:10.1002/cncr.24092.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Womble PR, VanVeldhuizen PJ, Nisbet AA, Reed GA, Thrasher JB, Holzbeierlein JM. A phase II clinical trial of neoadjuvant ketoconazole and docetaxel chemotherapy before radical prostatectomy in high risk patients. J Urol. 2011;186(3):882–7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.087.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Eastham JA, Kelly WK, Grossfeld GD, Small EJ. Cancer, Leukemia Group B. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 90203: a randomized phase 3 study of radical prostatectomy alone versus estramustine and docetaxel before radical prostatectomy for patients with high-risk localized disease. Urology. 2003;1(62 Suppl):55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, Capitanio U, Gallina A, Suardi N, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):480–7. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.044.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, Warncke SH, Thalmann GN, Krause T, et al. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):118–25. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.07.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. • Gakis G, Efstathiou J, Lerner SP, Cookson MS, Keegan KA, Guru KA, et al. ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: radical cystectomy and bladder preservation for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol. 2013;63(1):45–57. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.009. In-depth systematic literature review of radical prostatectomy for LN-positive prostate cancer. The authors highlight the utility of a multimodal therapeutic approach to improve outcomes.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gao L, Yang L, Lv X, Bu S, Wan F, Qian S, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on the efficacy of extended pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014;140(2):243–56. doi:10.1007/s00432-013-1574-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kim KH, Lim SK, Kim HY, Shin TY, Lee JY, Choi YD, et al. Extended vs standard lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: a propensity-score-matching analysis. BJU Int. 2013;112(2):216–23. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11765.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Kluth LA, Xylinas E, Rieken M, Chun FK, Fajkovic H, Becker A, et al. Does increasing the nodal yield improve outcomes in contemporary patients without nodal metastasis undergoing radical prostatectomy? Urol Oncol. 2014;32(1):47 e1–8. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.06.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Masterson TA, Bianco FJ Jr, Vickers AJ, DiBlasio CJ, Fearn PA, Rabbani F, et al. The association between total and positive lymph node counts, and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2006;175(4):1320–1324; discussion 4–5. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00685-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Baker CB, McDonald AM, Yang ES, Jacob R, Rais-Bahrami S, Nix JW, et al. Pelvic radiotherapy versus radical prostatectomy with limited lymph node sampling for high-grade prostate adenocarcinoma. Prostate Cancer. 2016;2016:2674954. doi:10.1155/2016/2674954.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Viterbo R, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Horwitz EM, et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external-beam radiotherapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer. 2011;117(13):2883–91. doi:10.1002/cncr.25900.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Cooperberg MR, Vickers AJ, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Comparative risk-adjusted mortality outcomes after primary surgery, radiotherapy, or androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(22):5226–34. doi:10.1002/cncr.25456.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Kishan AU, Shaikh T, Wang PC, Reiter RE, Said J, Raghavan G, et al. Clinical outcomes for patients with Gleason score 9–10 prostate adenocarcinoma treated with radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional comparative analysis. Eur Urol. 2016; doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.046.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. • Lee BH, Kibel AS, Ciezki JP, Klein EA, Reddy CA, Yu C, et al. Are biochemical recurrence outcomes similar after radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy? Analysis of prostate cancer-specific mortality by nomogram-predicted risks of biochemical recurrence. Eur Urol. 2015;67(2):204–9. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.017. Retrospective series comparing prostate cancer outcomes for patients treated with RP, XRT, or brachytherapy. The authors found that different definitions of “biochemical recurrence” for each modality were associated with significant differences in cancer specific mortality. They conclude that comparisons of BCR between treatments may not be valid.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Perez BA, Koontz BF. Radiotherapy before and after radical prostatectomy for high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2015;33(5):226–34. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.09.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Wallis CJ, Saskin R, Choo R, Herschorn S, Kodama RT, Satkunasivam R, et al. Surgery versus radiotherapy for clinically-localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70(1):21–30. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Westover K, Chen MH, Moul J, Robertson C, Polascik T, Dosoretz D, et al. Radical prostatectomy vs radiation therapy and androgen-suppression therapy in high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;110(8):1116–21. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11012.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Zelefsky MJ, Eastham JA, Cronin AM, Fuks Z, Zhang Z, Yamada Y, et al. Metastasis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparison of clinical cohorts adjusted for case mix. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1508–13. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.22.2265.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Petrelli F, Vavassori I, Coinu A, Borgonovo K, Sarti E, Barni S. Radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2014;12(4):215–24. doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2014.01.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Flanigan RC, Salmon SE, Blumenstein BA, Bearman SI, Roy V, McGrath PC, et al. Nephrectomy followed by interferon alfa-2b compared with interferon alfa-2b alone for metastatic renal-cell cancer. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(23):1655–9. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa003013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Moghanaki D, Turkbey B, Vapiwala N, Ehdaie B, Frank SJ, McLaughlin PW, et al. Advances in prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography-computed tomography for staging and radiotherapy treatment planning. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2017;27(1):21–33. doi:10.1016/j.semradonc.2016.08.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. von Below C, Daouacher G, Wassberg C, Grzegorek R, Gestblom C, Sorensen J, et al. Validation of 3 T MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging for nodal staging of newly diagnosed intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(4):328–34. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2015.12.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF, Deserno WM, Tabatabaei S, van de Kaa CH, et al. Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(25):2491–9. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa022749.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Schlemmer HP, Fenchel M, Eder M, Eisenhut M, et al. Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(5):887–97. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2660-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Sweat SD, Pacelli A, Murphy GP, Bostwick DG. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression is greatest in prostate adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases. Urology. 1998;52(4):637–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Budaus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G, Michl U, Heinzer H, Huland H, et al. Initial experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):393–6. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Frohmuller HG, Theiss M, Manseck A, Wirth MP. Survival and quality of life of patients with stage D1 (T1-3 pN1-2 M0) prostate cancer. Radical prostatectomy plus androgen deprivation versus androgen deprivation alone. Eur Urol. 1995;27(3):202–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Schmeller N, Lubos W. Early endocrine therapy versus radical prostatectomy combined with early endocrine therapy for stage D1 prostate cancer. Br J Urol. 1997;79(2):226–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Mathieu R, Korn SM, Bensalah K, Kramer G, Shariat SF. Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in metastatic prostate cancer: does it really make sense? World J Urol. 2016; doi:10.1007/s00345-016-1906-3.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Tzelepi V, Efstathiou E, Wen S, Troncoso P, Karlou M, Pettaway CA, et al. Persistent, biologically meaningful prostate cancer after 1 year of androgen ablation and docetaxel treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(18):2574–81. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.33.2999.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Ave, 11th Floor, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Justin T. Matulay & G. Joel DeCastro

Authors
  1. Justin T. Matulay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Joel DeCastro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Joel DeCastro.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Justin T. Matulay and G. Joel DeCastro each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Prostate Cancer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matulay, J.T., DeCastro, G.J. Radical Prostatectomy for High-risk Localized or Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: Removing the Primary. Curr Urol Rep 18, 53 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0703-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0703-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation