Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Localized prostate cancer

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Much controversy still surrounds the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer. Urologists generally believe that early detection and aggressive surgical therapy saves lives despite the absence of confirmatory randomized trials. Furthermore, a recent survey of radiation oncologists and urologists revealed marked polarization toward their own specialties when asked how they would counsel patients on therapy for newly diagnosed localized disease [1]. Some issues are not controversial, however. There is general agreement that pretreatment tumor characteristics, including serum prostate-specific antigen level at diagnosis, tumor grade, and clinical stage as judged by digital rectal examination, are important prognosticators for treatment outcomes independent of the type of treatment. Also, there is sufficient experience with standard therapies (radical prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy) to counsel patients on the chance for cure and the expected incidence of acute and chronic toxicities. A comparative evaluation of various therapies for prostate cancer should include consideration of cancer control, acute toxicity, treatment-related quality of life issues, salvage of treatment failures, and cost. Within this context, we believe that newly diagnosed patients should be counseled on all available treatment options before embarking on a course of therapy.

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 and Recommended Reading

  1. Fowler FJ, Collins MN, Albertsen PC, et al.: Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2000, 283:3217–3222. This survey documents the polarity of opinion between radiation therapists and urologists on the best management for localized prostate cancer.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ries LAG, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, et al., eds: SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973–1995. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jhaveri FM, Klein EA, Kupelian PA, et al.: Declining rates of extracapsular extension in radical prostatectomy: evidence for continued stage migration. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:3167–3172. This study demonstrates the pathologic stage migration which has accompanied widespread use of PSA screening in the United States, suggesting that for a given PSA, clinical stage, and tumor grade, the likelihood of cure is higher in men diagnosed most recently even without improvements in individual therapies.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ: Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998, 280:975–980. A population-based study with an excellent analysis of the risk of death due to prostate cancer as a function of age, tumor grade, and comorbidities in the context of choosing watchful waiting as a therapeutic option.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Carter HB, Landis PK, Epstein JI, Walsh PC: Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent [abstract]. J Urol 2000, 163(suppl):335.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clark PE, Levin HS, Kupelian PA, et al.: Intermediateterm outcome with radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: the Cleveland Clinic Experience. Submitted for publication.

  7. Jhaveri FM, Zippe CD, Klein EA, Kupelian PA: Biochemical failure does not predict overall survival after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: 10 year results. Urology 1999, 54:884–890. A large prostatectomy series which demonstrates that the presence of a detectable PSA after radical prostatectomy does not predict survival at 10 years, emphasizing the long natural history of treated prostate cancer and the lack of surrogate endpoints for predicting survival.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein EA: Early continence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1992, 148:92–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Catalona WJ, Carvalhal GF, Mager DE, Smith DS: Potency, continence, and complication rates in 1,870 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol 1999, 162:433–437. A large prostatectomy series demonstrating the results achieved with contemporary surgical techniques.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Penson DF, Litwin MS: Assessing quality of life: surgery vs. radiation. In The Management of Prostate Cancer. Edited by Klein EA. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2000:183–198.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Klein EA, Licht MR, Jhaveri FM: Contemporary technique of radical retropubic prostatectomy. In The Management of Prostate Cancer. Edited by Klein EA. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2000:133–158.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ng CS, Klein EA: Acute complications after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Prostate J 2000, 2:22–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zippe CD, Jhaveri FM, Klein EA, et al.: Role of Viagra following radical prostatectomy. Urology 2000, 55:241–245.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fergany A, Kupelian PA, Levin HS, et al.: No difference in biochemical failure rates with or without pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy in low risk patients. Urology, In press.

  15. Tarone RE, Chu KC, Brawley OW: Implications of stage-specific survival rates in assessing recent declines in prostate cancer mortality rates. Epidemiol 2000, 11:167–170. A population-based study documenting that mortality rates for prostate cancer in white men are now lower than in the pre-PSA era, and suggesting that screening may have a beneficial effect on mortality.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Klein EA, Grass JA, Calabrese DA, et al.: Maintaining quality of care and patient satisfaction with radical prostatectomy in the era of cost containment. Urology 1996, 48:269–274.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ciezki J, Angermeier K, Ulchaker J, et al.: Cost comparison of radical prostatectomy and transperineal brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Urology 2000, 55:68–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kupelian PA: Prostate cancer radiation therapy: conventional, conformal, and brachytherapy. In The Management of Prostate Cancer. Edited by Klein EA. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2000:159–182.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sohayda C, Kupelian PA, Levin HS, Klein EA: Extent of extracapsular extension in localized prostate cancer. Urology 2000, 55:382–386.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Katcher J, Kupelian P, Zippe C, et al.: Indications for excluding the seminal vesicles when treating clinically localized prostatic adenocarcinoma with radiotherapy alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 37:871–876.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hanks G, Lee W, Hanlon A, et al.: Conformal technique dose escalation in prostate cancer control with higher doses in patients with pretreatment PSA =10 ng/ml. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995, 32(suppl1):141–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pollack A, Zagars GK: External beam radiotherapy for stage T1/T2 prostate cancer: how does it stack up? Urology 1998, 51:258–264.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Zelefsky MJ, Leibel SA, Kutcher GJ, Fuks Z: Threedimensional conformal radiotherapy and dose escalation: where do we stand? Semin Radiat Oncol 1998, 8:107–114. An overview of techniques and results using conformal techniques for escalation of radiation doses above conventional levels with a description of the impact on toxicity and rates of cancer control.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Zelefsky MJ, Leibel SA, Kutcher GJ, Fuks Z: Threedimensional conformal radiotherapy and dose escalation: where do we stand? Semin Radiat Oncol 1998, 8:107–114.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lyons J, Kupelian P: Importance of radiation dose in the treatment of stage T1-T2 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42(suppl1):308.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pollack A, Zagars G, Starkshall G, et al.: Conventional vs. conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: preliminary results of dosimetry and acute toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996, 34:555–564.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Teh B, Uhl B, Augspurger M, Grant W, et al.: Intensitymodulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer: preliminary results of acute toxicity compared to conventional and six-field conformal approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42(suppl1):219.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zelefsky M, Leibel SA, Kutcher GJ, et al.: The feasibility of dose escalation with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in patients with prostatic carcinoma. Cancer J Sci Am 1995, 1:142–146.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lawton CA, Won M, Pilepich MV, et al.: Long-term treatment sequelae following external beam irradiation for adenocarcinoma of the prostate: analysis of RTOG studies 7506 and 7706. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991, 21:935–939.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Shipley WU, Zietman AL, Hanks GE, et al.: Treatment related sequelae following external beam radiation for prostate cancer: a review with an update in patients with stages T1 and T2 tumor. J Urol 1994, 152:1799–1805.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Zelefsky MJ, Aschkenasy E, Kelsen S, Leibel SA: Tolerance and early outcome results of postprostatectomy three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 39:327–333.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sandler HM, McLaughlin PW, Ten Haken RK, et al.: Three dimensional conformal radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer: low risk of chronic rectal morbidity observed in a large series of patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995, 33:797–801.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Schultheiss TE, Lee WR, Hunt MA, et al.: Late GI and GU complications in the treatment of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 37:3–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Consensus statement: Guidelines for PSA following radiation therapy. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 37:1035–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hanlon AL, Hanks GE: Scrutiny of the ASTRO consensus definition of biochemical failure in irradiated prostate cancer patients demonstrates its usefulness and robustness. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 46:559–566. This article deals with the controversy surrounding the classification of biochemical failure after radiation therapy using the ASTRO consensus definition of three consecutive rises in PSA, and examines the effects of using alternative definitions.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Slivjak A, Pinover W, Hanlon A, et al.: The ASTRO consensus definition of bNED is an inappropriate endpoint for prostate cancer patients receiving conformal radiation therapy and androgen deprivation (CRT+AD). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42(suppl1):176.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Horwitz EM, Hanlon AL, Pinover WH, Hanks GE: The cost effectiveness of 3D conformal radiation therapy compared with conventional techniques for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 45:1219–1225.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Zelefsky MJ, Whitmore Jr WF: Long-term results of retropubic permanent 125iodine implantation of the prostate for clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol 1997, 158:23–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Storey MR, Landgren RC, Cottone JL, et al.: Transperineal 125iodine implantation for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer: 5-year tumor control and morbidity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 43:565–570.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Gelblum DY, Potters L, Ashley R, et al.: Urinary morbidity following ultrasound-guided transperineal prostate seed implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 45:59–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Critz FA, Williams WH, Benton JB, et al.: Prostate specific antigen bounce after radioactive seed implantation followed by external beam radiation for prostate cancer. Urol 2000, 163:1085–1089.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol 2000, 163:418–422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Teh B, Uhl B, Augspurger M, et al.: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer: preliminary results of acute toxicity compared to conventional and six-field conformal approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42(suppl1):219.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Slater JD, Yonemoto LT, Rossi CJ, et al.: Conformal proton therapy for prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42:299–304.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Lindsley KL, Cho P, Stelzer KJ, et al.: Fast neutrons in prostatic adenocarcinomas: worldwide clinical experience. Recent Results Cancer Res 1998, 150:125–136.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. D'Amico AV, Cormack R, Tempany CM, et al.: Real-time magnetic resonance image-guided interstitial brachytherapy in the treatment of select patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998, 42:507–515.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Klein EA, Thompson IM, Lippman SM, et al.: SELECT: the next prostate cancer prevention trial. J Urol, In press.

  48. Klein EA: The future of prostate cancer: genetic screening and chemoprevention. Indian J Urol, In press.

  49. Catalona WJ, Ramos CG, Carvalhal GF: Contemporary results of anatomic radical prostatectomy. CA Cancer J Clin 1999, 49:282–290.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Catalona WJ, Smith DS: Cancer recurrence and survival rates after anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer: intermediate term results. J Urol 1998, 160:2428–2430.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Eastham JA, Scardino PT: Radical prostatectomy for clinical stage T1 and T2 prostate cancer. In Comprehensive Textbook of Genitourinary Oncology, edn 2. Edited by Vogelzang NJ, Scardino PT, Shipley WU, Coffey DS. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999:722–738.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI: Cancer control and quality of life following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy: results at 10 years. J Urol 1994, 152:1831–1835.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Pound CR, Partin A, Epstein JI, Walsh PC: Prostatespecific antigen after anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy: patterns of recurrence and cancer control. Urol Clin North Am 1997, 24:395–402.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Urology Oncology, Urological Institute, 9500 Euclid Avenue, 44195, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Eric A. Klein MD

  2. Department of Radiation Therapy, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue, 44195, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Patrick A. Kupelian MD

Authors
  1. Eric A. Klein MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick A. Kupelian MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klein, E.A., Kupelian, P.A. Localized prostate cancer. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 1, 433–445 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-000-0071-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-000-0071-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation