Page 37 - Read Online
P. 37

Wagaskar et al. Mini-invasive Surg 2022;6:14    https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2021.106                                                                                 Page 5 of 8



                          Table 1. Summary of studies using CRP for OMPC

                                                               OMPC criteria                                                                                            Functional
                          Authors               Study type                      n                 PFS                       CSS                   OS                                     SRC (details)
                                                               (DM)                                                                                                     outcome
                                          [7]
                          Heidenreich et al.    Retrospective  ≤ 3 Bone (CT, SS) 104 (O-CRP)      NR                        89% at 3 years; 81% at  80% at 5 years      68% UC at 12     9% (5% - RL for bleeding; 4%-
                          (2018)                                                9 (RA-CRP)                                  5 years                                     months           LD)
                                            [11]
                          Sooriakumaran et al.    Retrospective  M1a-M1b        106 (O-CRP)       NR                        NR                    89% at 23 months      64% UC at 3      19% (14%-BT; 5%-LD)
                          (2016)                               (CT, SS)                                                                                                 months
                                   [12]
                          Jang et al.   (2018)  Retrospective  ≤ 5 Bone (SS)    38 (RA-CRP)       75% (RA-CRP) vs. 40%      NR                    NR                    NR               13% (8%-BT; 5%-RL for rectal
                                                                                41 (NLT)          (NLT) at 40 months                                                                     injury; bleeding)
                                   [13]
                          Culp et al.   (2014)  Population     M1a-M1c (NR)     245 (O-CRP)       NR                        76% (RP) vs. 61%      67% (RP) vs. 53%      NR               NR
                                                based                           7811 (nCRP)                                 (nCRP) at 5 years     (nCRP) at 5 years
                                           [17]
                          Antwi and Everson     Population     M1a-M1c (SS)     222 (O-CRP)       NR                        85%                   82%                   NR               NR
                          (2014)                based
                                      [16]
                          Gratzke et al.   (2014) Population   M1 (SS)          74 (O-CRP)        NR                        NR                    55% (RP) vs. 21%      NR               NR
                                                based                           7811 (NLT)                                                        (NLT) at 5 years
                                           [15]
                          Satkunasivam et al.     Population   M1 (CT, SS)      47 (O-CRP)        NR                        79% at 3 years        73% at 3 years        NR               NR
                          (2015)                based
                                        [14]
                          Gandaglia et al.      Retrospective  ≤ 5 Bone         11 (RA-CRP)       NR                        82% at 7 years        NR                    NR               82% (73%-BT, 9%-RL for
                          (2016)                               (CT/MRI, SS)                                                                                                              anastomotic leakage)
                                      [18]
                          Poelaert et al.   (2017) Prospective  < 4 Bone (SS)   1 (O-CRP)         NR                        100% (RP) vs. 61%     100% (RP) vs. 51%     49% UC at 3      0%
                                                                                15 (RA-CRP)                                 (NLT) at 2 years      (NLT) at 2 years      months
                                                                                9 (NLT)

                          CRP: Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy; OMPC: oligometastatic prostate cancer; DM: diagnostic method; PFS: progression-free survival; CSS: cancer-specific survival; OS: overall survival; SRC: surgery-related
                          complications; CT: computed tomography; SS: skeletal scintigraphy; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; O-CRP: open cytoreductive radical prostatectomy; RA-CRP: robot-assisted cytoreductive radical
                          prostatectomy; UC: urinary continence (defined as 0-1 pads per day); NLT: no local therapy; NR: not reported; RL: repeat laparotomy; LD: lymphocele drainage; BT: blood transfusion.



                          prostatectomy in OMPC settings; and (3) an emerging role for robot-assisted cytoreductive prostatectomy in selected men with OMPC.



                          Men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer usually receive systemic therapy, such as androgen deprivation therapy and chemotherapy, while radical

                          prostatectomy is typically reserved for localized prostate cancers. However, Tzelepi et al.  demonstrated the intra-prostatic survival of lethal prostate cancer
                                                                                                                                    [21]
                          cell clones with the biological potential to metastasize despite systemic therapy. A growing body of evidence suggests that control of a primary tumor may

                          delay the progress of metastases, thereby improving overall survival and reducing prostate cancer-specific mortality. Recently systematic review and meta-
                          analysis were conducted that compared CRP to systemic and radiation therapy in the treatment of OMPC. This systematic review showed that CRP had
                                                                                                                                [22]
                          significantly higher 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS and OS rates compared to systemic therapy . This review of the current literature also demonstrated that men with
                          OMPC experience improved PFS, OS, and CSS after CRP.
   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42