Ductal Prostate Cancers Demonstrate Poor Outcomes with Conventional Therapies
Cette étude compare les résultats, du point de vue de la survie sans métastase et de la survie globale, d'un traitement par prostatectomie radicale ou par radiothérapie avec ou sans traitement anti-androgénique chez des patients atteints d'un adénocarcinome canalaire de la prostate (163 cas) et des patients atteints d'un adénocarcinome prostatique à haut risque de récidive (155 cas)
Résumé en anglais
Background: Ductal prostate adenocarcinoma (DAC) is a rare, aggressive, histologic variant of prostate cancer that is treated with conventional therapies, similar to high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma (PAC).
Objective: To assess the outcomes of men undergoing definitive therapy for DAC or high-risk PAC and to explore the effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in improving the outcomes of DAC.
Design, setting, and participants: A single-center retrospective review of all patients with cT1–4/N0–1 DAC from 2005 to 2018 was performed. Those undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RTx) for DAC were compared with cohorts of high-risk PAC patients.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models.
Results and limitations: A total of 228 men with DAC were identified; 163 underwent RP, 34 underwent RTx, and 31 had neoadjuvant therapy prior to RP. In this study, 163 DAC patients and 155 PAC patients undergoing RP were compared. Similarly, 34 DAC patients and 74 PAC patients undergoing RTx were compared. DAC patients undergoing RP or RTx had worse 5-yr MFS (75% vs 95% and 62% vs 93%, respectively, p < 0.001) and 5-yr OS (88% vs 97% and 82% vs 100%, respectively, p < 0.05) compared with PAC patients. In the 76 men who received adjuvant/salvage ADT after RP, DAC also had worse MFS and OS than PAC (p < 0.01). A genomic analysis revealed that 10/11 (91%) DACs treated with ADT had intrinsic upregulation of androgen-resistant pathways. Further, none of the DAC patients (0/15) who received only neoadjuvant ADT prior to RP had any pathologic downgrading. The retrospective nature was a limitation.
Conclusions: Men undergoing RP or RTx for DAC had worse outcomes than PAC patients, regardless of the treatment modality. Upregulation of several intrinsic resistance pathways in DAC rendered ADT less effective. Further evaluation of the underlying biology of DAC with clinical trials is needed.
