Currently, several therapies are available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but no specific clinical factors to personalize treatment. We first sought the prognostic value of duration on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) in patients receiving androgen-receptor-signaling inhibitors (ARSI) for mCRPC.

A multicenter cohort of mCRPC patients who started ARSI between July 2011 and October 2021 was identified. Based on their initial disease burden and duration on ADT for HSPC, primary progressive (PP) men were classified into four groups: low/intermediate-risk localized disease (LOC) and high-risk localized/locally advanced disease (LAD) and short-term (ST) < 24 vs. long-term (LT) ADT ≥ 24 months, whereas de novo (DN) mHSPC were subdivided into short-time vs. long-time to CRPC.

We included 919 mCRPC patients with a median age of 77 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 71-82)]. Median ADT duration in HSPC was 24 months (IQR = 14-40). Median follow-up was 91 months (IQR = 62-138), median OS and PFS from ARSI start were 20 (IQR 10-32) and 10 months (IQR = 5-19), respectively. In PP developing metastatic disease (n = 655, 71.3%), LOC and LAD with ST ADT had a greater than almost double-risk of death compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01; 95% CI 1.54-2.64; LAD/ST: HR = 1.73; 95% CI 1.34-2.24; p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis including age, prognostic cohort, Gleason, ECOG, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy, groups with ST ADT were associated with worse OS compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: HR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.38-2.45; p < 0.001; LAD/ST: HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.21-2.10; p < 0.001), along with ECOG > 2 (HR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.06-2.26; p = 0.03). There were also similar results of PFS. Moreover, long-time to CRPC in patients with history of DN mHSPC (n = 264, 28.7%) resulted in a better OS/PFS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02, p = 0.064 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99, p = 0.042, respectively).

Our study showed that duration on ADT for mHSPC was significantly associated with survival in mCRPC undergoing ARSI. These findings suggest a possible connection between initial management of prostate tumour and a better prognostication in mCRPC. Prospective trials are warranted.

Maintaining a castration level of testosterone (TST) during radiation therapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is an essential strategy in the treatment of prostate cancer; however, hypogonadism can cause various complications. The aim was to compare serum TST recovery between LHRH agonists and LHRH antagonists.

A total of 131 patients who underwent radiation therapy with ADT for prostate cancer were retrospectively analyzed. Serum TST levels after termination of ADT including LHRH agonists and antagonists were compared. Cox proportional hazards model and the Kaplan-Meier method were used for statistical analysis.

Median age, baseline TST, nadir TST, and duration of ADT were 71 years, 535 ng/dL, 10.92 ng/dL, and 12 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified significant associations of initial PSA ≥ 10.92 ng/mL (p = 0.0366), ADT ≥ 360 days (p = 0.0408), nadir TST ≤ 19 ng/dL (p = 0.0003), and LHRH agonist (p = 0.0027) with delayed TST recovery to castration level (50 ng/dL). We created a risk model based on these four independent risk factors (Low: 0-1 factor/Intermediate: 2 factors/High Risk: 3-4 factors). Each risk group significantly differentiated the TST recovery to castration level. Even after propensity score matching, recovery of TST to castration level and therapeutic level (200 ng/dL) was significantly delayed in the LHRH agonist group compared with the LHRH antagonist group (p = 0.0016, p = 0.0389, respectively).

LHRH antagonists restored serum TST to castration and therapeutic levels faster than LHRH agonists in prostate cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy with ADT.

Human cells potentiate highly diverse functions through tight transcriptional regulation and maintenance of genome integrity. While the DNA damage response (DDR) safeguards the genome, ligand-activated transcription factors, such as steroid hormone receptors (SHRs), provide complex transcriptional outputs. Interestingly, an increasing body of evidence reveals a direct biological and functional interplay between DDR factors and SHR cascades in cancer. SHRs can directly affect DDR gene expression, but DDR factors in turn act as transcriptional coregulators, enabling oncogenic SHR-mediated signaling, which has the potential for novel therapeutic interventions. With a focus on breast and prostate cancer, we describe in this review recent developments in, and insights into, the complex interplay between SHR signaling and the DDR, highlighting opportunities for future clinical interventions.

To evaluate and compare the survivals and radiotherapy-induced adverse events (AEs) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and trimodality therapy, including low-dose iodine-125 brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, and ADT, for high-risk localized prostate cancer (LPC).

High-risk patients with LPC at T stage ≥ 3a, Gleason score ≥ 8, and initial prostate-specific antigen ≥ 20.0 ng/mL treated between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. All the patients were treated with IMRT plus ADT or trimodality therapy. In both groups, ADT was initiated 6 months before and continued for 2 years after radiotherapy. Survival and acute and late radiation-induced AEs were evaluated and compared.

Two hundred and thirty-eight patients were treated with IMRT, and 91 underwent trimodality. Five- and 7-year biochemical-clinical failure-free survival (BCFFS) rates in the IMRT/trimodality group were 94.9/96.2, and 91.8/91.5%, respectively (P = 0.511). Stratified by 1-2/3 factors, 5- and 7-year BCFFS rates in the IMRT groups were 95.8/91.8, and 95.8/75.6%, respectively (P = 0.009). Five and 7-year BCFFS rates in the trimodality group were 96.8/94.1, and 91.4/94.1%, respectively (P = 0.995). The cumulative 3-/5-year incidence of late genitourinary AEs in the IMRT/trimodality group was 7.3/8.4, and 15.5/16.9%, respectively (P = 0.037), and the cumulative 3-/5-year incidence of late gastrointestinal AEs was 2.2/3.4, and 11.0/12.2%, respectively (P = 0.001). Thirty patients (9.1%) could not complete long-term ADT.

Treatment results of both IMRT and trimodality were considered to be good, and our results also indicated that the long-term survival of unfavorable high-risk patients with LPC who had three risk factors was poor in the IMRT group. Further treatment experience of both modalities must be accumulated with more appropriate patient allocations.

A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >0.5 ng/mL after 9 to 10 weeks of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and before radiation therapy (RT) was associated with an increased PSA-failure risk; however, the impact on all-cause mortality (ACM) risk after adjusting for serum testosterone level remains unknown.

From 2005 to 2015, 350 patients with localized, unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC) were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy and RT plus docetaxel vs standard of care (SOC) with androgen deprivation therapy and RT. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to assess whether a significant association existed between PSA (continuous and categorized as ≤0.5 vs > 0.5 ng/mL) measured at 9 to 10 weeks after randomization and ACM risk, adjusting for known PC prognostic factors and baseline testosterone level.

After a median follow-up of 10.23 years (interquartile range: 8.07-11.41), 85 patients died (25.30%), 41 from PC (48.24%). PSA level at 9 to 10 weeks after randomization was significantly associated with increased risk of ACM when analyzed as a continuous (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30; p = .008) or categorical covariate (>0.5 vs ≤ 0.5 ng/mL; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.12-3.17; p = .02) after adjusting for covariates.

This study validates that a PSA level >0.5 ng/mL after neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and before RT is prognostic and significantly associated with an increased ACM risk. Patients achieving this endpoint should be considered for enrollment in future randomized trials evaluating the impact of treatment escalation on ACM using a prerandomization stratification by age or validated comorbidity metrics.

Prostate cancer (PC) treatment, particularly androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), remains pivotal, albeit linked to increased fracture risk due to osteoporosis. The advent of novel hormonal agents (NHAs) has spurred inquiries into their influence on bone health. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of NHAs on bone health in patients receiving combination therapy. We conducted a retrospective analysis using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, encompassing men aged 45 and above diagnosed with PC without bone metastasis and undergoing ADT between 2000 and 2018. The study involved 25,949 patients, categorized into those receiving standard ADT (n = 25,166) and those on NHA combination therapy (n = 783). Our analysis delved into fracture risk, comorbidities, and osteoporosis treatments. Patients on NHA combination therapy faced significantly higher risks of any osteoporotic fracture and major osteoporotic fracture than those on ADT alone (HR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.04-1.61; HR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.75, respectively). Notably, age emerged as a critical factor, with the highest risk observed in those aged 90 or above. The 5-year overall survival rates were lower for patients who experienced any osteoporotic fracture, major osteoporotic fracture, and hospitalization due to osteoporotic fracture compared to those who did not experience these fractures (51.5% vs. 56.5%, 47.1% vs. 56.7%, and 48.2% vs. 56.3%, respectively, p < 0.001). Furthermore, patients not using any bone-modifying agents had the highest risk for all fracture types. In conclusion, NHA combination therapy in PC patients potentially escalates the risk of osteoporotic fractures, especially in older individuals. Our findings underscore the pivotal role of osteoporosis treatments in preventing fractures, emphasizing the importance of evaluating fracture risk in patients undergoing NHA combination therapy.

The real-world benefits of adding androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and its optimal duration when combined with current standard high-dose radiation therapy (RT) remain unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy of and toxicities associated with ADT in the setting of combination with high-dose RT for intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). This article is a modified and detailed version of the commentary on Clinical Question 8 described in the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer (ver. 2023). A qualitative systematic review was performed according to the Minds Guide. All relevant published studies between September 2010 and August 2020, which assessed the outcomes of IR or HR PCa treated with high-dose RT, were screened using two databases (PubMed and ICHUSHI). A total of 41 studies were included in this systematic review, mostly consisting of retrospective studies (N = 34). The evidence basically supports the benefit of adding ADT to high-dose RT to improve tumor control. Regarding IR populations, many studies suggested the existence of a subgroup for which adding ADT had no impact on either overall survival or the BF-free duration. On the other hand, regarding HR populations, several studies suggested the positive impact of adding ADT for ≥1 year on overall survival. Adding ADT increases not only the risk of sexual dysfunction but also that of cardiovascular toxicities or bone fracture. Although the benefit of adding ADT was basically suggested for both IR and HR populations, further investigations are warranted to identify subgroups of patients for whom ADT has no benefit, as well as the appropriate duration of ADT for those who do derive benefit.

To determine whether 6 months of preoperative apalutamide for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPCa) reduces the aggregate postoperative radiotherapy risk and to evaluate associations of molecular perturbations with clinical outcomes in this study cohort.

Between May 2018 and February 2020, eligible patients with IRPCa (Gleason 3 + 4 or 4 + 3 and clinical T2b-c or prostate-specific antigen level of 10-20 ng/mL) were treated with apalutamide 240 mg/day for 6 months followed by radical prostatectomy (RP) in this single-arm, phase II trial. The primary endpoint was presence of any adverse pathological feature at risk of pelvic radiation (pathological T stage after neoadjuvant therapy [yp]T3 or ypN1 or positive surgical margins). Translational studies, including germline and somatic DNA alterations and RNA and protein expression, were performed on post-apalutamide RP specimens, and assessed for associations with clinical outcomes.

A total of 40 patients underwent a RP, and only one patient discontinued apalutamide prior to 6 months. In all, 40% had adverse pathological features at time of RP, and the 3-year biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate was 15%, with 27.5% being not evaluable. Genomic alterations frequently seen in metastatic PCas, such as androgen receptor (AR), tumour protein p53 (TP53), phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN), or BReast CAncer associated gene (BRCA1/2) were underrepresented in this localised cohort. Adverse pathological features and BCR at 3-years were associated with increased expression of select cell cycle (e.g., E2F targets: adjusted P value [Padj] < 0.001, normalised enrichment score [NES] 2.47) and oxidative phosphorylation (Padj < 0.001, NES 1.62) pathways.

Preoperative apalutamide did not reduce the aggregate postoperative radiation risk to the pre-specified threshold in unselected men with IRPCa. However, transcriptomic analysis identified key dysregulated pathways in tumours associated with adverse pathological outcomes and BCR, which warrant future study. Further investigation of preoperative therapy is underway for men with high-risk PCa.

The goal is to describe the evolution of radiation therapy (RT) utilization in the management of localized and metastatic prostate cancer.

Long term data for a variety of hypofractionated definitive RT dose-fractionation schemes has matured, allowing patients and providers many standard-of-care options to choose from. Post-prostatectomy, adjuvant RT has largely been replaced by an early salvage approach. Multiparametric MRI and PSMA PET have enabled increasingly targeted RT delivery to the prostate and oligometastatic tumors. Areas of active investigation include determining the value of proton beam therapy and perirectal spacers, and optimally incorporate genomic tumor profiling and next generation hormonal therapies with RT in the curative setting. The use of radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer is rapidly evolving. In the coming years, there will be continued improvements in a variety of areas to enhance the value of RT in multidisciplinary prostate cancer management.

Although a contemporary randomized clinical trial has led to the use of whole-pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT), long-term data evaluating a potential reduction in mortality are lacking and are addressed in the current study.

From 2005 to 2015, 350 men with localized, unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC) were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and RT plus docetaxel versus ADT and RT. Treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes was at the discretion of the treating physician. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Grays regression analyses were performed to assess whether a significant association existed between radiation treatment volume and all-cause mortality (ACM) and PC-specific mortality (PCSM), respectively, adjusting for known PC prognostic factors and comorbidity. An interaction term between age (categorized by dichotomization at 65 years to enable clinical interpretation and applicability of the results and which approximates the median (66 years [IQR, 61-70]) and radiation treatment volume was included in the analysis.

After a median follow-up of 10.20 years (IQR, 7.96-11.41), 89 men died (25.43%); of these, 42 died of PC (47.19%). Of the 350 randomly assigned patients, 88 (25.14%) received WPRT. In men younger than 65 years, WPRT was associated with a significantly lower ACM risk (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11 to 0.97]; P = .04) and lower PCSM risk (AHR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.02 to 1.35]; P = .09) after adjusting for covariates, whereas this was not the case for men 65 years or older.

WPRT has the potential to reduce mortality in younger men with unfavorable-risk PC.

Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC.

The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy.

The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC.

CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves local cancer control in unfavorable localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. ADT is known to cause hormonally related symptoms that resolve with testosterone recovery. Hot flashes are particularly burdensome. This study sought to evaluate the timeline of hot flashes following short-course ADT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as well as its relationship with testosterone recovery.

Institutional IRB approval was obtained for this retrospective review of prospectively collected data (IRB#: 2009-510). ADT was initiated three months prior to the start of SBRT. Hot flashes were self-reported via question 13a of the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 prior to ADT initiation, the first day of robotic SBRT, and at each follow-up (one, three, six, nine, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months). The responses were grouped into three relevant categories (no problem, very small-small problem, and moderate-big problem). Scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother. Testosterone levels were measured at each follow-up.

From 2007 to 2010, 122 localized prostate cancer patients (nine low-, 64 intermediate-, and 49 high-risk according to the D'Amico classification) at a median age of 72 years (range 54.5-88.3) were treated with short course ADT (three to six months) and SBRT (35-36.25 Gy) at Georgetown University Hospital. Thirty-two percent were Black and 27% were obese. Seventy-seven percent of patients received three months of ADT. At baseline, 2% of men experienced hot flashes that were a "moderate to big problem" and that proportion peaked at the start of SBRT (45%) before returning to baseline (2%) nine months post-SBRT with a cumulative incidence of 52.4%. The median baseline EPIC-26 hot flash score of 94 declined to 50 at the start of SBRT but this returned to baseline (92) by six months post SBRT. These changes were both statistically and clinically significant (MID = 9.5083, p<0.01). Testosterone recovery (> 230 ng/dL) occurred in approximately 70% of patients by 12 months post SBRT. Resolution of hot flashes correlated with testosterone recovery.

Bothersome hot flashes occur in greater than 50% of men treated with neoadjuvant ADT. Resolution of hot flashes occurs in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Reassurance of the temporary nature of hot flashes may assist in reducing patient anxiety. Measuring testosterone levels at follow-up visits may allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the associated bother.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been associated with coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction (MI) in prostate cancer patients, but controversy persists regarding its effects on cardiovascular mortality (CVM).

We assessed the long-term relationship between ADT and CVM in a prostate cancer randomized trial (NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9202).

From 1992 to 1995, 1554 men with locally advanced prostate cancer (T2c-T4, prostate-specific antigen <150 ng/ml) received radiotherapy with 4 mo (short-term [STADT]) versus 28 mo (longer-term [LTADT]) of ADT.

Using the Fine-Gray and Cox regression models, the relationship between ADT and mortality was evaluated.

With a median follow-up of 19.6 yr, LTADT was associated with improved overall survival (OS) versus STADT (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88; p = 0.03) and prostate cancer survival (subdistribution HR [sHR] 0.70, p = 0.003). Comparing LTADT with STADT, prostate cancer mortality improved by 6.0% (15.6% [95% confidence interval 13.0-18.3%] vs 21.6% [18.6-24.7%]) at 15 yr, while CVM increased by 2.2% (14.9% [12.4-17.6%] vs 12.7% [10.4-15.3%]). In multivariable analyses, LTADT was not associated with increased CVM versus STADT (sHR 1.22 [0.93-1.59]; p = 0.15). An association between LTADT and MI death was detected (sHR 1.58 [1.00-2.50]; p = 0.05), particularly in patients with prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD; sHR 2.54 [1.16-5.58]; p = 0.02).

With 19.6 yr of follow-up, LTADT was not significantly associated with increased CVM in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. Patients may have increased MI mortality with LTADT, particularly those with baseline CVD. Overall, there remained a prostate cancer mortality benefit and no OS detriment with LTADT.

In a long-term analysis of a large randomized prostate cancer trial, radiation with 28 mo of hormone therapy did not increase the risk of cardiovascular death significantly versus 4 mo of hormone therapy. Future studies are needed for patients with pre-existing heart disease, who may have an increased risk of myocardial infarction death with longer hormone use.

High-risk localized prostate cancer is a challenging clinical entity to treat, with heterogeneous responses to an evolving array of multidisciplinary treatment approaches. In addition, this disease state is growing in incidence due to a variety of factors, including shifting recommendations that discouraged routine prostate cancer screening. Current guidelines now incorporate an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening and evaluation. More work is underway to improve targeted screening for certain at-risk populations and to implement greater personalization in the use of diagnostic tools. Once diagnosed with high-risk localized disease, a multimodality treatment paradigm is warranted. Radiation-in its various forms and combinations-plays a large and continually evolving role in the management of high-risk prostate cancer, yet treatment outcomes are still suboptimal. There is a growing need to improve upon current treatment approaches, and better personalize a particular treatment recommendation based on both tumor and patient characteristics, as well as patient preference and goals of therapy. Given that treatment generally requires more than one therapy, there are notable implications on long-term quality of life, especially with respect to overlapping and cumulative side effects of local and systemic therapies, respectively. The desire for aggressive therapy to optimize cancer control outcomes must be weighed against the risk of morbidities and overtreatment and discussed with each patient so that an informed decision about treatment and care can be determined. High-level evidence to support treatment recommendations, where available, is critical for a data-driven and tailored approach to address all goals of care.

Accurate determination of the local stage of prostate cancer is crucial for treatment planning and prognosis. The primary objective of local staging is to distinguish between organ-confined and locally advanced disease, with the latter carrying a worse clinical prognosis. The presence of locally advanced disease features of prostate cancer, such as extra-prostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and positive surgical margin, can impact the choice of treatment. Over the past decade, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has become the preferred imaging modality for the local staging of prostate cancer and has been shown to provide accurate information on the location and extent of disease. It has demonstrated superior performance compared to staging based on traditional clinical nomograms. Despite being a relatively new technique, mpMRI has garnered considerable attention and ongoing investigations. Therefore, in this review, we will discuss the current use of mpMRI on prostate cancer local staging.

The clinical success of combined androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer created interest in understanding the mechanistic links between androgen receptor (AR) signaling and the DNA damage response (DDR). Convergent data have led to a model where AR both regulates, and is regulated by, the DDR. Integral to this model is that the AR regulates the transcription of DDR genes both at a steady state and in response to ionizing radiation (IR). In this study, we sought to determine which immediate transcriptional changes are induced by IR in an AR-dependent manner. Using PRO-seq to quantify changes in nascent RNA transcription in response to IR, the AR antagonist enzalutamide, or the combination of the two, we find that enzalutamide treatment significantly decreased expression of canonical AR target genes but had no effect on DDR gene sets in prostate cancer cells. Surprisingly, we also found that the AR is not a primary regulator of DDR genes either in response to IR or at a steady state in asynchronously growing prostate cancer cells.

Our data indicate that the clinical benefit of combining ADT with RT is not due to direct AR regulation of DDR gene transcription, and that the field needs to consider alternative mechanisms for this clinical benefit.

Locally advanced prostate cancer comprises approximately 20% of new prostate cancer diagnoses. For these patients, international guidelines recommend treatment with radiotherapy (RT) to the prostate in combination with long-term (2-3 years) androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), or radical prostatectomy in combination with extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) as another treatment option for selected patients as part of multimodal therapy. Improvements in overall survival with docetaxel or an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor have been achieved in patients with metastatic castration sensitive or castration resistant prostate cancer. However, the role of systemic therapy combinations for high risk and/or unfavorable prostate cancer is unclear. In this context, the aim of this review is to assess the current evidence for systemic treatment combinations as part of primary definitive therapy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Over a century ago, low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy was introduced to treat prostate cancer (PCa). Since then, it has been widely applied worldwide, including in East Asia. LDR brachytherapy has been performed in 88 institutes in Japan. Beneficial clinical outcomes of LDR brachytherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk PCa have been demonstrated in large clinical trials. These clinical outcomes were achieved through advances in methods, such as urological precise needle puncture and seed placement, and the quantitative decision making regarding radiological parameters by radiation oncologists. The combined use of LDR brachytherapy with other therapeutic modalities, such as external beam radiation and androgen deprivation therapy, for the clinical risk classification of PCa has led to better anticancer treatment efficacy. In this study, we summarized basic LDR brachytherapy findings that should remain unchanged and be passed down in urology departments. We also discussed the applications of LDR brachytherapy for PCa in various clinical settings, including focal and salvage therapies. In addition, we highlighted technologies associated with brachytherapy that are under development.

We examined the prognostic significance of early changes in primary tumor SUV measured with Gallium-68-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography ([68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11-PET/CT) and serum PSA values after neoadjuvant androgen deprivation treatment (nADT) in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with definitive radiotherapy (RT).

The clinical data and SUV parameters of 71 PCa patients were reviewed retrospectively. The serum PSA and primary tumor SUV values were calculated before and after the start of ADT. Using univariable and multivariable analyses, the prognostic factors predicting biochemical disease free survival (bDFS) and prostate cancer specific survival (PCSS) were investigated. In addition, logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of biochemical failure (BF).

All but one patient responded with a 98.8% reduction in serum PSA (21.8 ng/mL vs. 0.3 ng/mL; p < 0.001), and 64 patients (91.1%) had a median 66.6% decrease in primary tumor SUV after ADT (13.2 vs. 4.8, p < 0.001). The primary tumor SUV response rate was significantly higher in patients with Gleason score (GS) of 7 than in patients with GS > 7 (59.5% vs. 40.5%; p = 0.04), and it was significantly lower in patients with inadequate treatment response than in those with complete (CR) or partial response (PR) (1.1% vs. 66.1%; p < 0.001). There was a strong and significant correlation (Spearman = 0.41, p < 0.001) and a high concordance (91.5%) between PSA response and SUV response after ADT. With a median follow-up time of 76.1 months, the 5-year bDFS and PCSS rates were 77.2% and 92.2%, respectively. Nineteen patients (26.7%) patients had recurrence at a median of 44.6 months after the completion of RT. In multivariate analysis, lymph node metastasis, GS greater than 7, and SD/PD after nADT were independent predictors of worse bDFS. However, no significant factor for PCSS was identified. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, advanced age, GS of  > 7 disease, lymph node metastasis, and SD or PD after nADT were independent predictors of BF.

These results imply that the metabolic response measured with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11-PET/CT after nADT could be used to predict progression in high-risk PCa patients treated with definitive RT.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy can benefit patients with localized prostate cancer. However, ADT can negatively impact quality of life, and there remain no validated predictive models to guide its use. METHODS: We used digital pathology images from pretreatment prostate tissue and clinical data from 5727 patients enrolled in five phase 3 randomized trials, in which treatment was radiotherapy with or without ADT, as our data source to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)–derived predictive patient-specific model that would determine which patients would develop the primary end point of distant metastasis. The model used baseline data to provide a binary output that a given patient will likely benefit from ADT or not. After the model was locked, validation was performed using data from NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9408 (n=1594), a trial that randomly assigned men to radiotherapy plus or minus 4 months of ADT. Fine–Gray regression and restricted mean survival times were used to assess the interaction between treatment and the predictive model and within predictive model–positive, i.e., benefited from ADT, and –negative subgroup treatment effects. RESULTS: Overall, in the NRG/RTOG 9408 validation cohort (14.9 years of median follow-up), ADT significantly improved time to distant metastasis. Of these enrolled patients, 543 (34%) were model positive, and ADT significantly reduced the risk of distant metastasis compared with radiotherapy alone. Of 1051 patients who were model negative, ADT did not provide benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Our AI-based predictive model was able to identify patients with a predominantly intermediate risk for prostate cancer likely to benefit from short-term ADT. (Supported by a grant [U10CA180822] from NRG Oncology Statistical and Data Management Center, a grant [UG1CA189867] from NCI Community Oncology Research Program, a grant [U10CA180868] from NRG Oncology Operations, and a grant [U24CA196067] from NRG Specimen Bank from the National Cancer Institute and by Artera, Inc. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT00767286, NCT00002597, NCT00769548, NCT00005044, and NCT00033631.)

Decipher is a genomic classifier (GC) prospectively validated postprostatectomy. We validated the performance of the GC in pretreatment biopsy samples within the context of 3 randomized phase 3 high-risk definitive radiation therapy trials.

A prespecified analysis plan (NRG-GU-TS006) was approved to obtain formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue from biopsy specimens from the NRG biobank from patients enrolled in the NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9202, 9413, and 9902 phase 3 randomized trials. After central review, the highest-grade tumors were profiled on clinical-grade whole-transcriptome arrays and GC scores were obtained. The primary objective was to validate the independent prognostic ability for the GC for distant metastases (DM), and secondary for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) with Cox univariable and multivariable analyses.

GC scores were obtained on 385 samples, of which 265 passed microarray quality control (69%) and had a median follow-up of 11 years (interquartile range, 9-13). In the pooled cohort, on univariable analysis, the GC was shown to be a prognostic factor for DM (per 0.1 unit; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.41; P < .001), PCSM (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.41; P < .001), and OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P < .001). On multivariable analyses, the GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36), PCSM (sHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.39), and OS (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) after adjusting for age, Prostate Specific Antigen, Gleason score, cT stage, trial, and randomized treatment arm. GC had similar prognostic ability in patients receiving short-term or long-term androgen-deprivation therapy, but the absolute improvement in outcome varied by GC risk.

This is the first validation of a gene expression biomarker on pretreatment prostate cancer biopsy samples from prospective randomized trials and demonstrates an independent association of GC score with DM, PCSM, and OS. High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state, and GC can improve risk stratification to help personalize shared decision making.

There is an ongoing debate on the optimal sequencing of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa). Recent data favors concurrent ADT and RT over the neoadjuvant approach.

We conducted a systematic review in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases assessing the combination and optimal sequencing of ADT and RT for Intermediate-Risk (IR) and High-Risk (HR) PCa.

Twenty randomized control trials, one abstract, one individual patient data meta-analysis, and two retrospective studies were selected. HR PCa patients had improved survival outcomes with RT and ADT, particularly when a long-course Neoadjuvant-Concurrent-Adjuvant ADT was used. This benefit was seen in IR PCa when adding short-course ADT, although less consistently. The best available evidence indicates that concurrent over neoadjuvant sequencing is associated with better metastases-free survival at 15 years. Although most patients had IR PCa, HR participants may have been undertreated with short-course ADT and the absence of pelvic RT. Conversely, retrospective data suggests a survival benefit when using the neoadjuvant approach in HR PCa patients.

The available literature supports concurrent ADT and RT initiation for IR PCa. Neoadjuvant-concurrent-adjuvant sequencing should remain the standard approach for HR PCa and is an option for IR PCa.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy can benefit patients with localized prostate cancer. However, ADT can negatively impact quality of life and there remain no validated predictive models to guide its use.

Digital pathology image and clinical data from pre-treatment prostate tissue from 5,727 patients enrolled on five phase III randomized trials treated with radiotherapy +/- ADT were used to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-derived predictive model to assess ADT benefit with the primary endpoint of distant metastasis. After the model was locked, validation was performed on NRG/RTOG 9408 (n = 1,594) that randomized men to radiotherapy +/- 4 months of ADT. Fine-Gray regression and restricted mean survival times were used to assess the interaction between treatment and predictive model and within predictive model positive and negative subgroup treatment effects.

In the NRG/RTOG 9408 validation cohort (14.9 years of median follow-up), ADT significantly improved time to distant metastasis (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] = 0.64, 95%CI [0.45-0.90], p = 0.01). The predictive model-treatment interaction was significant (p-interaction = 0.01). In predictive model positive patients (n = 543, 34%), ADT significantly reduced the risk of distant metastasis compared to radiotherapy alone (sHR = 0.34, 95%CI [0.19-0.63], p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between treatment arms in the predictive model negative subgroup (n = 1,051, 66%; sHR = 0.92, 95%CI [0.59-1.43], p = 0.71).

Our data, derived and validated from completed randomized phase III trials, show that an AI-based predictive model was able to identify prostate cancer patients, with predominately intermediate-risk disease, who are likely to benefit from short-term ADT.

Multimodality therapy including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy are frequently deployed in the management of localized prostate cancer. We sought to perform a critical appraisal of the most contemporary literature focusing on the multimodality management of localized prostate cancer.

Men who are ideal candidates for multimodality therapy include those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, high-risk disease, and very high-risk disease. Enhancements in both systemic agents (including second-generation antiandrogens) as well as localized therapies (such as stereotactic body radiotherapy and brachytherapy) are refining the optimal balance between the use of systemic and local therapies for localized prostate cancer. Genomic predictors are emerging as critical tools for more precisely allocating treatment intensification with multimodality therapies as well as treatment de-intensification. Close collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based multimodality therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making in areas where the evidence is mixed.

There is no consensus concerning the appropriate use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) during primary and postoperative external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in the management of prostate cancer (PCa). Thus, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) guidelines seeks to present current recommendations for the clinical use of ADT in the various indications of EBRT.

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE PubMed that evaluated EBRT and ADT in prostate cancer. The search focused on randomized, Phase II and III trials published in English from January 2000 to May 2022. In case topics were addressed in the absence of Phase II or III trials, recommendations were labelled accordingly based on the limited body of evidence. Localized PCa was classified according to D'Amico et al. classification in low-, intermediate and high risk PCa. The ACROP clinical committee identified 13 European experts who discussed and analyzed the body of evidence concerning the use of ADT with EBRT for prostate cancer.

Key issues were identified and are discussed: It was concluded that no additional ADT is recommended for low-risk prostate cancer patients, whereas for intermediate- and high-risk patients four to six months and two to three years of ADT are recommended. Likewise, patients with locally advanced prostate cancer are recommended to receive ADT for two to three years and when ≥ 2 high-risk factors (cT3-4, ISUP grade ≥ 4 or PSA ≥ 40 ng/ml) or cN1 is present ADT for three years plus additional Abiraterone for two years is recommended. For postoperative patients no ADT is recommended for adjuvant EBRT in pN0 patients whereas for pN1 patients adjuvant EBRT with long-term ADT is performed for at least 24 to 36 months. In the setting of salvage EBRT ADT is performed in biochemically persistent PCa patients with no evidence of metastatic disease. Long-term ADT (24 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with high risk of further progression (PSA ≥ 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group ≥ 4) and a life expectancy of over ten years, whereas short-term ADT (6 months) is recommended in pN0 patients with lower risk profile (PSA < 0.7 ng/ml and ISUP grade group 4). Patients considered for ultra-hypofractionated EBRT as well as patients with image based local recurrence within the prostatic fossa or lymph node recurrence should participate in appropriate clinical trials evaluating the role of additional ADT.

These ESTRO-ACROP recommendations are evidence-based and relevant to the use of ADT in combination with EBRT in PCa for the most common clinical settings.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a urological malignancy with poor prognosis. Immune-related genes are associated with immune infiltration in prostate cancer, but their role in immunogenic PCa is less well understood. We assessed the infiltration patterns of 22 immune cells in PCa and the relationship of immune-related differentially expressed genes (IDEGs) with them. The 87 IDEGs are involved in the interaction between the extracellular matrix and the tumor microenvironment. The model, including seven IDEGs (SLPI, DES, IAPP, NPY, ISG15, PLA2G2A, and HLA-DMB), showed a good predictive power. The SLPI expression is positively correlated with the infiltration level of T cells gamma delta. In addition, PCa has high infiltration levels in Macrophages M1 (18.07%) and Dendritic cells activated (17.64%). The correlation analysis between IDEGs and immune cell infiltration suggested that PCa immunotherapy biomarkers may be closely related to T cells gamma delta.

A nadir Prostate-Specific Antigen (nPSA) of 0.06 ng/mL has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) in patients with intermediate or high-risk (HR) prostate cancer treated with definitive external beam radiation therapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We aimed to examine the association between the duration of ADT and bRFS in HR localized prostate cancer, based on nPSA.

Between 1998 and 2015, 204 patients with HR localized prostate cancer were identified. Of them, 157 patients (77.0%) reached the desired nPSA of < 0.06 ng/mL (favorable group), while 47 (23.0%) did not (unfavorable group). Duration of ADT varied among patients depending on physician preference, patient tolerance, and/or compliance. Survival outcomes were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and predictors of outcomes using multi-variable cox regression model.

In the favorable group, ADT for at least 12 months lead to superior bRFS compared to ≤ 9 months of ADT (P = 0.036). However, no significant difference was seen when examining the value of receiving ADT beyond 12, 18, or 24 months, respectively. On univariate analysis for bRFS, the use of ADT for at least 12 months was significant (P = 0.012) as well as time to nadir PSA (tnPSA), (≤ 6 vs > 6 months); (P = 0.043). The presenting T stage was borderline significant (HR 3.074; 95% CI 0.972-9.719; P = 0.056), while PSA at presentation, Gleason Score and age were not. On multivariate analysis, the use of ADT for 12 months (P = 0.012) and tnPSA (P = 0.037) remained significant. In the unfavorable group, receiving ADT beyond 9 and 12 months was associated with improved bRFS (P = 0.044 and 0.019, respectively). However, beyond 18 months, there was no significant difference.

In HR localized prostate cancer patients treated with definitive RT and ADT, the total duration of ADT may be adjusted according to treatment response using nPSA. In patients reaching a nPSA below 0.06 ng/mL, a total of 12 months of ADT may be sufficient, while in those not reaching a nPSA below 0.06 ng/mL, a total duration of 18 months is required.

To analyze the perioperative outcomes of neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) before laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery for localized high-risk prostate cancer in a Chinese cohort.

The clinical data of 385 patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) in our hospital from January 2019 to June 2021 were analyzed retrospectively, including 168 patients with preoperative NHT and 217 patients with simple surgery. Clinical characteristics were compared in the above two groups, the laparoscopic RP (LRP) cohort (n = 234) and the robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) cohort (n = 151), respectively.

In the overall cohort, compared with the control group, the NHT group had a shorter operative time, less blood loss, a lower positive surgical margin rate, and a higher proportion of Gleason score (GS) downgrading after the operation (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in hospitalization time, biochemical recurrence, urine leakage, urinary continence, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (p > 0.05). In the LRP cohort, it was found that the NHT group also had shorter operative time, less blood loss, lower positive surgical margin rate, a higher proportion of GS downgrading after the operation, and faster recovery of urinary control than the control group (p < 0.05). There was no marked difference in hospitalization time, biochemical recurrence, urinary leakage, or PSA progression-free survival. However, in the RALP cohort, the NHT group had a significant difference in the GS downgrading after the operation compared with the control group (p < 0.05). In the overall cohort, multiple analyses showed that initial PSA level, GS at biopsy, clinical T stage, lymph node invasion, use of NHT, and surgical methods were significantly associated with positive surgical margin (p < 0.05) while NHT did not account for biochemical recurrence (p > 0.05).

NHT can lower the difficulty of surgery, reduce positive surgical margin rate, and help recovery in short-term urinary control in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after LRP. However, we do not have evidence on the benefit of NHT in high-risk PCa patients treated with RALP. For these patients, surgery can be performed as early as possible.

Biochemical recurrence (BCR) is common after radical prostatectomy, but effective treatment options for men with BCR after curative treatment remain controversial. Although prostate-specific antigen is widely used as a surrogate marker for prostate cancer survival, it cannot fully differentiate between prostate-cancer-specific survival and overall survival. Thus, it is challenging for physicians to determine the timing of treatment to halt or slow the clinical progression of disease in patients with BCR while avoiding overtreatment for patients whose disease may not progress beyond BCR. Adjuvant therapy for radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy in intermediate- or high-risk localized prostate cancer has a benefit in terms of disease progression and survival but is not recommended in low-risk prostate cancer because of the significant adverse effects related to radiotherapy and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is also recommended for patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy. Several options for management of BCR after radical prostatectomy include SRT to the prostatic bed and/or pelvis, continuous or intermittent ADT, or observation. Patients' comorbidity, preferences, and cancer-related factors must be considered when deciding the best management strategy. Modern imaging technology such as positron emission tomography imaging of prostate-specific membrane antigen-positive regions enables earlier detection of disease progression, thus enhancing decision making for future disease management.

Prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality have rapidly increased in China. Notably, unique epidemiological characteristics of PCa are found in the Chinese PCa population, including a low but rising incidence and an inferior but improving disease prognosis. Consequently, the current treatment landscape of PCa in China demonstrates distinct features. Establishing a more thorough understanding of the characteristics of Chinese patients may help provide novel insights into potential treatment strategies for PCa patients. Herein, we review the epidemiological status and differences in treatment modalities of Chinese PCa patients. In addition, we discuss the underlying socioeconomic and biological factors that contribute to such diversity and further propose directions for future efforts in optimizing the PCa treatment in China.

Prostate cancer is the most common solid organ malignancy in men in the United States. Until recently, treatment options for men with metastatic disease were limited and patients faced poor outcomes with minimal alternatives. The landscape of prostate cancer treatment has transformed and taken shape over the last 20 years with novel hormonal and non-hormonal therapeutics that have demonstrated significant improvement in survival. However, patients with advanced disease still face imminent progression on hormone blockade therapy.

There is a significant market opportunity to devise novel, more potent agents for patients with hormone-resistant disease. Here we review the existing treatment options in men with advanced prostate cancer, the market opportunity within this field, goals of current research, and the novel agents under investigation, including androgen receptor degraders, testosterone synthesis pathway inhibitors, DNA-binding domain and N-terminal domain antagonists, and the combination of hormonal and non-hormonal agents.

Combination therapy regimens and novel agents targeting alternative binding domains of the androgen receptor are of great interest, as they may overcome resistance mechanisms and hold promise as the future of advanced prostate cancer treatment.

Background: To evaluate outcomes in terms of survival and toxicity in a series of intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy (HyRT) + hormonal therapy (HT) with or without image guidance (IGRT) and to investigate the impact of different variables. Methods: This is a multi-centric study. From January 2005 to December 2019, we treated 313 intermediate-risk PCa patients (T2b−T2c, Gleason score 7, or pre-treatment PSA 10 to 20 ng/mL) with HyRT. Patients received 54.75 Gy in 15 fractions in 5 weeks plus 9 months of neo-adjuvant, concomitant, and adjuvant HT with or without IGRT. Results: Median follow-up was 91.6 months (range 5.1−167.8 months). Median OS was not reached, and the 8- and 10-year OS was 81.9% and 72.4%, respectively. Median CSS was not reached, and the 8- and 10-year CSS was 97.9% and 94.5%, respectively. PSA at first follow-up <0.8 ng/mL was significantly related to better oncological outcomes (CSS, bRFS, LRFS, cPFS, and MFS) in both univariate and multivariate analysis. After Propensity Score matching, grade 2−3 acute and cumulative late GU (p = 0.153 and p = 0.581, respectively) and GI (p = 0.196 and p = 0.925, respectively) toxicity were not statistically different in patients treated with or without IGRT. Conclusions: HyRT is effective and safe regardless of the use of IGRT. PSA at first follow-up is an easily accessible prognostic factor that may help the clinicians to identify patients who require a treatment intensification.

To describe a local radio-oncological treatment for patients with prostate cancer that metastasized to either the lymph nodes or distant regions.

We included 133 patients with prostate cancer that displayed either distant metastases (DM) or lymph node metastases alone (NM) and were treated between 2004 and 2019. All patients underwent computed tomography and a bone scan or 18F- or prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted positron emission tomography. Patients received local external beam radiation therapy to the prostate to achieve local control (60-81.4 Gy to the prostate, and 45-50.4 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes), with either the 3D conformal (4-field box) or volumetric modulated arc therapy technique. A urologist prescribed additional therapy.

We included 51 patients with DM and 82 patients with NM. The mean follow-up was 42 months for all patients. The groups were similar in T stage, initial prostate-specific antigen, histology, androgen deprivation therapy, age, treatment techniques, and prescribed doses, but different in lymph node inclusion and follow-up times. In the NM and DM groups, the 5‑year biochemical recurrence-free rates were 52% and 24%, respectively (p < 0.0001); the 5‑year disease-specific survival rates were 92% and 61%, respectively (p = 0.001); and the 5‑year OS rates were 77% and 48%, respectively (p = 0.01). The groups had similar acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary side effects, except that late genitourinary side effects occurred significantly more frequently in the NM group (p = 0.01).

DM was associated with significantly worse outcomes than NM. The long-term survival of patients with metastatic prostate cancer was low.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) combined with computed tomography (CT) is a new imaging modality to detect the extra-prostatic spread of prostate cancer. PSMA PET/CT has a higher sensitivity and specificity than conventional imaging (CT ± whole body bone scan [WBBS]). This study conducted a cost-utility analysis of PSMA PET/CT compared with conventional imaging for patients with newly diagnosed, intermediate-risk or high-risk primary prostate cancer.

Australian healthcare perspective.

Tertiary.

A decision-analytic Markov model combined data from a variety of sources. The time horizon was 35 years. The sensitivity and specificity of PSMA PET/CT and CT alone were based on meta-analyses and the test accuracy of CT+WBBS was based on a single randomised controlled trial. Health outcomes included cases detected, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years. Costs related to other diagnostic tests, initial treatment, adverse events, and post-disease progression were included. All costs were reported in 2021 Australian Dollars (A$).

The deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of PSMA PET/CT was estimated to be A $21,147/quality-adjusted life-year gained versus CT+WBBS, and A$36,231/quality-adjusted life-year gained versus CT alone. The results were most sensitive to the time horizon, and the initial treatments received by patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer. The probability of PSMA PET/CT being cost effective was estimated to be 91% versus CT+WBBS and 89% versus CT alone, using a threshold of AU$50,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained.

PSMA PET/CT is likely to be more costly than CT+WBBS or CT alone in Australia; however, it is still likely to be considered cost effective compared with conventional imaging.

Prostate cancer is the most frequent cancer in men and a leading cause of cancer death. Determining a patient's optimal therapy is a challenge, where oncologists must select a therapy with the highest likelihood of success and the lowest likelihood of toxicity. International standards for prognostication rely on non-specific and semi-quantitative tools, commonly leading to over- and under-treatment. Tissue-based molecular biomarkers have attempted to address this, but most have limited validation in prospective randomized trials and expensive processing costs, posing substantial barriers to widespread adoption. There remains a significant need for accurate and scalable tools to support therapy personalization. Here we demonstrate prostate cancer therapy personalization by predicting long-term, clinically relevant outcomes using a multimodal deep learning architecture and train models using clinical data and digital histopathology from prostate biopsies. We train and validate models using five phase III randomized trials conducted across hundreds of clinical centers. Histopathological data was available for 5654 of 7764 randomized patients (71%) with a median follow-up of 11.4 years. Compared to the most common risk-stratification tool-risk groups developed by the National Cancer Center Network (NCCN)-our models have superior discriminatory performance across all endpoints, ranging from 9.2% to 14.6% relative improvement in a held-out validation set. This artificial intelligence-based tool improves prognostication over standard tools and allows oncologists to computationally predict the likeliest outcomes of specific patients to determine optimal treatment. Outfitted with digital scanners and internet access, any clinic could offer such capabilities, enabling global access to therapy personalization.