Salvage lymph node dissection in patients with oligometastatic recurrence of prostate cancer confirmed by PET-CT

Background. Due to the development of visualization methods of examination in a heterogenous group of patients with prostate cancer recurrence, it has become possible to detect cases of oligometastatic disease.

The objective is to evaluate intermediate term surgical and oncological results of salvage lymph node dissection (sLND) in patients with oligometastatic recurrence of prostate cancer confirmed by positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT).

Materials and methods. The experience of treatment of 13 patients with recurrent prostate cancer who underwent sLND is presented. The characteristics of patients prior to sLND, surgical and oncological results were evaluated. A comparison of sLND results after PET-CT with choline and ⁶⁸Ga-prostate specific membrane antigen (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA) was performed.

Results. Median age was 65years (interquartile range (IQR) 59—70 years), median level of prostate-specific antigen was 2.8 ng/ml (IQR 1.3—4.6 ng/ml). Complications were observed in 4 of 13 patients (grade IIIа or lower per the Clavien—Dindo classification). Median follow-up duration was 46 months (IQR 11—50 months), response to sLND was observed in 6 patients and full response (prostate-specific antigen level <0.2 ng/ml) in 4. Median time to prescription of androgen deprivation therapy after sLND was 13.6 months (IQR 5.2—30.7 months). In 5 patients, for maximum follow-up period androgen deprivation therapy wasn’t performed. No statistically significant differences between patients who underwent sLND after PET-CT with choline and ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA, were observed except for the follow-up period.

Conclusion. Therefore, sLND in carefully selected patients is a safe intervention allowing to delay or fully cancel androgen deprivation therapy in the presented follow-up period.

1. Freedland S., Presti J.C. Jr, Amling C.L. et al. Time trends in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results of the SEARCH database. Urology 2003;61(4):736—41. PMID: 12670557.

2. Preradical prostatectomy nomogram for prediction of long-term results of radical prostatectomy. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Available at: https://www.mskcc.org/nomograms/prostate/pre_op.

3. Freedland S.J., Humphreys E.B., Mangold L.A. et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005;294(4):433-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.294.4.433. PMID: 16046649.

4. Hijazi S., Meller B., Leitsmann C. et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for nodal oligometastatic prostate cancer detected by 68Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate 2015;75(16):1934—40.

5. Pond G.R., Sonpavde G., de Wit R. et al. The prognostic importance of metastatic site in men with metastatic castrationresistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014;65(1):3—6. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.024. PMID: 24120464.

6. Yossepowitch O., Bianco FJ. Jr, Eggener S.E. et al. The natural history of noncastrate metastatic prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007;51(4):940-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.045. PMID: 17125912.

7. Suardi N., Gandaglia G., Gallina A. et al. Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol 2015;67(2):299—309. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.011. PMID: 24571959.

8. Weichselbaum R.R., Hellman S. Oligometastases revisited. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011;8(6):378—82. DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.44. PMID: 21423255.

9. Maurer T., Gschwend J., Rauscher I. et al. Diagnostic efficacy of (68)gallium-positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2016;195(5):1436—43.

10. Mottet N., Bellmunt J., Bolla M. et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 2017;71(4):618—29. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003. PMID: 27568654.

11. American Urological Association. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline [Internet] Linthicum: American Urological Association. 2017. Available at: https://www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/prostate-cancer.cfm.

12. Wang E.H., Yu J.B., Gross C.P. et al. Variation in pelvic lymph node dissection among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy by hospital characteristics and surgical approach: results from the National Cancer Database. J Urol 2015;193(3):820-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.09.019. PMID: 25242393.

13. Gandaglia G., Abdollah F., Schiffmann J. et al. Distribution of metastatic sites in patients with prostate cancer: a population-based analysis. Prostate 2014;74(2):210—6. DOI: 10.1002/pros.22742. PMID: 24132735.

14. Sivaraman A., Benfante N., Touijer K. et al. Can pelvic node dissection at radical prostatectomy influence the nodal recurrence at salvage lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer? Investigative and Clinical Urology 2018;59(2):83—90. DOI: 10.4111/icu.2018.59.2.83. PMID: 29520383.

15. Scattoni V., Picchio M., Suardi N. et al. Detection of lymph-node metastases with integrated [11C]choline PET/CT in patients with PSA failure after radical retropubic prostatectomy: results confirmed by open pelvic-retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Eur Urol 2007;52(2):423-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.03.032. PMID: 17397992.

16. Veliev E.I., Golubtsova E.N., Tomilov A.A. Surgical treatment for progressive prostate cancer: A clinical case. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology 2014;(3):95—100. (In Russ.).

17. Zattoni F., Nehra A., Murphy C.R. et al. Mid-term outcomes following salvage lymph node dissection for prostate cancer nodal recurrence status post-radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus 2016;2(5):522—31. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.01.008. PMID: 28723518.

18. Vasil’ev A.O., Govorov A.V., Pushkar’ D.Yu. Salvage lymphadenectomy in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology 2017;13(2):67-73. (In Russ.).

19. Evsukova O.I., Chernyaev VA., Khalmurzaev O.A. et al. Evaluation of safety and advisability of salvage lymph node dissection in patients with lymphogenic metastases of prostate cancer after radical treatment. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology 2017;13(4):64—9. (In Russ.).

20. Suardi N., Briganti A., Gandaglia G. et al. Salvage lymph node dissection for node-only recurrence of prostate cancer: ready for prime time? Eur Urol 2017;71(5): 693-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.001. PMID: 28043707.

21. Alekseev B.Ya., Nyushko K.M., Reva S.A. et al. Salvage lymphadenectomy in patients with lymphogenic prostate cancer progression after radical treatment:results of a multicenter study. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology 2016;12(4):70—80. (In Russ.).

22. Kretschmer A., Herlemann A., Stief C.G., Gratzke C. When is surgical treatment indicated in metastatic prostate cancer and what is the scientific rationale? Urologe 2017;56(5):599—603. DOI: 10.1007/s00120-017-0361-0. PMID: 28314971.

23. Porres D., Pfister D., Thissen A. et al. The role of salvage extended lymph node dissection in patients with rising PSA and PET/CT scan detected nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2017;20(1):85—92. DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2016.54. PMID: 27824042.

24. Picchio M., Briganti A., Fanti S. et al. The role of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of patients with prostate-specific antigen progression after radical treatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011;59(1): 51—60. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.09.004. PMID: 20869161.

25. Bouchelouche K., Choyke P. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in prostate cancer: a step toward personalized medicine. Curr Opin Oncol 2016;28(3):216—21. DOI: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000277. PMID: 26967720.

26. Michaud L., Touijer K. Molecular imaging for prostate cancer: performance analysis of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus choline PET/CT. Actas Urol Esp 2017;41(5):292— 9. DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2016.09.015. PMID: 27912910.

27. Schwenck J., Rempp H., Reischl G. et al. Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;44(1):92— 101. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-016-3490-6. PMID: 27557844.

28. Pfister D., Porres D., Heidenreich A. et al. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer lesions before salvage lymphadenectomy is more accurate with Ga-HBED-CC than with F-Fluoroethylcholine PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:1410—7.

29. Rigatti P., Suardi N., Briganti A. et al. Pelvic/retroperitoneal salvage lymph node dissection for patients treated with radical prostatectomy with biochemical recurrence and nodal recurrence detected by [11C] choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Urol 2011;60:935—43.

30. Jilg C.A., Rischke H.C,. Reske S.N. et al. Salvage lymph node dissection with adjuvant radiotherapy for nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. J Urol 2012;188(6):2190— 7. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.041. PMID: 23083862.

31. Jilg C.A., Drendel V., Rischke H.C. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-68-HBED-CC-PSMA-Ligand-PET/CT before salvage lymph node dissection for recurrent prostate cancer. Theranostics 2017;7(6):1770— 80. DOI: 10.7150/thno.18421. PMID: 28529650.

32. Rauscher I., Dhwel C., Wirtz M. et al. Value of 111In-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-radioguided surgery for salvage lymphadenectomy in recurrent prostate cancer: correlation with histopathology and clinical follow-up. BJU Int 2017;120(1):40—7. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13713. PMID: 27862863.

33. Rischke H.C., Schultze-Seemann W, Wieser G. et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy after salvage lymph node dissection because of nodal relapse of prostate cancer versus salvage lymph node dissection only. Strahlenther Onkol 2015;191(4):310—20. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-014-0763-5. PMID: 25326142.

34. Stenzl A. Salvage lymph node dissection in recurrent prostate cancer patients. Eur Urol 2011;60(5):944—5. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.08.027. PMID: 21862206.