Role of Radical Prostatectomy in Oligo-Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
메타분석
1/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
611 patients.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
However, there is a paucity of high-quality literature on this subject. Ongoing randomised controlled trials may soon clarify the role of cRP in the context of o-mHSPC concerning survival benefits.
[INTRODUCTION AND AIMS] Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) ± palliative radiotherapy (pRT) is the current standard of care for Oligo-metastatic hormone-sensi
- 95% CI 0.34-0.92
- HR 0.56
APA
Rajan K, Parmar K, et al. (2025). Role of Radical Prostatectomy in Oligo-Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Cancers, 17(17). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17172757
MLA
Rajan K, et al.. "Role of Radical Prostatectomy in Oligo-Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.." Cancers, vol. 17, no. 17, 2025.
PMID
40940854 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[INTRODUCTION AND AIMS] Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) ± palliative radiotherapy (pRT) is the current standard of care for Oligo-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (o-mHSPC). Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (cRP) has gained interest in this group of patients, with potential benefits including reduced tumour burden and a lower risk of local events from disease progression. In this review, we compare both survival outcomes and local event rates between cRP and upfront ADT ± SACT.
[METHODS] All randomised trials and observational studies comparing cRP with standard treatment (ST), which we defined as ADT ± SACT for o-mHSPC, were included in the review. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024516586), and the review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The databases searched included Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science. A risk of bias assessment was performed for the included studies as recommended by the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews and Interventions. The primary outcome measures were Overall Survival (OS), Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS), Progression-free Survival (PFS), Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer-free Survival (CRPC-FS), and local complication rates. The secondary outcome measures were complication rates and functional outcomes post-cRP.
[RESULTS] A total of 5130 studies were identified for this review (5119 by database searching and 11 through manual searching). Eight studies were included in the review, comprising 611 patients. cRP was identified to have superior OS (HR: 0.56 (95% CI: 0.34-0.92), I = 0%, = 0.02 (very low certainty)) and CSS (HR: 0.27 (95% CI: 0.15-0.47), I = 0%, < 0.0001 (very low certainty)). The PFS (HR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.34-1.33), I = 58%, = 0.25 (very low certainty)) and CRPC-FS (HR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.32-1.43), I = 57%, = 0.30 (very low certainty)) were similar between the two groups. The rates of local events were significantly lower in patients undergoing cRP (RR 0.27 (95% CI: 0.13-0.59), I = 17%, = 0.001 (low certainty)). The rates of Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade 3 or higher complications ranged from 0% to 13.1%. Additionally, the reported continence rates ranged from 81.5% to 91.3%. The review is limited by the lack of a uniform definition for o-mHSPC and the predominance of low-quality, heterogeneous studies. Despite mitigation strategies, the overall certainty of evidence remains very low per GRADE assessment.
[CONCLUSION] cRP significantly reduces local event rates compared with ST and offers comparable PFS and CFPC-FS, with superior OS and CSS in the cRP arm compared to the ST arm in patients with o-mHSPC. However, there is a paucity of high-quality literature on this subject. Ongoing randomised controlled trials may soon clarify the role of cRP in the context of o-mHSPC concerning survival benefits.
[METHODS] All randomised trials and observational studies comparing cRP with standard treatment (ST), which we defined as ADT ± SACT for o-mHSPC, were included in the review. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024516586), and the review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The databases searched included Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science. A risk of bias assessment was performed for the included studies as recommended by the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews and Interventions. The primary outcome measures were Overall Survival (OS), Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS), Progression-free Survival (PFS), Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer-free Survival (CRPC-FS), and local complication rates. The secondary outcome measures were complication rates and functional outcomes post-cRP.
[RESULTS] A total of 5130 studies were identified for this review (5119 by database searching and 11 through manual searching). Eight studies were included in the review, comprising 611 patients. cRP was identified to have superior OS (HR: 0.56 (95% CI: 0.34-0.92), I = 0%, = 0.02 (very low certainty)) and CSS (HR: 0.27 (95% CI: 0.15-0.47), I = 0%, < 0.0001 (very low certainty)). The PFS (HR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.34-1.33), I = 58%, = 0.25 (very low certainty)) and CRPC-FS (HR: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.32-1.43), I = 57%, = 0.30 (very low certainty)) were similar between the two groups. The rates of local events were significantly lower in patients undergoing cRP (RR 0.27 (95% CI: 0.13-0.59), I = 17%, = 0.001 (low certainty)). The rates of Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade 3 or higher complications ranged from 0% to 13.1%. Additionally, the reported continence rates ranged from 81.5% to 91.3%. The review is limited by the lack of a uniform definition for o-mHSPC and the predominance of low-quality, heterogeneous studies. Despite mitigation strategies, the overall certainty of evidence remains very low per GRADE assessment.
[CONCLUSION] cRP significantly reduces local event rates compared with ST and offers comparable PFS and CFPC-FS, with superior OS and CSS in the cRP arm compared to the ST arm in patients with o-mHSPC. However, there is a paucity of high-quality literature on this subject. Ongoing randomised controlled trials may soon clarify the role of cRP in the context of o-mHSPC concerning survival benefits.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- Metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer to the penis resulting in malignant priapism and urethral obstruction.
- Experiences of metastatic prostate cancer patients with a mainstream genetic testing pathway.
- Impact of Omission of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Treatment of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.
- Fatal Interstitial Pneumonitis During Combined Degarelix, Darolutamide, and Docetaxel Therapy for Metastatic Prostate Cancer.
- Perioperative outcomes and postoperative functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for oligometastatic versus localized prostate cancer: a multicenter matched case-control study.
- Liquid Biopsy in Non-Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Clinical Evidence and Future Directions.