Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.1111/iju.70309

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.1111/iju.70356

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

BACKGROUND/AIM: The impact of neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy (NCHT) on biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) in patients with very-high risk localized prostate cancer remains uncertain, particularly because previous studies have included heterogeneous populations with locally advanced disease. This retrospective study evaluated the clinical significance of NCHT in patients with strictly defined T2-T3a very-high risk disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 49 patients treated between 2017 and 2024 were analyzed; 25 received NCHT consisting of androgen deprivation therapy and estramustine phosphate, while 24 underwent radical prostatectomy without NCHT. All patients received robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and pathological outcomes were comparable between the two groups, with a median follow-up period of 19 months in the NCHT group and 29 months in the non-NCHT group. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no significant difference in BRFS between the groups (p=0.397). In multivariable Cox analysis, primary Gleason pattern 5 was the only independent predictor of BRFS (hazard ratio=3.72; 95% confidence interval=1.19-11.58), whereas NCHT did not confer an oncological benefit. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that for patients with very-high risk prostate cancer limited to T2-T3a disease, NCHT does not improve biochemical recurrence outcomes, and tumor biology-particularly primary Gleason pattern 5-plays a more decisive role in prognosis than neoadjuvant systemic intensification. While cytotoxic therapy combined with androgen deprivation remains of investigational interest, its utility in organ-confined but biologically aggressive prostate cancer appears limited based on current evidence. Further large-scale, prospective studies are warranted to clarify the optimal patient selection for neoadjuvant approaches.

DOI： 10.21873/invivo.14264

PubMed

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

DOI： 10.1111/iju.70055

researchmap

Authorship：Lead author   Language：Japanese   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

Event date： 2021.9 - 2021.10

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Event date： 2020.12

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)  

Event date： 2020.11

Language：Japanese   Presentation type：Oral presentation (general)