Comparisons of cancer-specific and overall mortality in patients with biopsy- and TURP-diagnosed prostate cancer: a population-based propensity score-matching study

This population-based propensity score-matching study aimed to investigate the survival outcomes of patients with biopsy- and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)-diagnosed prostate cancer (PC). We obtained data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database, PC patients diagnosed by biopsy and TURP from 1975 to 2019 were enrolled. Cohort data were baseline-matched using a propensity score-matching (PSM) study. Compared with biopsy-confirmed PC (BPC) patients, prostate cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) in patients with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)-diagnosed PC (TPC) were analyzed. A total of 26,027 cases were obtained for this study, of which 4770 cases (18.3%) were TPC patients and 21,257 cases (81.7%) were BPC patients. The proportion of TPC patients showed an increasing trend. The prognosis of TPC patients seemed worse, the ratios of CSM and OM were higher, and the median survival time was shorter (all p < 0.05). After PSM, TPC patients still had a worse prognosis. Compared with BPC patients, TPC patients’ CSM and OM risks increased by 42.0% and 43.0%, respectively (p < 0.001). The results of subgroup analysis indicated earlier the stage of TPC patients, the higher the risk of OM, while systemic treatment after surgery may bring declines of CSM and OM (all p for interaction < 0.001). To our knowledge, we first used a large sample size to find that clinically suspected PC patients with obstruction, directly TURP will increase the risk of CSM and OM.

Prostate cancer; Biopsy; TURP; Cancer-specific mortality; Overall mortality; Propensity score-matching study

[1] Mottet N, van den Bergh R, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. European Urology. 2021; 79: 243–262.

[2] Mohler JL, Antonarakis ES. Nccn guidelines update: management of prostate cancer. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2019; 17: 583–586.

[3] Lam T, MacLennan S, Willemse PM, Mason MD, Plass K, Shepherd R, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG prostate cancer guideline panel consensus statements for deferred treatment with curative intent for localised prostate cancer from an international collaborative study (detective study). European Urology. 2019; 76: 790–813.

[4] Zigeuner R, Schips L, Lipsky K, Auprich M, Salfellner M, Rehak P, et al. Detection of prostate cancer by TURP or open surgery in patients with previously negative transrectal prostate biopsies. Urology. 2003; 62: 883–887.

[5] Gravas S. Hot topics in the clinical practice guidelines for treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction. European Urology Focus. 2022; 8: 396–398.

[6] Cheng BK, Castellani D, Chan IS, Baker A, Gauhar V, Wroclawski ML, et al. Incidence, predictive factors and oncological outcomes of incidental prostate cancer after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Urology. 2022; 40: 87–101.

[7] Abedi AR, Ghiasy S, Fallah-Karkan M, Rahavian A, Allameh F. The management of patients diagnosed with incidental prostate cancer: narrative review. Research and Reports in Urology. 2020; 12: 105–109.

[8] Hilscher M, Røder A, Helgstrand JT, Klemann N, Brasso K, Vickers AJ, et al. Risk of prostate cancer and death after benign transurethral resection of the prostate—a 20-year population‐based analysis. Cancer. 2022; 128: 3674–3680.

[9] Gillessen S, Armstrong A, Attard G, Beer TM, Beltran H, Bjartell A, et al. Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: report from the advanced prostate cancer consensus conference 2021. European Urology. 2022; 82: 115–141.

[10] Liberman D, Jarosek S, Virnig BA, Chu H, Elliott SP. The patient burden of bladder outlet obstruction after prostate cancer treatment. Journal of Urology. 2016; 195: 1459–1463.

[11] Altay B, Erkurt B, Kiremit MC, Horuz R, Guzelburc V, Albayrak S. A comparison of 120 W laser photoselective vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction by prostate cancer. Urologia Internationalis. 2015; 94: 326–329.

[12] Rom M, Waldert M, Schatzl G, Swietek N, Shariat SF, Klatte T. Bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer. BJU International. 2014; 114: 62–66.

[13] Fang K, Song P, Zhang J, Yang L, Liu P, Lu N, et al. The impact of palliative transurethral resection of the prostate on the prognosis of patients with bladder outlet obstruction and metastatic prostate cancer: a population-matched study. Frontiers in Surgery. 2021; 8: 726534.

[14] Krupski TL, Stukenborg GJ, Moon K, Theodorescu D. The relationship of palliative transurethral resection of the prostate with disease progression in patients with prostate cancer. BJU International. 2010; 106: 1477–1483.

[15] Chen S, Chiu L, Chen K. Comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for detection of prostate cancer in patients with moderate lower urinary tract symptoms. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association. 2010; 73: 568–572.

[16] Cho HJ, Shin SC, Cho JM, Kang JY, Yoo TK. The role of transurethral resection of the prostate for patients with an elevated prostate-specific antigen. Prostate International. 2014; 2: 196–202.

[17] Hammarsten J, Andersson S, Peeker R, Holmén A, Högstedt B. Does transurethral resection of a clinically benign prostate gland increase the risk of developing clinical prostate cancer? A 10-year follow-up study. Cancer. 1994; 74: 2347–2351.

[18] Lerner LB, McVary KT, Barry MJ, Bixler BR, Dahm P, Das AK, et al. Management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA guideline part II—surgical evaluation and treatment. Journal of Urology. 2021; 206: 818-826.

[19] Rosenhammer B, Lausenmeyer EM, Mayr R, Burger M, Eichelberg C. HoLEP provides a higher prostate cancer detection rate compared to bipolar TURP: a matched-pair analysis. World Journal of Urology. 2018; 36: 2035–2041.

[20] He G, Sun C, Shu Y, Wang B, Du C, Chen J, et al. The diagnostic value of prostate cancer between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a retrospective comparative study. International Journal of Surgery. 2020; 79: 217–221.

[21] Elkoushy MA, Elshal AM, Elhilali MM. Incidental prostate cancer diagnosis during holmium laser enucleation: assessment of predictors, survival, and disease progression. Urology. 2015; 86: 552–557.

[22] Hutchison D, Peabody H, Kuperus JM, Humphrey JE, Ryan M, Moriarity A, et al. Management of prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2021; 39: 297.e1–297.e8.

[23] Lambert E, Goossens M, Palagonia E, Vollemaere J, Mazzone E, Dell’Oglio P, et al. Changes in serum PSA after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate are predictive for the future diagnosis of prostate cancer. World Journal of Urology. 2021; 39: 2621–2626.

[24] Zhao Z, Ma W, Zeng G, Qi D. PSCA mRNA expression in preoperatively negative prostate biopsies predicts incidental prostate cancer in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2011; 104: 672–678.

[25] Cuzick JM, Stone S, Lenz L, Flake DD, Rajamani S, Moller H, et al. Validation of the cell cycle progression score to differentiate indolent from aggressive prostate cancer in men diagnosed through transurethral resection of the prostate biopsy. Cancer Reports. 2022; 5: e1535.

[26] Ahdoot M, Wilbur AR, Reese SE, Lebastchi AH, Mehralivand S, Gomella PT, et al. MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020; 382: 917–928.

[27] Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, Chou R, Crispino T, Davis JW, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part I: introduction, risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management. Journal of Urology. 2022; 208: 10–18.

[28] Buelens S, Poelaert F, Claeys T, De Bleser E, Dhondt B, Verla W, et al. Multicentre, prospective study on local treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (LoMP study). BJU International. 2022; 129: 699–707.

[29] Löppenberg B, Dalela D, Karabon P, Sood A, Sammon JD, Meyer CP, et al. The impact of local treatment on overall survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer on diagnosis: a national cancer data base analysis. European Urology. 2017; 72: 14–19.

[30] Ventimiglia E, Seisen T, Abdollah F, Briganti A, Fonteyne V, James N, et al. A systematic review of the role of definitive local treatment in patients with clinically lymph node-positive prostate cancer. European Urology Oncology. 2019; 2: 294–301.

[31] Ong S, Chen K, Grummet J, Yaxley J, Scheltema MJ, Stricker P, et al. Guidelines of guidelines: focal therapy for prostate cancer, is it time for consensus? BJU International. 2023; 131: 20–31.

[32] Cornford P, van den Bergh R, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II—2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. European Urology. 2021; 79: 263–282.

[33] Beyer K, Moris L, Lardas M, Omar MI, Healey J, Tripathee S, et al. Updating and integrating core outcome sets for localised, locally advanced, metastatic, and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: an update from the pioneer consortium. European Urology. 2022; 81: 503–514.

[34] Ørsted DD, Bojesen SE, Nielsen SF, Nordestgaard BG. Association of clinical benign prostate hyperplasia with prostate cancer incidence and mortality revisited: a nationwide cohort study of 3,009,258 men. European Urology. 2011; 60: 691–698.

[35] Holman, Wisniewski, Semmens, Rouse, Bass. Mortality and prostate cancer risk in 19,598 men after surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU International. 1999; 84: 37–42.