Prostate cancer represents a prevalent malignancy within the male genitourinary system. In recent years, its incidence in China has gradually increased, becoming a significant public health issue. While early detection correlates strongly with improved prognosis, the majority of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients in China are already in intermediate or advanced stages, precluding curative-intent interventions and contributing to marked survival disparities. The progression of prostate cancer is lengthy, typically encompassing diagnosis, treatment, progression, metastasis, and death, accompanied by a decline in quality of life. Personalized treatment plans should be developed based on the disease stage and patient preferences. In non-metastatic prostate cancer, where the tumor is confined to the prostate, surgery and radiotherapy are the primary treatments, supplemented by neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies to delay metastasis. For metastatic prostate cancer, systemic therapy is prioritized to prolong survival. In metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, controlling androgen levels is crucial, while treatment options for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer are relatively limited, necessitating individualized and precise treatment. During prostate cancer management, prostate-specific antigen levels are closely linked to prognosis and require monitoring. Bone metastasis, the most common site in prostate cancer patients, often triggers skeletal-related events, demanding effective prevention and management. Treatment-related adverse reactions are also a clinical challenge, requiring balanced risk-benefit assessments and judicious drug selection to preserve quality of life. Rapid advancements in screening technologies, surgical innovations, drug development, and China-specific epidemiological factors further complicate decision-making in holistic prostate cancer management. To optimize the standardization of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment in China, the Genitourinary Oncology Committee of Chinese Anti-cancer Association synthesized global guidelines, clinical evidence and clinical expertise, and addressed critical challenges in the whole-course management of prostate cancer to formulate a multidisciplinary consensus. The expert consensus on whole-course management of prostate cancer (2025 edition) establishes standardized protocols to guide clinical practice, improve treatment outcomes, and enhance patient quality of life.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis* ; Consensus ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Quality of Life ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology* ; China ; Bone Neoplasms/secondary* ; Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use*

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) face poor prognoses due to tumor heterogeneity and drug resistance. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have been under development for over two decades for mCRPC treatment. Several clinical trials have demonstrated promising antitumor activity and acceptable safety profiles for ADCs in this setting. Among prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted ADCs, ARX517 demonstrates superior safety and more significant prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reductions compared to earlier agents such as MLN2704, PSMA-ADC, and MEDI3726. ADCs targeting B7-H3, such as MGC018 and DB-1311, have also shown antitumor activity. ADCs targeting other antigens, including six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate (STEAP)1 (DSTP3086S), trophoblast cell surface antigen (TROP)2 (sacituzumab govitecan), and solute carrier (SLC) 44A4 (ASG-5ME), have shown preliminary antitumor activity in early trials but face challenges with insufficient efficacy or toxicity. Tisotumab vedotin (targeting tissue factor) has shown no significant therapeutic response in mCRPC. Meanwhile, disitamab vedotin (HER2-targeted), ABBV-969 and DXC008 (both dual PSMA/STEAP1-targeted) are currently under evaluation. Notably, an international multicenter phase Ⅲ clinical trial (NCT06925737) for mCRPC has been initiated in May 2025 for evaluating B7-H3-targeted ADC ifinatamab deruxtecan. This review summarizes recent advances in ADCs targeting key antigens in mCRPC (including PSMA, B7-H3, STEAP1, TROP2, SLC44A4, and others) and explores combination strategies, offering insights to inform the clinical management of mCRPC.
Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology* ; Male ; Immunoconjugates/therapeutic use* ; Glutamate Carboxypeptidase II/immunology* ; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use* ; B7 Antigens/immunology* ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Antigens, Neoplasm/immunology* ; Antigens, Surface ; Camptothecin/analogs & derivatives* ; Oxidoreductases

OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) score combined with PSA density (PSAD) in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) in the PSA grey zone by MRI-TRUS cognitive fusion-guided transperineal targeted prostate biopsy. METHODS: This retrospective study included 327 male patients with total PSA (tPSA) levels of 4-10 μg/L undergoing MRI-TRUS cognitive fusion-guided transperineal targeted prostate biopsy in our hospital between January 2021 and December 2023. According to the pathological results, we divided the patients into a CSPCa (n = 44) and a non-CSPCa group (n = 283), collected their clinical and imaging data, and subjected them to statistical analysis. RESULTS: The age, tPSA level, PSAD and PI-RADS score were significantly higher, while the free PSA (fPSA) level, f/tPSA ratio and prostate volume remarkably lower in the CSPCa than in the non-CSPCa group (P<0.05). The areas under the curve (AUCs) of PSAD, PI-RADS score and their combination were 0.772, 0.730 and 0.801, with sensitivities of 63.63%, 70.45% and 72.73%, and specificities of 84.10%, 75.62% and 83.75%, respectively (P<0.01). With PSAD 0.2 μg/(ml·cm3) as the best cut-off value and based on the PI-RADS scores, the patients were divided into two groups for analysis. In the patients with PI-RADS scores 2 and 5, the AUCs were 0.534 and 0.643, with sensitivities of 16.67% and 63.64%, and specificities of 85.14% and 64.29%, with no statistically significant differences (P= 0.784, P= 0.228), and in those with PI-RADS scores 3 and 4, the AUCs were 0.794 and 0.843, with sensitivities of 57.14% and 80.00%, and specificities of 87.14% and 81.82%, with statistically significant differences (P= 0.009, P<0.001). CONCLUSION PI-RADS v2.1 score combined with PSAD can effectively improve the diagnostic efficiency of CSPCa in the PSA grey zone by MRI-TRUS cognitive fusion-guided transperineal targeted prostate biopsy and serve as a guide for selection of prostate biopsy.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging* ; Retrospective Studies ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; Prostate/pathology* ; Aged ; Middle Aged

Objective： The aim of this study is to explore the predictive value of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging(bpMRI)for pelvic lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer patients with PSA≤20 μg/L and establish a nomogram. Methods： The imaging data and clinical data of 363 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from July 2018 to December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were used to screen independent risk factors for pelvic lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer, and a nomogram of the clinical prediction model was established. Calibration curves were drawn to evaluate the accuracy of the model. Results： Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed extrocapusular extension (OR=8.08,95%CI=2.62－24.97, P<0.01), enlargement of pelvic lymph nodes (OR=4.45,95%CI=1.16－17.11,P=0.030), and biopsy ISUP grade(OR=1.97,95%CI=1.12－3.46, P=0.018)were independent risk factors for pelvic lymph node metastasis. The C-index of the prediction model was 0.834, which indicated that the model had a good prediction ability. The actual value of the model calibration curve and the prediction probability of the model fitted well, indicating that the model had a good accuracy. Further analysis of DCA curve showed that the model had good clinical application value when the risk threshold ranged from 0.05 to 0.70.Conclusion： For prostate cancer patients with PSA≤20 μg/L, bpMRI has a good predictive value for the pelvic lymph node metastasis of prostate cancer with extrocapusular extension, enlargement of pelvic lymph nodes and ISUP grade≥4.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging* ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; Retrospective Studies ; Nomograms ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Lymph Nodes/pathology* ; Pelvis ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prostatectomy ; Lymph Node Excision ; Risk Factors ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Logistic Models ; Middle Aged ; Aged

In this nonsystematic review of the literature, we explored the changing landscape of detection and treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Through emphasizing improved cancer assessment with histology classification and genomics, we investigated key developments in PCa detection and risk stratification. The pivotal role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the novel diagnostic pathway is examined, alongside the benefits and drawbacks of MRI-targeted biopsies for detection and tumor characterization. We also delved into treatment options, particularly active surveillance for intermediate-risk PCa. Outcomes are compared between intermediate- and low-risk patients, offering insights into tailored management. Surgical techniques, including Retzius-sparing surgery, precision prostatectomy, and partial prostatectomy for anterior cancer, are appraised. Each technique has the potential to enhance outcomes and minimize complications. Advancements in technology and radiobiology, including computed tomography (CT)/MRI imaging and positron emission tomography (PET) fusion, allow for precise dose adjustment and daily target monitoring with imaging-guided radiotherapy, opening new ways of tailoring patients' treatments. Finally, experimental therapeutic approaches such as focal therapy open new treatment frontiers, although they create new needs in tumor identification and tracking during and after the procedure.
Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Male ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Prostatectomy/methods* ; Risk Assessment ; Watchful Waiting ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*

A crucial aspect of prostate cancer grading, especially in low- and intermediate-risk cancer, is the accurate identification of Gleason pattern 4 glands, which includes ill-formed or fused glands. However, there is notable inconsistency among pathologists in recognizing these glands, especially when mixed with pattern 3 glands. This inconsistency has significant implications for patient management and treatment decisions. Conversely, the recognition of glomeruloid and cribriform architecture has shown higher reproducibility. Cribriform architecture, in particular, has been linked to the worst prognosis among pattern 4 subtypes. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is also associated with high-grade cancer and poor prognosis. Accurate identification, classification, and tumor size evaluation by pathologists are vital for determining patient treatment. This review emphasizes the importance of prostate cancer grading, highlighting challenges like distinguishing between pattern 3 and pattern 4 and the prognostic implications of cribriform architecture and intraductal proliferations. It also addresses the inherent grading limitations due to interobserver variability and explores the potential of computational pathology to enhance pathologist accuracy and consistency.
Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Male ; Neoplasm Grading ; Prognosis ; Observer Variation ; Prostate/pathology* ; Reproducibility of Results

Pathological results are a gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), one of the ways to obtain the pathological tissue is prostate biopsy. With the advances in detection technology, biochemical examination and medical imaging have greatly improved the detection rate of PCa. However, the final therapeutic option depends on pathological results, and therefore the precision of prostate biopsy and puncturing technique is highly required. Specific requirements include pinpoint positioning of the lesion and exact sampling of the positive tissue to reduce pain caused by unnecessary invalid punctures, accurate navigation for deep lesions to avoid damage to the urethra and bladder and reduce bleeding and other complications. Current development of medical imaging and artificial intelligence has significantly promoted biopsy puncture techniques. This review updates the application of image fusion and robotics in prostate biopsy.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate/pathology* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Punctures/methods* ; Biopsy, Needle/methods* ; Robotics

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy is the recommended investigation in men with suspicious lesion(s) on MRI. The role of concurrent systematic in addition to targeted biopsies is currently unclear. Using our prospectively maintained database, we identified men with at least one Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesion who underwent targeted and/or systematic biopsies from May 2016 to May 2020. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as any Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer. Of 545 patients who underwent MRI fusion-targeted biopsy, 222 (40.7%) were biopsy naïve, 247 (45.3%) had previous prostate biopsy(s), and 76 (13.9%) had known prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance. Prostate cancer was more commonly found in biopsy-naïve men (63.5%) and those on active surveillance (68.4%) compared to those who had previous biopsies (35.2%; both P < 0.001). Systematic biopsies provided an incremental 10.4% detection of csPCa among biopsy-naïve patients, versus an incremental 2.4% among those who had prior negative biopsies. Multivariable regression found age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.03, P = 0.03), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density ≥0.15 ng ml^-2 (OR = 3.24, P < 0.001), prostate health index (PHI) ≥35 (OR = 2.43, P = 0.006), higher PI-RADS score (vs PI-RADS 3; OR = 4.59 for PI-RADS 4, and OR = 9.91 for PI-RADS 5; both P < 0.001) and target lesion volume-to-prostate volume ratio ≥0.10 (OR = 5.26, P = 0.013) were significantly associated with csPCa detection on targeted biopsy. In conclusion, for men undergoing MRI fusion-targeted prostate biopsies, systematic biopsies should not be omitted given its incremental value to targeted biopsies alone. The factors such as PSA density ≥0.15 ng ml^-2, PHI ≥35, higher PI-RADS score, and target lesion volume-to-prostate volume ratio ≥0.10 can help identify men at higher risk of csPCa.
Male ; Humans ; Prostate/pathology* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Retrospective Studies

This study explored a new model of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) and adjusted prostate-specific antigen density of peripheral zone (aPSADPZ) for predicting the occurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). The demographic and clinical characteristics of 853 patients were recorded. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density (PSAD), PSAD of peripheral zone (PSADPZ), aPSADPZ, and peripheral zone volume ratio (PZ-ratio) were calculated and subjected to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The calibration and discrimination abilities of new nomograms were verified with the calibration curve and area under the ROC curve (AUC). The clinical benefits of these models were evaluated by decision curve analysis and clinical impact curves. The AUCs of PSA, PSAD, PSADPZ, aPSADPZ, and PZ-ratio were 0.669, 0.762, 0.659, 0.812, and 0.748 for PCa diagnosis, while 0.713, 0.788, 0.694, 0.828, and 0.735 for csPCa diagnosis, respectively. All nomograms displayed higher net benefit and better overall calibration than the scenarios for predicting the occurrence of PCa or csPCa. The new model significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy of PCa (0.945 vs 0.830, P < 0.01) and csPCa (0.937 vs 0.845, P < 0.01) compared with the base model. In addition, the number of patients with PCa and csPCa predicted by the new model was in good agreement with the actual number of patients with PCa and csPCa in high-risk threshold. This study demonstrates that aPSADPZ has a higher predictive accuracy for PCa diagnosis than the conventional indicators. Combining aPSADPZ with PIRADS can improve PCa diagnosis and avoid unnecessary biopsies.
Male ; Humans ; Prostate/pathology* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging* ; Biopsy ; Nomograms ; Retrospective Studies

We identified distinct senescence-related molecular subtypes and critical genes among prostate cancer (PCa) patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or radical radiotherapy (RT). We conducted all analyses using R software and its suitable packages. Twelve genes, namely, secreted frizzled-related protein 4 (SFRP4), DNA topoisomerase II alpha (TOP2A), pleiotrophin (PTN), family with sequence similarity 107 member A (FAM107A), C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 14 (CXCL14), prostate androgen-regulated mucin-like protein 1 (PARM1), leucine zipper protein 2 (LUZP2), cluster of differentiation 38 (CD38), cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), vestigial-like family member 3 (VGLL3), apolipoprotein E (APOE), and aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 family member (ALDH2), were eventually used to subtype PCa patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and GSE116918, and the molecular subtypes showed good correlations with clinical features. In terms of the tumor immune environment (TME) analysis, compared with cluster 1, cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) scored significantly higher, while endothelial cells scored lower in cluster 2 in TCGA database. There was a statistically significant correlation between both CAFs and endothelial cells with biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival for PCa patients undergoing RP. For the GSE116918 database, cluster 2 had significantly lower levels of CAFs and tumor purity and higher levels of stromal, immune, and Estimation of STromal and Immune cells in MAlignant Tumor tissues using Expression data (ESTIMATE) scores than cluster 1; in addition, patients with high levels of CAFs, stromal scores, immune scores, and ESTIMATE scores and low levels of tumor purity tended to suffer from BCR. Based on the median of differentially expressed checkpoints, high expression of CD96, hepatitis A virus cellular receptor 2 (HAVCR2), and neuropilin 1 (NRP1) in GSE116918 and high expression of CD160 and tumor necrosis factor (ligand) superfamily member 18 (TNFSF18) in TCGA database were associated with a significantly higher risk of BCR than their counterparts. In conclusion, we first constructed distinct molecular subtypes and critical genes for PCa patients undergoing RP or RT from the fresh perspective of senescence.
Male ; Humans ; Endothelial Cells ; Ligands ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate/pathology* ; Prostatectomy ; Aldehyde Dehydrogenase, Mitochondrial ; DNA-Binding Proteins ; Transcription Factors