BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide, a second-generation androgen receptor (AR) pathway inhibitor, is widely used in the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, after a period of enzalutamide treatment, patients inevitably develop drug resistance. In this study, we characterized leucine-rich repeated G-protein-coupled receptor 5 (LGR5) and explored its potential therapeutic value in prostate cancer. METHODS: A total of 142 pairs of tumor and adjacent formalin-fixed paraf-fin-embedded tissue samples from patients with prostate cancer were collected from the Pathology Department at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hos-pital. LGR5 was screened by sequencing data of enzalutamide-resistant cell lines combined with sequencing data of lesions with different Gleason scores from the same patients. The biological function of LGR5 and its effect on enzalutamide resistance were investigated in vitro and in vivo . Glutathione-S-transferase (GST) pull-down, coimmunoprecipitation, Western blotting, and immunofluorescence assays were used to explore the specific binding mechanism of LGR5 and related pathway changes. RESULTS: LGR5 was significantly upregulated in prostate cancer and negatively correlated with poor patient prognosis. Overexpression of LGR5 promoted the malignant progression of prostate cancer and reduced sensitivity to enzalutamide in vitro and in vivo . LGR5 promoted the phosphorylation of glycogen synthase kinase-3β (GSK-3β) by binding heat shock protein 90,000 alpha B1 (HSP90AB1) and mediated the activation of the Wingless/integrated (WNT)/β-catenin signaling pathway. The increased β-catenin in the cytoplasm entered the nucleus and bound to the nuclear AR, promoting the transcription level of AR, which led to the enhanced tolerance of prostate cancer to enzalutamide. Reducing HSP90AB1 binding to LGR5 significantly enhanced sensitivity to enzalutamide. CONCLUSIONS LGR5 directly binds to HSP90AB1 and mediates GSK-3β phosphorylation, promoting AR expression by regulating the WNT/β-catenin signaling pathway, thereby conferring resistance to enzalutamide treatment in prostate cancer.
Male ; Humans ; Phenylthiohydantoin/pharmacology* ; Benzamides ; Receptors, G-Protein-Coupled/genetics* ; Nitriles ; Cell Line, Tumor ; HSP90 Heat-Shock Proteins/metabolism* ; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/genetics* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; beta Catenin/metabolism* ; Receptors, Androgen/genetics* ; Animals ; Mice ; Wnt Signaling Pathway/physiology*

Androgens play an important role in prostate cancer development and progression. Androgen action is mediated through the androgen receptor (AR), a ligand-dependent DNA-binding transcription factor. AR is arguably the most important target for prostate cancer treatment. Current USA Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved AR inhibitors target the ligand-binding domain (LBD) and have exhibited efficacy in prostate cancer patients, particularly when used in combination with androgen deprivation therapy. Unfortunately, patients treated with the currently approved AR-targeting agents develop resistance and relapse with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The major mechanism leading to CRPC involves reactivation of AR signaling mainly through AR gene amplification, mutation, and/or splice variants. To effectively inhibit the reactivated AR signaling, new approaches to target AR are being actively explored. These new approaches include novel small molecule inhibitors targeting various domains of AR and agents that can degrade AR. The present review provides a summary of the existing FDA-approved AR antagonists and the current development of some of the AR targeting agents.
Humans ; Male ; Androgen Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Receptors, Androgen/metabolism* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy* ; Signal Transduction/drug effects*

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can negatively affect sexual function, and only a minority of patients report sexual activity. We reviewed the existing literature regarding the proportion of men who remained sexually active during and after ADT. The PubMed database was searched for studies published over the past 20 years. We selected and reviewed randomized clinical trials that provided sexual function data at baseline and during and after ADT. The primary outcome measure was the sexual function. Studies assessed sexual function using quality of life patient-reported outcome measures, which included sexual potency/activity evaluation. Information from 2947 patients was analyzed in this review. The median age of patients was 70 years. At baseline, a median of 49.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.1%-50.7%) of the patients reported being sexually active. At 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years or later of ADT treatment, a median of 10.3% (95% CI: 10.2%-10.5%), 8.9% (95% CI: 8.6%-9.2%), and 8.3% (95% CI: 8.2%-8.5%) of the patients reported being sexually active, respectively. Considering that half of the patients were sexually active at baseline, it seems probable that more than 10% of the patients who were sexually active before starting ADT remained sexually active when undergoing ADT. In conclusion, despite the common belief that ADT eliminates sexual activity, this analysis found that approximately 1 in 10 men are sexually active when on ADT, and this proportion is likely increased in men who are sexually active before starting ADT. Attention to sexual activity should not be dismissed in men on ADT.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Sexual Behavior/drug effects* ; Quality of Life ; Aged

Despite surgical advancements, erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common consequence of radical prostatectomy (RP). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of early penile rehabilitation within a dedicated penile rehabilitation program on assisted and unassisted erectile function (EF) recovery. All patients who underwent RP and at least 1 year follow-up at penile rehabilitation program in the Department of Urology, OORR Policlinico Riuniti (Foggia, Italy) were included. Treatment involved phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5Is; tadalafil 20 mg, 1 tablet every other day), intracavernous injections (Caverject 5 µg, 1 vial per week), and daily use of vacuum erection devices (VEDs). Primary end point was EF recovery defined as International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) ≥21 with or without rehabilitation aids. IIEF-5 and prescribed treatments were prospectively collected at 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Among 570 eligible patients, 397 (69.6%) underwent rehabilitation. Patients who undergoing andro-rehabilitation were younger (65 months vs 70 months; P < 0.0001), had lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (5.9 ng ml -1 vs 6.2 ng ml -1 ; P = 0.04), and lower grade tumors ( P = 0.001) compared to the patients who did not undergo sexual rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy. Two-year EF recovery rates in patients undergoing andro-rehabilitation ranged from 75% (preoperative IIEF-5 >16) to 45% (preoperative IIEF-5 <16) with rehabilitation aids. Combination treatments (PDE5I+VEDs with or without intracavernous injections) showed the highest rates of EF recovery (up to 80% at 2 years). EF recovery without rehabilitation aids was significantly higher for patients with IIEF-5 >21 (IIEF-5 >21 [36%] vs IIEF-5 of 17-21 [18%]; P = 0.01). Subanalysis indicated a moderate benefit of rehabilitation in patients with preoperative IIEF-5 <16 who underwent bilateral nerve-sparing RP. Participation in intensive penile rehabilitation programs improves EF recovery in patients undergoing RP. Preserving the neurovascular bundles may be beneficial for patients with preoperative ED.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatectomy/rehabilitation* ; Middle Aged ; Erectile Dysfunction/drug therapy* ; Aged ; Recovery of Function ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Penile Erection ; Tadalafil/therapeutic use* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Treatment Outcome

Prostate cancer is a prevalent and debilitating disease that necessitates effective prevention and treatment strategies. Green tea, a well-known beverage derived from the Camellia sinensis plant, contains bioactive compounds with potential health benefits, including catechins and polyphenols. This comprehensive review aims to explore the potential benefits of green tea in prostate cancer prevention and treatment by examining existing literature. Green tea possesses antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-carcinogenic properties attributed to its catechins, particularly epigallocatechin gallate. Epidemiological studies have reported an inverse association between green tea consumption and prostate cancer risk, with potential protection against aggressive forms of the disease. Laboratory studies demonstrate that green tea components inhibit tumor growth, induce apoptosis, and modulate signaling pathways critical to prostate cancer development and progression. Clinical trials and human studies further support the potential benefits of green tea. Green tea consumption has been found to be associated with a reduction in prostate-specific antigen levels, tumor markers, and played a potential role in slowing disease progression. However, challenges remain, including optimal dosage determination, formulation standardization, and conducting large-scale, long-term clinical trials. The review suggests future research should focus on combinatorial approaches with conventional therapies and personalized medicine strategies to identify patient subgroups most likely to benefit from green tea interventions.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Tea/chemistry* ; Catechin/pharmacology*

BACKGROUND: LY01005 (Goserelin acetate sustained-release microsphere injection) is a modified gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist injected monthly. This phase III trial study aimed to evaluated the efficacy and safety of LY01005 in Chinese patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 49 sites in China. This study included 290 patients with prostate cancer who received either LY01005 or goserelin implants every 28 days for three injections. The primary efficacy endpoints were the percentage of patients with testosterone suppression ≤50 ng/dL at day 29 and the cumulative probability of testosterone ≤50 ng/dL from day 29 to 85. Non-inferiority was prespecified at a margin of -10%. Secondary endpoints included significant castration (≤20 ng/dL), testosterone surge within 72 h following repeated dosing, and changes in luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and prostate specific antigen levels. RESULTS: On day 29, in the LY01005 and goserelin implant groups, testosterone concentrations fell below medical-castration levels in 99.3% (142/143) and 100% (140/140) of patients, respectively, with a difference of -0.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.9% to 2.0%) between the two groups. The cumulative probabilities of maintaining castration from days 29 to 85 were 99.3% and 97.8%, respectively, with a between-group difference of 1.5% (95% CI, -1.3% to 4.4%). Both results met the criterion for non-inferiority. Secondary endpoints were similar between groups. Both treatments were well-tolerated. LY01005 was associated with fewer injection-site reactions than the goserelin implant (0% vs . 1.4% [2/145]). CONCLUSION: LY01005 is as effective as goserelin implants in reducing testosterone to castration levels, with a similar safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04563936.
Humans ; Male ; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use* ; East Asian People ; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone/agonists* ; Goserelin/therapeutic use* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Testosterone

Most prostate cancers initially respond to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). With the long-term application of ADT, localized prostate cancer will progress to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), and neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC), and the transcriptional network shifted. Forkhead box protein A1 (FOXA1) may play a key role in this process through multiple mechanisms. To better understand the role of FOXA1 in prostate cancer, we review the interplay among FOXA1-targeted genes, modulators of FOXA1, and FOXA1 with a particular emphasis on androgen receptor (AR) function. Furthermore, we discuss the distinct role of FOXA1 mutations in prostate cancer and clinical significance of FOXA1. We summarize possible regulation pathways of FOXA1 in different stages of prostate cancer. We focus on links between FOXA1 and AR, which may play different roles in various types of prostate cancer. Finally, we discuss FOXA1 mutation and its clinical significance in prostate cancer. FOXA1 regulates the development of prostate cancer through various pathways, and it could be a biomarker for mCRPC and NEPC. Future efforts need to focus on mechanisms underlying mutation of FOXA1 in advanced prostate cancer. We believe that FOXA1 would be a prognostic marker and therapeutic target in prostate cancer.
Humans ; Male ; Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Androgens/metabolism* ; Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 3-alpha/metabolism* ; Mutation ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy* ; Receptors, Androgen/metabolism*

We aimed to study radiomics approach based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for determining significant residual cancer after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Ninety-two post-ADT prostate cancer patients underwent MRI before prostatectomy (62 with significant residual disease and 30 with complete response or minimum residual disease [CR/MRD]). Totally, 100 significant residual, 52 CR/MRD lesions, and 70 benign tissues were selected according to pathology. First, 381 radiomics features were extracted from T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps. Optimal features were selected using a support vector machine with a recursive feature elimination algorithm (SVM-RFE). Then, ADC values of significant residual, CR/MRD lesions, and benign tissues were compared by one-way analysis of variance. Logistic regression was used to construct models with SVM features to differentiate between each pair of tissues. Third, the efficiencies of ADC value and radiomics models for differentiating the three tissues were assessed by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The ADC value (mean ± standard deviation [s.d.]) of significant residual lesions ([1.10 ± 0.02] × 10^-3 mm² s^-1) was significantly lower than that of CR/MRD ([1.17 ± 0.02] × 10^-3 mm² s^-1), which was significantly lower than that of benign tissues ([1.30 ± 0.02] × 10^-3 mm² s^-1; both P < 0.05). The SVM feature models were comparable to ADC value in distinguishing CR/MRD from benign tissue (AUC: 0.766 vs 0.792) and distinguishing residual from benign tissue (AUC: 0.825 vs 0.835) (both P > 0.05), but superior to ADC value in differentiating significant residual from CR/MRD (AUC: 0.748 vs 0.558; P = 0.041). Radiomics approach with biparametric MRI could promote the detection of significant residual prostate cancer after ADT.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use* ; Androgens ; Neoplasm, Residual ; Retrospective Studies ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods*

Mitogen-activated protein kinase-8-interacting protein 2 (MAPK8IP2) is a scaffold protein that modulates MAPK signal cascades. Although MAPK pathways were heavily implicated in prostate cancer progression, the regulation of MAPK8IP2 expression in prostate cancer is not yet reported. We assessed MAPK8IP2 gene expression in prostate cancer related to disease progression and patient survival outcomes. MAPK8IP2 expression was analyzed using multiple genome-wide gene expression datasets derived from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) RNA-sequence project and complementary DNA (cDNA) microarrays. Multivariable Cox regressions and log-rank tests were used to analyze the overall survival outcome and progression-free interval. MAPK8IP2 protein expression was evaluated using the immunohistochemistry approach. The quantitative PCR and Western blot methods analyzed androgen-stimulated MAPK8IP2 expression in LNCaP cells. In primary prostate cancer tissues, MAPK8IP2 mRNA expression levels were significantly higher than those in the case-matched benign prostatic tissues. Increased MAPK8IP2 expression was strongly correlated with late tumor stages, lymph node invasion, residual tumors after surgery, higher Gleason scores, and preoperational serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. MAPK8IP2 upregulation was significantly associated with worse overall survival outcomes and progression-free intervals. In castration-resistant prostate cancers, MAPK8IP2 expression strongly correlated with androgen receptor (AR) signaling activity. In cell culture-based experiments, MAPK8IP2 expression was stimulated by androgens in AR-positive prostate cancer cells. However, MAPK8IP2 expression was blocked by AR antagonists only in androgen-sensitive LNCaP but not castration-resistant C4-2B and 22RV1 cells. These results indicate that MAPK8IP2 is a robust prognostic factor and therapeutic biomarker for prostate cancer. The potential role of MAPK8IP2 in the castration-resistant progression is under further investigation.
Male ; Humans ; Androgens/therapeutic use* ; Receptors, Androgen/genetics* ; Prognosis ; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase 8/therapeutic use* ; Cell Line, Tumor ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy* ; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic

Management and treatment of terminal metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains heavily debated. We sought to investigate the efficacy of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus anlotinib as a potential solution for terminal mCRPC and further evaluate the association of genomic characteristics with efficacy outcomes. We conducted a retrospective real-world study of 25 mCRPC patients who received PD-1 inhibitor plus anlotinib after the progression to standard treatments. The clinical information was extracted from the electronic medical records and 22 patients had targeted circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) next-generation sequencing. Statistical analysis showed that 6 (24.0%) patients experienced prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and 11 (44.0%) patients experienced PSA reduction. The relationship between ctDNA findings and outcomes was also analyzed. DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathways and homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway defects indicated a comparatively longer PSA-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS; 2.5 months vs 1.2 months, P = 0.027; 3.3 months vs 1.2 months, P = 0.017; respectively). This study introduces the PD-1 inhibitor plus anlotinib as a late-line therapeutic strategy for terminal mCRPC. PD-1 inhibitor plus anlotinib may be a new treatment choice for terminal mCRPC patients with DDR or HRR pathway defects and requires further investigation.
Male ; Humans ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Treatment Outcome ; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy* ; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use* ; Retrospective Studies