Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017

Silke Gillessen, Gerhardt Attard, Tomasz M. Beer, Himisha Beltran, Alberto Bossi, Rob Bristow, Brett Carver, Daniel Castellano, Byung Ha Chung, Noel Clarke, Gedske Daugaard, Ian D. Davis, Johann de Bono, Rodolfo Borges dos Reis, Charles G. Drake, Ros Eeles, Eleni Efstathiou, Christopher P Evans, Stefano Fanti, Felix FengKarim Fizazi, Mark Frydenberg, Martin Gleave, Susan Halabi, Axel Heidenreich, Celestia S. Higano, Nicolas James, Philip Kantoff, Pirkko Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Raja B. Khauli, Gero Kramer, Chris Logothetis, Fernando Maluf, Alicia K. Morgans, Michael J. Morris, Nicolas Mottet, Vedang Murthy, William Oh, Piet Ost, Anwar R. Padhani, Chris Parker, Colin C. Pritchard, Mack Roach, Mark A. Rubin, Charles Ryan, Fred Saad, Oliver Sartor, Howard Scher, Avishay Sella, Neal Shore, Matthew Smith, Howard Soule, Cora N. Sternberg, Hiroyoshi Suzuki, Christopher Sweeney, Matthew R. Sydes, Ian Tannock, Bertrand Tombal, Riccardo Valdagni, Thomas Wiegel, Aurelius Omlin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

202 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. Objective: To present the report of APCCC 2017. Design, setting, and participants: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. Results and limitations: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. Conclusions: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. Patient summary: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference, 10 important areas of controversy in advanced prostate cancer management were identified, discussed, and the experts voted on 150 predefined consensus questions. The full report of the results is summarised here.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEuropean Urology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
Politics
Consensus
Castration
Therapeutics
Molecular Imaging
Patient Preference
Genetic Counseling
Expert Testimony
Genetic Testing
Osteoclasts
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Caregivers

Keywords

  • Advanced and high-risk localized prostate cancer
  • Castration-naive and castration-resistant prostate cancer
  • Consensus
  • Oligometastatic prostate cancer
  • Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer : The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017. / Gillessen, Silke; Attard, Gerhardt; Beer, Tomasz M.; Beltran, Himisha; Bossi, Alberto; Bristow, Rob; Carver, Brett; Castellano, Daniel; Chung, Byung Ha; Clarke, Noel; Daugaard, Gedske; Davis, Ian D.; de Bono, Johann; dos Reis, Rodolfo Borges; Drake, Charles G.; Eeles, Ros; Efstathiou, Eleni; Evans, Christopher P; Fanti, Stefano; Feng, Felix; Fizazi, Karim; Frydenberg, Mark; Gleave, Martin; Halabi, Susan; Heidenreich, Axel; Higano, Celestia S.; James, Nicolas; Kantoff, Philip; Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Pirkko Liisa; Khauli, Raja B.; Kramer, Gero; Logothetis, Chris; Maluf, Fernando; Morgans, Alicia K.; Morris, Michael J.; Mottet, Nicolas; Murthy, Vedang; Oh, William; Ost, Piet; Padhani, Anwar R.; Parker, Chris; Pritchard, Colin C.; Roach, Mack; Rubin, Mark A.; Ryan, Charles; Saad, Fred; Sartor, Oliver; Scher, Howard; Sella, Avishay; Shore, Neal; Smith, Matthew; Soule, Howard; Sternberg, Cora N.; Suzuki, Hiroyoshi; Sweeney, Christopher; Sydes, Matthew R.; Tannock, Ian; Tombal, Bertrand; Valdagni, Riccardo; Wiegel, Thomas; Omlin, Aurelius.

In: European Urology, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gillessen, S, Attard, G, Beer, TM, Beltran, H, Bossi, A, Bristow, R, Carver, B, Castellano, D, Chung, BH, Clarke, N, Daugaard, G, Davis, ID, de Bono, J, dos Reis, RB, Drake, CG, Eeles, R, Efstathiou, E, Evans, CP, Fanti, S, Feng, F, Fizazi, K, Frydenberg, M, Gleave, M, Halabi, S, Heidenreich, A, Higano, CS, James, N, Kantoff, P, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, PL, Khauli, RB, Kramer, G, Logothetis, C, Maluf, F, Morgans, AK, Morris, MJ, Mottet, N, Murthy, V, Oh, W, Ost, P, Padhani, AR, Parker, C, Pritchard, CC, Roach, M, Rubin, MA, Ryan, C, Saad, F, Sartor, O, Scher, H, Sella, A, Shore, N, Smith, M, Soule, H, Sternberg, CN, Suzuki, H, Sweeney, C, Sydes, MR, Tannock, I, Tombal, B, Valdagni, R, Wiegel, T & Omlin, A 2017, 'Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017', European Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.002
Gillessen, Silke ; Attard, Gerhardt ; Beer, Tomasz M. ; Beltran, Himisha ; Bossi, Alberto ; Bristow, Rob ; Carver, Brett ; Castellano, Daniel ; Chung, Byung Ha ; Clarke, Noel ; Daugaard, Gedske ; Davis, Ian D. ; de Bono, Johann ; dos Reis, Rodolfo Borges ; Drake, Charles G. ; Eeles, Ros ; Efstathiou, Eleni ; Evans, Christopher P ; Fanti, Stefano ; Feng, Felix ; Fizazi, Karim ; Frydenberg, Mark ; Gleave, Martin ; Halabi, Susan ; Heidenreich, Axel ; Higano, Celestia S. ; James, Nicolas ; Kantoff, Philip ; Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Pirkko Liisa ; Khauli, Raja B. ; Kramer, Gero ; Logothetis, Chris ; Maluf, Fernando ; Morgans, Alicia K. ; Morris, Michael J. ; Mottet, Nicolas ; Murthy, Vedang ; Oh, William ; Ost, Piet ; Padhani, Anwar R. ; Parker, Chris ; Pritchard, Colin C. ; Roach, Mack ; Rubin, Mark A. ; Ryan, Charles ; Saad, Fred ; Sartor, Oliver ; Scher, Howard ; Sella, Avishay ; Shore, Neal ; Smith, Matthew ; Soule, Howard ; Sternberg, Cora N. ; Suzuki, Hiroyoshi ; Sweeney, Christopher ; Sydes, Matthew R. ; Tannock, Ian ; Tombal, Bertrand ; Valdagni, Riccardo ; Wiegel, Thomas ; Omlin, Aurelius. / Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer : The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017. In: European Urology. 2017.
@article{aecebba4d2994379905233f37d9b1f34,
title = "Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017",
abstract = "Background: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. Objective: To present the report of APCCC 2017. Design, setting, and participants: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; {"}oligometastatic{"} prostate cancer; castration-na{\"i}ve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. Results and limitations: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. Conclusions: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. Patient summary: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference, 10 important areas of controversy in advanced prostate cancer management were identified, discussed, and the experts voted on 150 predefined consensus questions. The full report of the results is summarised here.",
keywords = "Advanced and high-risk localized prostate cancer, Castration-naive and castration-resistant prostate cancer, Consensus, Oligometastatic prostate cancer, Therapeutics",
author = "Silke Gillessen and Gerhardt Attard and Beer, {Tomasz M.} and Himisha Beltran and Alberto Bossi and Rob Bristow and Brett Carver and Daniel Castellano and Chung, {Byung Ha} and Noel Clarke and Gedske Daugaard and Davis, {Ian D.} and {de Bono}, Johann and {dos Reis}, {Rodolfo Borges} and Drake, {Charles G.} and Ros Eeles and Eleni Efstathiou and Evans, {Christopher P} and Stefano Fanti and Felix Feng and Karim Fizazi and Mark Frydenberg and Martin Gleave and Susan Halabi and Axel Heidenreich and Higano, {Celestia S.} and Nicolas James and Philip Kantoff and Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, {Pirkko Liisa} and Khauli, {Raja B.} and Gero Kramer and Chris Logothetis and Fernando Maluf and Morgans, {Alicia K.} and Morris, {Michael J.} and Nicolas Mottet and Vedang Murthy and William Oh and Piet Ost and Padhani, {Anwar R.} and Chris Parker and Pritchard, {Colin C.} and Mack Roach and Rubin, {Mark A.} and Charles Ryan and Fred Saad and Oliver Sartor and Howard Scher and Avishay Sella and Neal Shore and Matthew Smith and Howard Soule and Sternberg, {Cora N.} and Hiroyoshi Suzuki and Christopher Sweeney and Sydes, {Matthew R.} and Ian Tannock and Bertrand Tombal and Riccardo Valdagni and Thomas Wiegel and Aurelius Omlin",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.002",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "European Urology",
issn = "0302-2838",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer

T2 - The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017

AU - Gillessen, Silke

AU - Attard, Gerhardt

AU - Beer, Tomasz M.

AU - Beltran, Himisha

AU - Bossi, Alberto

AU - Bristow, Rob

AU - Carver, Brett

AU - Castellano, Daniel

AU - Chung, Byung Ha

AU - Clarke, Noel

AU - Daugaard, Gedske

AU - Davis, Ian D.

AU - de Bono, Johann

AU - dos Reis, Rodolfo Borges

AU - Drake, Charles G.

AU - Eeles, Ros

AU - Efstathiou, Eleni

AU - Evans, Christopher P

AU - Fanti, Stefano

AU - Feng, Felix

AU - Fizazi, Karim

AU - Frydenberg, Mark

AU - Gleave, Martin

AU - Halabi, Susan

AU - Heidenreich, Axel

AU - Higano, Celestia S.

AU - James, Nicolas

AU - Kantoff, Philip

AU - Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Pirkko Liisa

AU - Khauli, Raja B.

AU - Kramer, Gero

AU - Logothetis, Chris

AU - Maluf, Fernando

AU - Morgans, Alicia K.

AU - Morris, Michael J.

AU - Mottet, Nicolas

AU - Murthy, Vedang

AU - Oh, William

AU - Ost, Piet

AU - Padhani, Anwar R.

AU - Parker, Chris

AU - Pritchard, Colin C.

AU - Roach, Mack

AU - Rubin, Mark A.

AU - Ryan, Charles

AU - Saad, Fred

AU - Sartor, Oliver

AU - Scher, Howard

AU - Sella, Avishay

AU - Shore, Neal

AU - Smith, Matthew

AU - Soule, Howard

AU - Sternberg, Cora N.

AU - Suzuki, Hiroyoshi

AU - Sweeney, Christopher

AU - Sydes, Matthew R.

AU - Tannock, Ian

AU - Tombal, Bertrand

AU - Valdagni, Riccardo

AU - Wiegel, Thomas

AU - Omlin, Aurelius

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Background: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. Objective: To present the report of APCCC 2017. Design, setting, and participants: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. Results and limitations: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. Conclusions: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. Patient summary: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference, 10 important areas of controversy in advanced prostate cancer management were identified, discussed, and the experts voted on 150 predefined consensus questions. The full report of the results is summarised here.

AB - Background: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. Objective: To present the report of APCCC 2017. Design, setting, and participants: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. Results and limitations: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. Conclusions: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. Patient summary: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference, 10 important areas of controversy in advanced prostate cancer management were identified, discussed, and the experts voted on 150 predefined consensus questions. The full report of the results is summarised here.

KW - Advanced and high-risk localized prostate cancer

KW - Castration-naive and castration-resistant prostate cancer

KW - Consensus

KW - Oligometastatic prostate cancer

KW - Therapeutics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021207004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021207004&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.002

DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 28655541

AN - SCOPUS:85021207004

JO - European Urology

JF - European Urology

SN - 0302-2838

ER -