What's in a name? Why differentiation between biochemical recurrence and metastatic prostate cancer matters.

Abstract

Purpose of review: The natural history of biochemical recurrence (BCR) is highly variable, complicating the distinction between BCR and metastasis. A targeted approach to risk stratifying disease progression is needed. This review proposes a 'framework,' that categorizes disease progression into five distinct groups: low-risk BCR, high-risk BCR, oligometastatic disease, low-volume metastatic disease, and high-volume metastatic disease. Each group is defined by clinicopathological and molecular features, along with targeted treatment strategies to tailor therapy and optimize disease management.

Recent findings: Recent clinical trials and updates to guidelines have focused on treatment intensification and early identification of patients at risk for recurrence. In addition, the utilization of molecular imaging and implementation of metastasis directed therapy has led to a change in the conventions of recurrence and metastasis. Therefore, the patients with BCR or metastatic disease require a more individualized and multimodal treatment for their prostate cancer.

Summary: Distinguishing BCR from metastatic disease has important implications. It offers ways to avoid unnecessary treatment in patients who are less likely to progress and helps identify those who are more likely to benefit from earlier or more aggressive interventions.