Prostate cancer (PCa) is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide and the second most common cancer among men. Treatment options depend on factors like age, androgen sensitivity, PSA levels, Gleason score, TNM stage, and recurrence risk. Available treatments include hormonal therapy, radiation, surgery, and chemotherapy. Early immunological treatments were limited by poor lymphocyte infiltration and an immunosuppressive environment. Today, strategies such as dendritic cell vaccines, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and adoptive cell therapy (ACT) are used. ACT, especially CAR T-cell strategies, aims to overcome traditional treatment limitations, particularly in advanced and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), though it remains in early development. Personalized medicine uses molecular insights from the diseased tissue to tailor treatments. Variability in patient response, due to tumor heterogeneity and prior treatments, highlights the importance of personalized and combination therapies as future strategies for effective immunotherapy. This review explores the current landscape of PCa. We analyze treatment guidelines established by NCCN and EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG. We comprehensively examine immunotherapeutic strategies currently available or under investigation for prostate cancer, with particular emphasis on ICIs, ACT with a focus on CAR T-cell therapy, combination approaches and therapeutic synergies, and predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response. Additionally, we discuss the challenges and future directions in the implementation of immunotherapy for the management of prostate cancer.

Background/objectives: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men over 60 years of age. The development of assisted robotic surgery has improved surgical performance across several variables in dynamic ways, introducing new reconstruction techniques. The present study aims to show differences between Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted prostatectomy vs. Retzius-sparing and posterolateral fascial reconstruction in patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Methods: A retrospective study was performed in a 3-year time period by a single surgeon using the Da Vinci X platform. Two groups were assessed for the study, with and without posterolateral fascial reconstruction. Demographic data were analyzed with central tendency measures, and mean differences were calculated with the Mann–Whitney test and t-test, being significant if p < 0.05. Results: A total of 199 patients were included. The posterolateral reconstruction group had 81 patients, and outcomes saw similar performances to the non-reconstruction group. Urinary continence showed a positive trend of higher percentages in the first week after surgery but had similar results after one year, with no statistically significant differences. Oncologic results and sexual dysfunction showed no statistically significant differences between groups. Conclusions: Posterolateral reconstruction combined with Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy demonstrated improved continence and was shown to be safe, without increasing overall complications such as bleeding.

Background/Objectives: Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers in men worldwide. While standard treatments often provide good initial results, many patients eventually develop resistance and experience a more aggressive relapse. Microsatellite instability (MSI) involves variations in the lengths of microsatellite base repeats in cells. Assessing the frequency of MSI is essential, as it may identify candidates for immune checkpoint inhibitors, which have shown promising outcomes. This study focuses on evaluating the MSI frequency in Mexican PCa patients and exploring its potential relationship with tumor aggressiveness. Methods: In this study, 116 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumoral tissue biopsies from Mexican patients with PCa were collected from Hospital Civil de Culiacán and Pathology and Nephropathology, Diagnosis and Research Center, in the period from 2021 to 2024. The Gleason score was assessed, and the MSI was performed by multiplex PCR with a panel of five markers (NR-27, NR-21, NR-24, BAT-25, and BAT-26). High microsatellite instability (MSI-H) was defined as two or more unstable markers, low microsatellite instability (MSI-L) as an unstable marker, and microsatellite stability (MSS) as no unstable marker. Results: We found 19.83% (23/116) MSI PCa patients, of which 21.74% (5/23) were MSI-H, and 78.26% (18/23) were MSI-L. We found a major distribution of MSI-positive cases (50% (11/22)) in Gleason score 9 patients, corresponding to prognostic group 5. In addition, we found most of the instability in the BAT-26 marker in MSI PCa patients (60.87% (14/23)). Conclusions: This study is the first to evaluate the frequency of MSI in PCa within the Mexican population. Among the Mexican patients with MSI-positive PCa, there was a predominant Gleason score 9 and a majority instability of the BAT-26 marker.