Differences in the incidence and mortality rate of prostate cancer between the USA and Japan have been decreasing over time, and were only twofold in 2017. Therefore, countermeasures against prostate cancer could be very important not only in Western countries, but also in developed Asian countries. Screening for prostate cancer in the general population using transrectal ultrasonography, digital rectal examination and/or prostate acid phosphatase began in Japan in the early 1980s, and screening with prostate‐specific antigen and digital rectal examination has been widespread in the USA since the late 1980s. Large‐ and mid‐scale randomized controlled trials on screening for prostate cancer began around 1990 in the USA, Canada and Europe. However, most of these studies failed as randomized controlled trials because of high contamination in the control arm, low compliance in the screening arm or insufficient screening setting about screening frequency and/or biopsy indication. The best available level 1 evidence is data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer and the Göteborg screening study. However, several non‐urological organizations and lay media around the world have mischaracterized the efficacy of prostate‐specific antigen screening. To avoid long‐term confusion about screening for prostate cancer, leading professional urological organizations, including the Japanese Urological Association, are moving toward the establishment of an optimal screening system that minimizes the drawbacks of overdetection, overtreatment and loss of quality of life due to treatment, and maximizes reductions in the risk of death as a result of prostate cancer and the development of metastatic prostate cancer.

Purpose Active surveillance (AS) is one potential solution to avoiding the overtreatment of favorable prostate cancer. By handling the AS strategy more safely, tumor aggressiveness may be evaluated more accurately. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the predictive impact of baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) isoform [−2]proPSA (p2PSA)-related indices on the pathological reclassification at 1 year during an AS program. Methods Between 2002 and 2003, 134 males diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer were registered in the Japanese multicenter study cohort as candidates for AS, and 118 (88 %) males actually proceeded to AS. Of the 118 patients, the 67 that underwent protocol biopsy at 1 year after beginning AS were enrolled in the present study. The predictive significance of various baseline clinicopathological features and p2PSA-related indices on pathological reclassification at 1 year after beginning AS were investigated. Results The pathological reclassification rate was 37.3 %. According to the univariate analysis, prostate volume (p = 0.049), number of biopsy cores (p = 0.047), percentage of positive biopsy cores (p = 0.023), p2PSA to free PSA ratio (%p2PSA) (p = 0.003) and prostate health index (phi) (p = 0.010) at baseline were significantly different between the reclassification and non-reclassification groups. By multivariate logistic regression analysis, baseline %p2PSA (p = 0.008) and phi (p = 0.008) were the only independent predictive factors for pathological upgrade at 1 year after AS commencement. Conclusions Baseline %p2PSA and phi may predict the pathological reclassification at 1 year after starting AS, which could be due to the under detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at AS enrollment.

Background: Carbon ion Radiotherapy for prostate cancer is widely used, however reports are limited from single institute or short follow up. We performed a prospective observational study (GUNMA0702) to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of carbon ion radiotherapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. Methods: Between June 2010 and August 2013, 304 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated, with a median follow-up duration of 60 months. All patients received carbon ion radiotherapy with 57.6 Gy (RBE) in 16 fractions over 4 weeks. Hormonal therapy was given according to the risk group. Toxicity was reported according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Event, Version 4.0 by the National Cancer Institute. Results: The overall 5-year biochemical relapse-free rate was 92.7%, with rates of 91.7, 93.4, and 92.0% in low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients, respectively. The 5-year local control and overall survival rates were 98.4 and 96.6%, respectively. Acute grade 3 or greater toxicity was not observed. Late grade 2 and grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity rates were 9 and 0.3%, and 0.3, and 0%, respectively. Conclusions: The present protocol of carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer provided low genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity with good biochemical control within 5 years. Trial registration: University Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry number: UMIN000003827.

Background: We evaluated patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) during neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) followed by either adjuvant continuous ADT (CADT) or intermittent ADT (IADT) for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (Pca).Methods: A multicenter, randomized phase III trial enrolled 303 patients with locally advanced Pca. The patients were treated with 6 months (M) of ADT followed by 72 Gy of EBRT, and were randomly assigned to CADT or IADT after 14 M. The PROs were evaluated at sic points: baseline, 6 M, 8 M, 14 M, 20 M, and 38 M using FACT‐P questionnaires and EPIC urinary, bowel, and sexual bother subscales.Results: The FACT‐P total scores were significantly better (p < 0.05) in IADT versus CADT at 20 M (121.6 vs.115.4) and at 38 M (119.9 vs. 115.2). The physical well‐being scores (PWB) were significantly better (p < 0.05) in IADT versus CADT at 38 M (25.4 vs. 24.0). The functional scores were significantly better in IADT than those in CADT at 14 M (20.2 vs18.7, p < 0.05) and at 20 M (21.0 vs.18.9, p < 0.05).Conclusion: The PRO was significantly favorable in IADT on FACT‐P total score at 20 M and 38 M, PWB and functional scores at 38 M.