Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Etoposide plus cisplatin produces substantial but temporary regression in metastatic prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinomaSurgery and Chemotherapy Provide Temporary Relief for Prostate Cancer

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that etoposide plus cisplatin can cause significant but potentially non-durable regression in metastatic prostatic SCNEC.

This case report describes the management of a single patient with de novo metastatic prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The patient received etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) followed by a cytoreductive laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The primary focus was evaluating treatment response and the potential benefits and risks of cytoreductive surgery.

Main results showed a reduction in prostate volume from 72 to 17 cm3 following chemotherapy. However, the subsequent transition to irinotecan plus carboplatin did not result in durable clinical disease control. While the surgical intervention provided relief of urinary obstruction for approximately 3 months, it did not establish a survival benefit. A serious adverse event of vesicourethral anastomotic leak was reported.

The authors note that the evidence is limited by the single case report format and the fact that a RECIST response could not be assigned retrospectively. Clinical application is limited by the lack of a larger cohort to establish long-term durability of response or definitive survival benefits from surgery. The report suggests that while EP can cause significant regression, the duration of benefit may be limited.

How this fits prior evidence

This case report addresses a gap in the management of prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. While previous evidence noted that etoposide plus cisplatin shows higher treatment completion rate of 89.0% vs. 74.1% in HGNEC, this report specifically examines the use of the same etoposide plus cisplatin regimen for a prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma case. It provides specific data on prostate volume reduction and the limitations of surgical intervention for local symptom relief.

A case report describes the treatment of a man with a rare type of prostate cancer called prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The patient received a combination of etoposide and cisplatin followed by a surgical procedure called a cytoreductive laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

The treatment led to a significant reduction in prostate volume from 72 to 17 cm3. While the surgery helped clear a urinary obstruction, this relief only lasted for about 3 months. The study also noted that a different chemotherapy combination did not provide long-term control of the disease.

Because this report only follows one patient, the results are not enough to prove a standard of care. The surgery did not show a long-term survival benefit, but it did provide temporary relief for the patient's urinary issues. Patients with this rare condition should discuss these specific treatment combinations and their potential risks with their oncology team.

What this means for you:
Chemotherapy and surgery can shrink tumors and relieve urinary issues, but the benefits may be temporary.

Common questions

What were the results of the chemotherapy and surgery?

The combination of etoposide and cisplatin led to a significant reduction in prostate volume from 72 to 17 cm3. While the surgery helped relieve a urinary obstruction, this improvement only lasted for about 3 months. The study did not find durable clinical disease control with other medications.

What are the risks of this treatment?

The patient experienced a serious adverse event known as a vesicourethral anastomotic leak following the procedure. Because this was a single case report, it is difficult to determine how common this risk is for other patients with this specific type of cancer.

Does surgery improve long-term survival for this cancer?

The study did not establish a survival benefit from the surgery. While the surgery provided temporary relief of urinary obstruction, it did not provide a long-term durable response. Patients should talk to their doctor about the goals of surgery.

Study Details

Study typeSystematic review
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
ObjectiveTo describe the diagnostic challenges, treatment response, and potential benefits and risks of cytoreductive surgery in de novo metastatic prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (SCNEC).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of one patient with de novo metastatic prostatic SCNEC.ResultsA 50-year-old man presented in June 2022 with progressive dysuria for more than 1 year and acute urinary retention for 1 day. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was performed to relieve obstruction, and review of the specimen supported SCNEC. Staging 18F-FDG PET/CT showed an FDG-avid prostate, multiple lymph nodes, and bilateral non-FDG-avid pulmonary nodules without a dominant pulmonary primary; a prostatic primary with clinically suspected pulmonary metastases was favored, although the lung lesions were not biopsied. Seven cycles of etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) produced marked local regression, including a reduction in prostate volume from 72 to 17 cm³, but residual tumor persisted and a RECIST response category could not be assigned retrospectively. Cytoreductive laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was performed in February 2023. Postoperative pathology showed a mixed neuroendocrine–non-neuroendocrine neoplasm (MiNEN). A vesicourethral anastomotic leak improved conservatively, and urinary obstruction improved for approximately 3 months. Disease progressed in July 2023, and irinotecan plus carboplatin provided no durable clinical disease control. The patient died in December 2023, approximately 18 months after diagnosis.ConclusionEP can produce substantial but temporary regression in metastatic prostatic SCNEC. This case did not establish a survival benefit from surgery, although temporary relief of urinary obstruction was reported. Systemic therapy should remain the priority, and surgery should be limited to carefully selected local-control or palliative indications.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.