1
|
Marra G, Marquis A, Suberville M, Woo H, Govorov A, Hernandez-Porras A, Bhatti K, Turkbey B, Katz AE, Polascik TJ. Surveillance after Focal Therapy - a Comprehensive Review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00905-0. [PMID: 39367182 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00905-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2024] [Revised: 08/02/2024] [Accepted: 09/27/2024] [Indexed: 10/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND to date, no standardized, evidence-based follow-up schemes exist for the monitoring of patients who underwent focal therapy (FT) and expert centers rely mainly on their own experience and/or institutional protocols. We aimed to perform a comprehensive review of the most advantageous follow-up strategies and their rationale after FT for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS a narrative review of the literature was conducted to investigate different follow-up protocols of FT for PCa. Outcomes of interest were post-ablation oncological and functional outcomes and complications. RESULTS Oncological success after FT was generally defined as the biopsy-confirmed absence of clinically significant PCa in the treated zone. De novo PCa in the untreated area usually reflects an inaccurate patient selection and should be treated as primary PCa. During follow-up, oncological outcomes should be evaluated with periodic PSA, multiparametric MRI and prostate biopsy. The use of PSA derivatives and new biomarkers is still controversial and therefore not recommended. The first MRI after FT should be performed between 6-12 months to avoid ablation-related artifacts and diagnostic delay in case of FT failure. Other imaging modalities, such as PSMA PET/CT scan, are promising but still need to be validated in the post-FT setting. A 12-month "for-protocol" prostate biopsy, including targeted and systematic biopsy, was generally considered the preferred biopsy method to rule out tumor persistence/recurrence. Subsequent mpMRIs and biopsies should follow a risk-adapted approach depending on the clinical scenario. Functional outcomes should be periodically assessed using validated questionnaires within the first year, when typically recover to a new baseline. Complications, despite uncommon, should be strictly monitored mainly in the first month. CONCLUSIONS FT follow-up is a multifaceted process involving clinical, radiological, and histological assessment. Studies evaluating the impact of different follow-up strategies and ideal timings are needed to produce standardized protocols following FT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giancarlo Marra
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, City of Health and Science, Molinette Hospital and University of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Alessandro Marquis
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, City of Health and Science, Molinette Hospital and University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
- Smith Institute for Urology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell University, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Michel Suberville
- Department of Urology, Pôle Saint Germain Centre Hospitalier de Brive, Brive la Gaillarde, France
| | - Henry Woo
- Department of Urology, Blacktown Mount Druitt Hospitals, Blacktown, NSW, Australia
- Department of Uro-Oncology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | | | | | - Kamran Bhatti
- Urology Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Alkhor, Qatar
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Aaron E Katz
- Department of Urology, NYU Winthrop Hospital, Garden City, NY, USA
| | - Thomas J Polascik
- Department of Urology and Duke Cancer Institute, Duke Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sidana A, Tayebi S, Blank F, Lama DJ, Meyer M, Saeed Y, Tobler J, Hsu WW, Verma S. Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion guided focal cryoablation for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2024; 42:158.e1-158.e10. [PMID: 38245407 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2023] [Revised: 12/04/2023] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Focal therapy (FT) is a form of ablative treatment offered to men with localized, organ-confined prostate cancer (CaP). Pelvic multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and mpMRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion (MRI-US) guidance enable the precise delivery of FT with limited ablation of adjacent benign tissue or vital genitourinary structures. This article presents our findings on using MRI-US to perform FT as a primary treatment for men with intermediate-risk CaP. METHODS Thirty-six men underwent MRI-US fusion-guided FT cryoablation at a single center from 2018 to 2023 as a primary treatment for intermediate-risk CaP. Following FT, quarterly prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and a 6 to 9 month mpMRI and combined MRI-US targeted and systematic biopsy were performed. Oncological outcomes were determined using several endpoints containing biochemical recurrence, imaging failure, and pathological failure. Functional outcomes were measured using reported erectile dysfunction/potency rates, urinary incontinence rates, and the American Urologic Association Symptom Score (AUA-SS) and Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) indices. RESULTS Median follow-up was 29.1 months, most (75%) of whom had grade group 2 CaP. Out of the 36 men, 32 (88.9%) completed the combined MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy follow-up after treatment. The study had no major complications, but 12 (33.3%) patients experienced Clavien-Dindo grade II or lower complications. For oncological outcomes, 6 (16.7%) men had biochemical recurrence, 9 (25%) showed imaging failure, and 8 (22.2%) met the criteria for positive biopsy- out-of-field vs. in-field. 88.2% of previously potent patients remained potent postoperatively at 12 months. All patients were continent at 12 months. There were no statistically significant changes in the AUA-SS and SHIM scores postoperatively. CONCLUSION MRI-US-guided cryoablation to target lesions in intermediate-risk CaP appears to be a safe treatment option, with functional outcomes indicating minimal short and intermediate-term morbidity and acceptable oncological outcomes. However, despite close monitoring and follow-up, there is still a limitation in accurately predicting/detecting pathological failure after FT. The long-term durability of FT for intermediate-risk, organ-confined CaP remains uncertain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav Sidana
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH; Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, The University of Chicago Medicine & Biological Sciences, Chicago, IL.
| | - Shima Tayebi
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Fernando Blank
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Daniel J Lama
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Meredith Meyer
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Yusef Saeed
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Juliana Tobler
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Wei-Wen Hsu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| | - Sadhna Verma
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Busby D, Rich JM, Grauer R, Kaufmann B, Pandav K, Sood A, Tewari AK, Menon M, Patel HD, Gorin MA. Biopsy and Erectile Functional Outcomes of Partial Prostate Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Urology 2023; 182:14-26. [PMID: 37774854 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2023] [Revised: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To provide a systematic summary of prospectively performed studies evaluating ablative therapies for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) that included protocol-mandated assessment of (1) residual disease by post-treatment biopsy and/or (2) erectile functional outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a comprehensive literature search in September 2022. Studies were evaluated according to a predefined and registered plan in PROSPERO (CRD42022302777). Only prospective trials with protocol-mandated post-treatment prostate biopsies or functional assessments were included. Targeted focal therapy was the only ablation pattern with sufficient data to perform meta-analyses (29 studies, 1079 patients). RESULTS At baseline, 65.0% of patients treated with targeted focal therapy harbored grade group (GG) ≥2 PCa. One year after treatment, in-field treatment failure with ≥GG1 and ≥GG2 PCa occurred in 25.7% (range 11.1%-66.7%) and 8.8% (range 0%-27.8%) of men, respectively. In patients that received whole-gland biopsies 1year after ablation, residual ≥GG1 and ≥GG2 PCa was detected anywhere in the prostate in 43.7% (range 19.4%-71.7%) and 13.0% (range 0%-35.9%) of men. Erectile function was negatively affected by treatment, but 78.7% were potent 1year after targeted focal therapy (7 studies, 197 patients), and the average decrease in erectile function scores was 8.8% at 1year (21 studies, 760 patients). CONCLUSION Though long-term data after targeted focal therapy are limited, oncologic and treatment failure occurred in 13% and 9% (≥GG2 at 6-12months after treatment). Most men were able to maintain potency. This work can help benchmark new techniques and power future trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dallin Busby
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY; Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
| | - Jordan M Rich
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Ralph Grauer
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Basil Kaufmann
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Krunal Pandav
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | - Akshay Sood
- Department of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Department of Urology, The James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Ashutosh K Tewari
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Mani Menon
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
| | - Hiten D Patel
- Department of Urology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
| | - Michael A Gorin
- Milton and Carroll Petrie Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lantz A, Nordlund P, Falagario U, Jäderling F, Özbek O, Clements M, Discacciati A, Grönberg H, Eklund M, Stricker P, Emberton M, Aly M, Nordström T. Prostate Cancer IRE Study (PRIS): A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Focal Therapy to Radical Treatment in Localized Prostate Cancer. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 51:89-94. [PMID: 37091033 PMCID: PMC10114162 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 04/25/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of focal treatments (FTs) in prostate cancer (PCa) is to treat lesions while preserving surrounding benign tissue and anatomic structures. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a nonthermal technique that uses high-voltage electric pulses to increase membrane permeability and induce membrane disruption in cells, which potentially causes less damage to the surrounding tissue in comparison to other ablative techniques. We summarize the study protocol for the Prostate Cancer IRE Study (PRIS), which involves two parallel randomized controlled trials comparing IRE with (1) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) or (2) radiotherapy in men with newly diagnosed intermediate-risk PCa (NCT05513443). To reduce the number of patients for inclusion and the study duration, the primary outcomes are functional outcomes: urinary incontinence in study 1 and irritative urinary symptoms in study 2. Providing evidence of the lower impact of IRE on functional outcomes will lay a foundation for the design of future multicenter studies with an oncological outcome as the primary endpoint. Erectile function, quality of life, treatment failure, adverse events, and cost effectiveness will be evaluated as secondary objectives. Patients diagnosed with Gleason score 3 + 4 or 4 + 3 PCa from a single lesion visible on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) without any Gleason grade 4 or higher in systematic biopsies outside of the target (unifocal significant disease), aged ≥40 yr, with no established extraprostatic extension on multiparametric MRI, a lesion volume of <1.5 cm3, prostate-specific antigen <20 ng/ml, and stage ≤T2b are eligible for inclusion. The study plan is to recruit 184 men.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Lantz
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Corresponding author. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Per Nordlund
- Department of Urology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ugo Falagario
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Fredrik Jäderling
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Radiology, Capio S:t Göran Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Orhan Özbek
- Department of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mark Clements
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Andrea Discacciati
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Henrik Grönberg
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Martin Eklund
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Phillip Stricker
- St. Vincent’s Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- Department Urology St Vincents Hospital Sydney, Garvan Institute of Research, St Vincents Prostate Cancer Research Centre, University of NSW
| | - Mark Emberton
- Department of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, University College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Markus Aly
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Tobias Nordström
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Sciences at Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kotamarti S, Séguier D, Arcot R, Polascik TJ. Assessment after focal therapy: what is the latest? Curr Opin Urol 2022; 32:260-266. [PMID: 35275100 DOI: 10.1097/mou.0000000000000988] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW To review assessment after focal therapy (FT) in the context of developments from the past two years. RECENT FINDINGS With a paucity of high-quality studies, recent findings are primarily reliant on results from institutional-based cohorts and reports of expert consensus. Notably, oncologic treatment failure should be further stratified into recurrence in the in-field or out-of-field ablation zone, and both regions should be surveilled postoperatively. Monitoring primarily consists of periodic evaluations of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and magnetic resonance imaging, with histologic sampling needed to confirm suspicion of recurrence. Recent investigations into PSA derivatives, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, and prostate-specific membrane antigen imaging have shown preliminary promise. Although postablation functional outcomes are generally accepted to be excellent, they are limited by the wide range of patient-reported measures, variability in individual practice, and low questionnaire completion rates. SUMMARY There is still a need for high-level, long-term data to inform exact standardized protocols to manage patients after FT. A multifaceted approach is required to surveil patients and identify those at risk of recurrence. Embracing shared responsibility between the patient and clinician to fastidiously monitor the infield and out-of-field ablation zones postoperatively is critical to maximize oncologic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srinath Kotamarti
- Division of Urology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Denis Séguier
- Division of Urology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Urology, Lille University, Lille, France
| | - Rohith Arcot
- Division of Urology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Thomas J Polascik
- Division of Urology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Imaging and technologies for prostate cancer. Where are we now-where do we go? World J Urol 2021; 39:635-636. [PMID: 33649870 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-021-03641-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022] Open
|
7
|
Tourinho-Barbosa RR, Batista LT, Cathelineau X, Sanchez-Macias J, Sanchez-Salas R. Ablative options for prostate cancer management. Turk J Urol 2020; 47:S49-S55. [PMID: 33052840 DOI: 10.5152/tud.2020.20390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2020] [Accepted: 08/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
This review provides an overview of the available ablative options for prostate cancer (PCa) management. It contemplates the ablative concepts and the role of prostate ablation in different settings, from primary treatment to repeat ablation, and as an alternative to radiorecurrent disease. Improvements in prostate imaging have allowed us to ablate prostate lesions through thermal, mechanical, and vascular-targeted sources of energy. Partial gland ablation (PGA) has an emerging role in the management of localized PCa because toxicity outcomes have been proven less harmful compared with whole-gland treatments. Although long-term oncological outcomes are yet to be consolidated in comparative studies, recent large series and prospective studies in PGA have reported encouraging results. A second ablation after disease recurrence has demonstrated low toxicity, and future studies must define its potential to avoid radical treatments. PGA is an attractive option for PCa management in different scenarios because of its low-toxicity profile. As expected, recurrence rates are higher than those seen in whole-gland procedures. Long-term oncological outcomes of primary and salvage options are required to endorse it among the standard treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rafael R Tourinho-Barbosa
- Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris-Descartes, Paris, France.,Department of Urology, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, Brazil.,Department of Urology, Hospital Cardiopulmonar, Salvador, Brazil
| | | | - Xavier Cathelineau
- Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris-Descartes, Paris, France
| | - Javier Sanchez-Macias
- Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelone, Spain
| | - Rafael Sanchez-Salas
- Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris-Descartes, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|