1
|
Deivasigamani S, Kotamarti S, Rastinehad AR, Salas RS, de la Rosette JJMCH, Lepor H, Pinto P, Ahmed HU, Gill I, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Emberton M, Lawrentschuk N, Wysock J, Feller JF, Crouzet S, Kumar M P, Seguier D, Adams ES, Michael Z, Abreu A, Jack Tay K, Ward JF, Shinohara K, Katz AE, Villers A, Chin JL, Stricker PD, Baco E, Macek P, Ahmad AE, Chiu PKF, Crawford ED, Rogers CG, Futterer JJ, Rais-Bahrami S, Robertson CN, Hadaschik B, Marra G, Valerio M, Chong KT, Kasivisvanathan V, Tan WP, Lomas D, Walz J, Guimaraes GC, Mertziotis NI, Becher E, Finelli A, Kasraeian A, Lebastchi AH, Vora A, Rosen MA, Bakir B, Arcot R, Yee S, Netsch C, Meng X, de Reijke TM, Tan YG, Regusci S, Benjamin TGR, Olivares R, Noureldin M, Bianco FJ, Sivaraman A, Kim FJ, Given RW, Dason S, Sheetz TJ, Shoji S, Schulman A, Royce P, Shah TT, Scionti S, Salomon G, Laguna P, Tourinho-Barbosa R, Aminsharifi A, Cathelineau X, Gontero P, Stabile A, Grummet J, Ledbetter L, Graton M, Stephen Jones J, Polascik TJ. Primary Whole-gland Ablation for the Treatment of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Focal Therapy Society Best Practice Statement. Eur Urol 2023; 84:547-560. [PMID: 37419773 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.06.013] [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: 02/14/2023] [Revised: 05/25/2023] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/09/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Whole-gland ablation is a feasible and effective minimally invasive treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previous systematic reviews supported evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but oncological outcomes were inconclusive owing to limited follow-up. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the real-world data on the mid- to long-term oncological and functional outcomes of whole-gland cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in patients with clinically localized PCa, and to provide expert recommendations and commentary on these findings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We performed a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library publications through February 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. As endpoints, baseline clinical characteristics, and oncological and functional outcomes were assessed. To estimate the pooled prevalence of oncological, functional, and toxicity outcomes, and to quantify and explain the heterogeneity, random-effect meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Twenty-nine studies were identified, including 14 on cryoablation and 15 on HIFU with a median follow-up of 72 mo. Most of the studies were retrospective (n = 23), with IDEAL (idea, development, exploration, assessment, and long-term study) stage 2b (n = 20) being most common. Biochemical recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and metastasis-free survival rates at 10 yr were 58%, 96%, 63%, 71-79%, and 84%, respectively. Erectile function was preserved in 37% of cases, and overall pad-free continence was achieved in 96% of cases, with a 1-yr rate of 97.4-98.8%. The rates of stricture, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, rectourethral fistula, and sepsis were observed to be 11%, 9.5%, 8%, 0.7%, and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The mid- to long-term real-world data, and the safety profiles of cryoablation and HIFU are sound to support and be offered as primary treatment for appropriate patients with localized PCa. When compared with other existing treatment modalities for PCa, these ablative therapies provide nearly equivalent intermediate- to long-term oncological and toxicity outcomes, as well as excellent pad-free continence rates in the primary setting. This real-world clinical evidence provides long-term oncological and functional outcomes that enhance shared decision-making when balancing risks and expected outcomes that reflect patient preferences and values. PATIENT SUMMARY Cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound are minimally invasive treatments available to selectively treat localized prostate cancer, considering their nearly comparable intermediate- to long term cancer control and preservation of urinary continence to other radical treatments in the primary setting. However, a well-informed decision should be made based on one's values and preferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Srinath Kotamarti
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | | | | | - Herbert Lepor
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Division of Urology, Imperial College London & Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Inderbir Gill
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Laurence Klotz
- Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Samir S Taneja
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nathan Lawrentschuk
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - James Wysock
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | - Denis Seguier
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Urology, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France
| | - Eric S Adams
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Zoe Michael
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Andre Abreu
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kae Jack Tay
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - John F Ward
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Katsuto Shinohara
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Aaron E Katz
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Arnauld Villers
- Department of Urology, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France
| | - Joseph L Chin
- Department of Urology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Eduard Baco
- Department of Urology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Petr Macek
- Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Ardalan E Ahmad
- Department of Urology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Peter K F Chiu
- Department of Surgery, SH Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - E David Crawford
- Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Craig G Rogers
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Jurgen J Futterer
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Cary N Robertson
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Boris Hadaschik
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Giancarlo Marra
- Department of Urology, The University Hospital of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Massimo Valerio
- Service of Urology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Wei Phin Tan
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Derek Lomas
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jochen Walz
- Department of Urology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute Cancer Center, Marseille, France
| | | | | | | | - Antonio Finelli
- Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Amir H Lebastchi
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Anup Vora
- Chesapeake Urology, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Mark A Rosen
- Department of Urology, Sutter Health, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Baris Bakir
- Department of Radiology, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Rohit Arcot
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Urology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Samuel Yee
- Department of Surgery, SH Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | | | - Xiaosong Meng
- Department of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Theo M de Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Yu Guang Tan
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Stefano Regusci
- Department of Interventional Oncology, Swiss International Prostate Centelenor, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Ruben Olivares
- Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - Fernando J Bianco
- Urological Research Network, Urologist Specialist Group, Miami Lakes, FL, USA
| | - Arjun Sivaraman
- Division of Urology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
| | - Fernando J Kim
- Division of Urology, Denver Health Medical Center and University of Colorado Hospital, Denver, CO, USA
| | | | - Shawn Dason
- Department of Urology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Tyler J Sheetz
- Department of Urology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Sunao Shoji
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ariel Schulman
- Department of Urology, Maimonides Health Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter Royce
- Division of Urology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Taimur T Shah
- Division of Urology, Imperial College London & Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Georg Salomon
- Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center, University Clinic Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Pilar Laguna
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | - Alireza Aminsharifi
- Department of Urology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | | | - Paolo Gontero
- Department of Urology, The University Hospital of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Armando Stabile
- Unit of Urology/Division of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Jeremy Grummet
- Division of Urology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Leila Ledbetter
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Margaret Graton
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Thomas J Polascik
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Parry MG, Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Morris M, Berry B, Nathan A, Aggarwal A, Payne H, van der Meulen J, Clarke NW. Prostate cancer outcomes following whole-gland and focal high-intensity focused ultrasound. BJU Int 2023; 132:568-574. [PMID: 37422679 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To report the 5-year failure-free survival (FFS) following high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). PATIENTS AND METHODS This observational cohort study used linked National Cancer Registry data, radiotherapy data, administrative hospital data and mortality records of 1381 men treated with HIFU for clinically localised prostate cancer in England. The primary outcome, FFS, was defined as freedom from local salvage treatment and cancer-specific mortality. Secondary outcomes were freedom from repeat HIFU, prostate cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Cox regression was used to determine whether baseline characteristics, including age, treatment year, T stage and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group were associated with FFS. RESULTS The median (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up was 37 (20-62) months. The median (IQR) age was 65 (59-70) years and 81% had an ISUP Grade Group of 1-2. The FFS was 96.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95.4%-97.4%) at 1 year, 86.0% (95% CI 83.7%-87.9%) at 3 years and 77.5% (95% CI 74.4%-80.3%) at 5 years. The 5-year FFS for ISUP Grade Groups 1-5 was 82.9%, 76.6%, 72.2%, 52.3% and 30.8%, respectively (P < 0.001). Freedom from repeat HIFU was 79.1% (95% CI 75.7%-82.1%), CSS was 98.8% (95% CI 97.7%-99.4%) and OS was 95.9% (95% CI 94.2%-97.1%) at 5 years. CONCLUSION Four in five men were free from local salvage treatment at 5 years but treatment failure varied significantly according to ISUP Grade Group. Patients should be appropriately informed with respect to salvage radical treatment following HIFU.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew G Parry
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
| | - Arunan Sujenthiran
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
- Flatiron, London, UK
| | - Julie Nossiter
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
| | - Melanie Morris
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
| | - Brendan Berry
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
| | - Arjun Nathan
- The National Prostate Cancer Audit, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of UK, London, UK
- University College London, London, UK
| | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
- Department of Radiotherapy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Heather Payne
- Department of Oncology, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Jan van der Meulen
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Noel W Clarke
- Departments of Urology, The Christie and Salford Royal Hospitals, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lo Verde K, Toledano H, Campagna J, Rossi D, Bastide C, Baboudjian M. Long-term outcomes of whole gland high-intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer. Int Urol Nephrol 2022; 54:1233-1238. [PMID: 35397077 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-022-03156-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/19/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report the 10-year oncologic and functional outcomes of whole-gland HIFU as first-line treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were retrospectively included between January 2005 and July 2018 from a prospectively maintained database at a single academic institution. No patient underwent androgen deprivation therapy prior to HIFU. Primary endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). Secondary oncological endpoints included salvage treatment-free survival (STFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS A total of 97 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. According to D'Amico classification, the numbers of patients with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease were 38 (39.2%), 52 (53.6%), and 7 (7.2%). A total of 21 (21.6%) patients received salvage treatment at a mean of 4.1 years (± 2.8) after HIFU. The 10-year OS, CSS and BRFS rates were 91.8%, 100% and 40.3% in the overall cohort, respectively. In multivariate analysis, predictive factors for biochemical recurrence were intermediate-risk group (RR = 2.065; 95% CI 1.008-4.230; p = 0.047) and PSA nadir > 0.5 ng/mL (RR = 4.963; 95% CI 2.251-10.947; p < 0.001). Symptoms related to bladder outlet obstruction were the most frequently recorded adverse events. In multivariate analysis, positive biopsy on the prostatic apex was predictor of obstructive complications (RR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.092-9.476, p = 0.034). Only four patients developed severe urinary incontinence (> 1 pad/day). CONCLUSIONS HIFU showed low PCa-specific mortality, but biochemical recurrence rates were highly variable among patients. Future studies are needed to improve patient selection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Lo Verde
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France
| | - Harry Toledano
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France.,Department of Urology, Martigues Hospital, Martigues, France
| | - Jennifer Campagna
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France
| | - Dominique Rossi
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France
| | - Cyrille Bastide
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France
| | - Michael Baboudjian
- Department of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France. .,Department of Urology, La Conception Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, APHM, Marseille, France. .,Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Cross CG, Payne AH, Hawryluk GW, Haag-Roeger R, Cheeniyil R, Brady D, Odéen H, Minoshima S, Cross DJ, Anzai Y. Technical Note: Quantification of blood-spinal cord barrier permeability after application of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound in spinal cord injury. Med Phys 2021; 48:4395-4401. [PMID: 33999427 DOI: 10.1002/mp.14947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2020] [Revised: 04/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/19/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To demonstrate that magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) facilitates blood-spinal cord barrier (BSCB) permeability and develop observer-independent MRI quantification of BSCB permeability after MRgFUS for spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS Noninjured Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 3) underwent MRgFUS and were administered Evans blue post-MRgFUS to confirm BSCB opening. Absorbance was measured by spectrophotometry and correlated with its corresponding image intensity. Rats (n = 21) underwent T8-T10 laminectomy and extradural compression of the spinal cord (23g weighted aneurysm-type clip, 1 min). The intervention group (n = 11) was placed on a preclinical MRgFUS system, administered microbubbles (Optison, 0.2 mL/kg), and received 3 MRgFUS sonications (25 ms bursts, 1 Hz pulses for 3 min, 3 acoustic W, approximately 1.0-2.1 MPa peak pressure as measured via hydrophone). The sham group (n = 10) received equivalent procedures with no sonications. T1w MRI was obtained both pre- and post-MRgFUS BSCB opening. Spinal cords were segmented manually or semiautomatically and a Pearson correlation with P ≤ 0.001 was used to correlate the two segmentation methods. MRgFUS sonication and control regions intensity values were evaluated with a paired t-test with a P ≤ 0.01. RESULTS Semiautomatic segmentation reduced computational time by 95% and was correlated with manual segmentation (Pearson = 0.92, P < 0.001, n = 71 regions). In the noninjured rat group, Evans blue absorbance correlated with image intensity in the MRgFUS and control regions (Pearson = 0.82, P = 0.02, n = 6). In rats that underwent the SCI procedure, an increase in signal intensity in the MRgFUS targeted region relative to control was seen in all SCI rats (10.65 ± 12.4%, range: 0.96-43.9%, n = 11, P = 0.002). SCI sham MRgFUS revealed no change (0.63 ± 0.52%, 95% CI 0.320.95, n = 10). This result was significant between both groups (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION The implemented semiautomatic segmentation procedure improved data analysis efficiency. Quantitative methods using contrast-enhanced MRI with histological validation are sensitive for detection of blood-spinal cord barrier opening induced by magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chloe G Cross
- School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Allison H Payne
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | | | - Riley Haag-Roeger
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Rahul Cheeniyil
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Dalton Brady
- School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Henrik Odéen
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Satoshi Minoshima
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Donna J Cross
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Yoshimi Anzai
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| |
Collapse
|