Population-based comparative effectiveness of salvage radical prostatectomy vs cryotherapy

Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Primary Nonsurgical Treatment: An Updated Systematic Review

Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) has historically been associated with high morbidity, whilst recently published multicentre series suggested a trend towards improved outcomes. Hence, we performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria to investigate the oncological and functional results and morbidity of sRP. We included 20 retrospective articles comprising 4175 men. Robotic procedures were performed in 40% and nerve sparing in up to 36% of men. Postoperative continence was preserved in 40.4% of patients and erectile function in <16%. High-grade complications were described in 6.6% of patients (rectal injuries 0.9%). At final sRP pathology, surgical margins were positive in 26.1%, 32.8% had seminal vesicle invasion, and International Society of Urological Pathology grade was >3 in 26.6%. Ten-year metastasis-free survival ranged from 72% to 77% and 5-yr cancer-specific survival ranged from 86.6% to 97.7%. Salvage radical prostatectomy shows durable oncological control and morbidity improved over recent years, despite remaining significant compared to and higher than that of primary radical prostatectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) shows improving oncological control and morbidity over time. The complications associated with sRP and its functional results seem to be acceptable and are continuously improving.

A systematic review of salvage focal therapies for localised non-metastatic radiorecurrent prostate cancer

Although radiotherapy to the prostate for cancer is effective, recurrence occurs in 10–15% within 5 years. Traditional salvage treatments for men with radiorecurrent prostate cancer comprise of watchful waiting (WW) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Neither strategy provides ideal therapeutic ratios. Salvage focal ablation is an emerging option. We performed a systematic review of the Medline and Embase databases for studies reporting outcomes of focal salvage brachytherapy (sBT), cryotherapy (sCT) or high-intensity focused ultrasound (sHIFU) for radiorecurrent prostate cancer (conception to April 2019). Results were screened for inclusion against predetermined eligibility criteria. Certain data were extracted, including rates of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), metastasis, conversion to second-line therapies and adverse events. Of a total 134 articles returned from the search, 15 studies (14 case series and 1 comparative study) reported outcomes after focal sBT [5], sCT [7] and sHIFU [3]. Cohort size varied depending on intervention, with eligible studies of sBT being small case series. Median follow-up ranged from 10 to 56 months. Although pre-salvage demographics were similar [median age range, 61–75 years; prostate-specific antigen (PSA) range, 2.8–5.5 ng/mL], there was heterogeneity in patient selection, individual treatment protocols and outcome reporting. At 3 years, BDFS ranged from 61% to 71.4% after sBT, 48.1–72.4% after sCT and 48% after sHIFU. Only studies of sCT reported 5-year BDFS, which ranged from 46.5% to 54.4%. Rates of metastasis were low after all salvage modalities, as were conversion to second-line therapies (although this was poorly reported). Grade 3 adverse events were rare. This systematic review indicates that salvage focal ablation of radiorecurrent prostate cancer provides acceptable oncological outcomes and is well tolerated. Unfortunately, there is heterogeneity in the study design of existing evidence. Level 1 research comparing salvage focal therapies to existing whole-gland strategies is needed to further establish the role of these promising treatments.

Urethral Strictures and Stenoses Caused by Prostate Therapy

The number of patients with prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia is on the rise. As a result, the volume of prostate treatment and treatment-related complications is also increasing. Urethral strictures and stenoses are relatively common complications that require individualized management based on the length and location of the obstruction, and the patient's overall health, and goals of care. In general, less invasive options such as dilation and urethrotomy are preferred as first-line therapy, followed by more invasive substitution, flap, and anastomotic urethroplasty.

PSA nadir as a predictive factor for biochemical disease-free survival and overall survival following whole-gland salvage HIFU following radiotherapy failure

Background:

Treatment options for radio-recurrent prostate cancer are either androgen-deprivation therapy or salvage prostatectomy. Whole-gland high-intensity focussed ultrasound (HIFU) might have a role in this setting.

Methods:

An independent HIFU registry collated consecutive cases of HIFU. Between 2005 and 2012, we identified 50 men who underwent whole-gland HIFU following histological confirmation of localised disease following prior external beam radiotherapy (2005–2012). No upper threshold was applied for risk category, PSA or Gleason grade either at presentation or at the time of failure. Progression was defined as a composite with biochemical failure (Phoenix criteria (PSA>nadir+2 ng ml⁻¹)), start of systemic therapies or metastases.

Results:

Median age (interquartile range (IQR)), pretreatment PSA (IQR) and Gleason score (range) were 68 years (64–72), 5.9 ng ml⁻¹ (2.2–11.3) and 7 (6–9), respectively. Median follow-up was 64 months (49–84). In all, 24/50 (48%) avoided androgen-deprivation therapies. Also, a total of 28/50 (56%) achieved a PSA nadir <0.5 ng ml⁻¹, 15/50 (30%) had a nadir ⩾0.5 ng ml⁻¹ and 7/50 (14%) did not nadir (PSA non-responders). Actuarial 1, 3 and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 72, 40 and 31%, respectively. Actuarial 1, 3 and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 100, 94 and 87%, respectively. When comparing patients with PSA nadir <0.5 ng ml⁻¹, nadir ⩾0.5 and non-responders, a statistically significant difference in PFS was seen (P<0.0001). Three-year PFS in each group was 57, 20 and 0%, respectively. Five-year OS was 96, 100 and 38%, respectively. Early in the learning curve, between 2005 and 2007, 3/50 (6%) developed a fistula. Intervention for bladder outlet obstruction was needed in 27/50 (54%). Patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires showed incontinence (any pad-use) as 8/26 (31%).

Conclusions:

In our series of high-risk patients, in whom 30–50% may have micro-metastases, disease control rates were promising in PSA responders, however, with significant morbidity. Additionally, post-HIFU PSA nadir appears to be an important predictor for both progression and survival. Further research on focal salvage ablation in order to reduce toxicity while retaining disease control rates is required.

Cryosurgery would be An Effective Option for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Cryosurgery (CS) has been used on patients with clinically localized PCa for more than 10 years. However, clinical studies evaluating its effectiveness and safety have reported conflicting results. This systematic assessment was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence regarding the potential benefits and safety of CS compared with those of radiotherapy (RT) and radical prostatectomy (RP), respectively. All controlled trials comparing CS with RT or RP and single-arm studies reporting results of CS therapy were identified through comprehensive searches of PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase. Ten publications from seven trials, with totally 1252 patients, were included in the meta-analysis, which revealed no significant differences in comparisons of CS vs RT and CS vs RP for overall survival and disease specific survival. However, a significantly lower disease-free survival could be observed for CS than RP. Moreover, a systematic review of literature focusing on comparative data of databases and materials of single-arm trials revealed satisfactory survival results in both primary and salvage CS. Our results showed that cryosurgery would be a relatively effective method for clinically localized prostate cancer with survival results comparable to radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy. However, the large percentage of complications caused by cryosurgery should be carefully monitored.

Single-institution comparative study on the outcomes of salvage cryotherapy versus salvage robotic prostatectomy for radio-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Although primary treatment of localized prostate cancer provides excellent oncologic control, some men who chose radiotherapy experience a recurrence of disease. There is no consensus on the most appropriate management of these patients after radiotherapy failure. In this single-institution review, we compare our oncologic outcome and toxicity between salvage prostatectomy and cryotherapy treatments.

METHODS

From January 2004 to June 2013, a total of 23 salvage procedures were performed. Six of those patients underwent salvage prostatectomy while 17 underwent salvage cryotherapy by two high-volume fellowship-trained urologists. Patients being considered for salvage therapy had localized disease at presentation, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 10 ng/mL at recurrence, life expectancy > 10 years at recurrence, and a negative metastatic workup. Patients were followed to observe cancer progression and toxicity of treatment.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent salvage cryotherapy were statistically older with a higher incidence of hypertension than our salvage prostatectomy cohort. With a mean follow up of 14.1 months and 7.2 months, the incidence of disease progression was 23.5% and 16.7% after salvage cryotherapy and prostatectomy, respectively. The overall complication rate was also 23.5% versus 16.7%, with the most frequent complication after salvage cryotherapy being urethral stricture and after salvage prostatectomy being severe urinary incontinence. There were no rectal injuries with salvage prostatectomy and one rectourethral fistula in the cohort after salvage cryotherapy.

CONCLUSION

While recurrences from primary radiotherapy for prostate cancer do occur, there is no consensus on its management. In our experience, salvage procedures were generally safe and effective. Both salvage cryotherapy and salvage prostatectomy allow for adequate cancer control with minimal toxicity.

Feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial to compare (deferred) androgen deprivation therapy and cryotherapy in men with localised radiation-recurrent prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Salvage therapeutic options for biochemical failure after primary radiation-based therapy include radical prostatectomy, cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), brachytherapy (for post-EBRT patients) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT and salvage prostate cryoablation (SPC) are two commonly considered treatment options for RRPC. However, there is an urgent need for high-quality clinical studies to support evidence-based decisions on treatment choice. Our study aims to determine the feasibility of randomising men with RRPC for treatment with ADT and SPC.

METHODS

The randomised controlled trial (CROP) was developed, which incorporated protocols to assess parameters relating to cryotherapy procedures and provide training workshops for optimising patient recruitment. Analysis of data from the recruitment phase and patient questionnaires was performed.

RESULTS

Over a period of 18 months, 39 patients were screened for eligibility. Overall 28 patients were offered entry into the trial, but only 7 agreed to randomisation. The majority reason for declining entry into the trial was an unwillingness to be randomised into the study. 'Having the chance of getting cryotherapy' was the major reason for accepting the trial. Despite difficulty in retrieving cryotherapy temperature parameters from prior cases, 9 of 11 cryotherapy centres progressed through the Cryotherapists Qualification Process (CQP) and were approved for recruiting into the CROP study.

CONCLUSIONS

Conveying equipoise between the two study arms for a salvage therapy was challenging. The use of delayed androgen therapy may have been seen as an inferior option. Future cohort studies into available salvage options (including prostate cryotherapy) for RRPC may be more acceptable to patients than randomisation within an RCT.