1
|
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
|
2
|
Flegar L, Baunacke M, Buerk BT, Proschmann R, Zacharis A, Propping S, Huber J, Thomas C, Borkowetz A. Decision Regret and Quality of Life after Focal Therapy with Vascular-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy (TOOKAD®) for Localized Prostate Cancer. Urol Int 2021; 106:903-908. [PMID: 34814157 PMCID: PMC9533463 DOI: 10.1159/000520084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of the study was to assess quality of life (QoL), decision involvement, and decisional regret after treatment with vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) (TOOKAD®) for unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS Validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25) capturing QoL post-treatment, involvement in decision-making (Control Preferences Scale) and decision regret (Decisional Regret Scale), were given to patients at the 12-month visit after undergoing VTP at our institution between May 2018 and February 2021. RESULTS Out of 44 patients, 36 patients were included in this study and 31 (86.1%) responded to the questionnaires. Mean overall health score capturing QoL at 12 months was 79.3 (standard deviation: ±18.1). 70.9% of the patients (n = 22) had no decision regret, and 67.8% of men (n = 21) had an active role in decision-making. In control biopsy at 12 months post-treatment, 19.4% of patients (n = 7) presented with local recurrence and progression to higher Gleason score (GS) was found in 13.8% of patients (n = 5). Patients (n = 3) presenting with tumor recurrence or progression to higher GS in control biopsy showed a significantly higher level of decision regret (p < 0.009). CONCLUSION Only 9.7% of men (n = 3) felt a strong emotion of regret at 12 months after VTP. Level of decision regret was significantly higher in patients with local recurrence or tumor progression detected in control biopsy. QoL was stable after VTP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luka Flegar
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Martin Baunacke
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Bjoern Thorben Buerk
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Rick Proschmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Aristeidis Zacharis
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan Propping
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Johannes Huber
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Thomas
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Angelika Borkowetz
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zheng Y, Ye Y, Chen L, Ma Z, Liu L, Cheng G, Xiao W, Liu Y, Liu J, Miao Q, Wei Z, Ruan H, Zhang X. Prevalence and outcomes of focal ablation versus prostatectomy for elderly patients with prostate cancer: a population-based study. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER CENTER 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jncc.2021.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
|
4
|
Fredman E, Traughber B, Kharouta M, Podder T, Lo S, Ponsky L, MacLennan G, Paspulati R, Ellis B, Machtay M, Ellis R. Focal Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With Correlative Pathological and Radiographic-Based Treatment Planning. Front Oncol 2021; 11:744130. [PMID: 34604088 PMCID: PMC8480263 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.744130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 08/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Advances in multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) combining anatomic and functional imaging can accurately identify foci of adenocarcinoma within the prostate, offering the possibility of partial gland therapy. We performed tandem prospective pilot trials to investigate the feasibility of focal prostate SBRT (f-SBRT) based on correlating diagnostic mpMRI and biopsies with confirmatory pathology in treatment planning. Materials and Methods Patients with pathologic focal Gleason 6–7 disease and a corresponding PIRADS 4–5 lesion on mpMRI underwent targeted and comprehensive biopsies using MRI/ultrasound fusion under electromagnetic sensor navigation. After rigorous analysis for imaging biopsy concordance, five of 18 patients were eligible to proceed to f-SBRT. Chi-squared test was used for differences from expected outcomes, and concordance was estimated with binomial distribution theory and Wilson’s method. Results Six patients had Gleason 6 and 12 had Gleason 3 + 4 disease (mean PSA: 5.8 ng/ml, range: 2.2–8.4). Absolute concordance was 43.8% (95% CI: 0.20, 0.64). Patterns of discordance included additional sites of ipsilateral disease, bilateral disease, and negative target. Five were upstaged to a new NCCN risk category necessitating treatment escalation. The five patients with concordant pathology completed three-fraction f-SBRT with sparing of the surrounding normal structures (including contralateral neurovascular bundle), with no reported grade 2+ toxicities and favorable PSA responses (mean: 41% decrease). Conclusions On our pilot trials of f-SBRT planning using rigorous imaging and pathology concordance, image-guided confirmatory biopsies frequently revealed additional disease, suggesting the need for caution in partial-gland therapy. For truly focal disease, f-SBRT provided excellent dosimetry, minimal toxicity, and encouraging biochemical response. Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02681614; NCT02163317.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisha Fredman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Bryan Traughber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| | - Michael Kharouta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Tarun Podder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Simon Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Lee Ponsky
- Department of Urology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Gregory MacLennan
- Department of Pathology, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Raj Paspulati
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Bradley Ellis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Mitchell Machtay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| | - Rodney Ellis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Penn State University, Milton Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Maestroni U, Tafuri A, Dinale F, Campobasso D, Antonelli A, Ziglioli F. Oncologic outcome of salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in radiorecurrent prostate cancer. A systematic review. ACTA BIO-MEDICA : ATENEI PARMENSIS 2021; 92:e2021191. [PMID: 34487074 DOI: 10.23750/abm.v92i3.11475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT) is one of the option available for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. In patients with radiorecurrent localized prostate cancer, Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) is one of the most common therapeutic strategies. However, in the last decades, other salvage treatment options have been investigated, such as brachytherapy, cryoablation and High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (Hifu). MATERIAL AND METHODS The oncologic outcome of Hifu in a salvage setting after EBRT failure was investigated. We reviewed the literature from 2005 to 2020 in order to report the oncologic outcome of the technique. RESULTS A total of 1241 patients were analyzed, with a mean age of 68.6 years and a PSA value of 5.87 ng/mL before treatment. Mean follow-up was 24.3 months after treatment, ranging from 3 to 168 months. CONCLUSION Our review of the literature revealed that salvage Hifu is effective in the treatment of radiorecurrent clinically localized prostate cancer, with an overall survival of 85.2% at 5 years.
Collapse
|
6
|
Chesnut GT, Tin AL, Sivaraman A, Takeda T, Lee T, Fainberg J, Benfante N, Sjoberg DD, Vargas HA, Fine SW, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Coleman JA, Touijer KA, Zelefsky MJ, Ehdaie B. Defining the index lesion for potential salvage partial or hemi-gland ablation after radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:495.e17-495.e24. [PMID: 33583697 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.01.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2020] [Revised: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 01/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Salvage partial gland ablation (sPGA) has been proposed to treat some localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer. The role of prostate biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics to identify patients eligible for sPGA is unknown. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the ability of MRI and prostate biopsy characteristics to identify an index lesion suitable for sPGA and validate this selection using detailed tumor maps created from whole-mount slides from salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) specimens. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Men who underwent sRP for recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy between 2000 and 2014 at a single high-volume cancer center were eligible. Those with tumor maps, MRI and biopsy data were included in analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Primary outcome was the ability of clinicopathologic and imaging criteria to identify patients who may be eligible for sPGA based on detailed tumor map from whole-mount sRP slides. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 216 men who underwent sRP following whole gland radiotherapy, tumor maps, MRI, and biopsy data were available for 77. Of these, 15 (19%) were determined to be eligible for sPGA based on biopsy-proven unilateral disease in contiguous sextant segments, a dominant lesion on MRI concordant with biopsy location or no focal region of interest, and no imaging evidence of extraprostatic disease. Review of tumor maps identified 6 additional men who would have met criteria for sPGA, resulting in sensitivity of 71% (95% C.I. 48%-89%) and specificity of 100% (lower bound of 95% C.I. 94%). None of the 15 men who met the criteria for sPGA on clinical data were identified incorrectly on tumor maps to require full gland surgery (upper bound of 95% C.I. 22%). Median tumor volume of the index lesion was 0.4 cc and recurrent cancer was noted in the apex, mid-gland, and base in 81%, 100%, and 29% of men. CONCLUSIONS In men with recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy, biopsy findings and MRI can be used to select index lesions potentially amenable for sPGA and can guide patient evaluation for inclusion in clinical trials of sPGA following radiation failure. Larger, prospective studies are required to evaluate both the role of MRI and clinical criteria in guiding focal salvage therapy and the effectiveness of this modality for radiorecurrent prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory T Chesnut
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| | - Amy L Tin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Arjun Sivaraman
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Toshikazu Takeda
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Taehyoung Lee
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan Fainberg
- Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Daniel D Sjoberg
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - Samson W Fine
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Peter T Scardino
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - James A Eastham
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jonathan A Coleman
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Karim A Touijer
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
Accurate early detection of recurrent prostate cancer after surgical or nonsurgical treatment is increasingly relevant in the era of evolving options for salvage therapy. The importance of differentiating between local tumor recurrence, distant metastatic disease, and a combination of both in a patient with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer is essential for appropriate treatment selection. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the best test for localization and characterization of locally residual or recurrent prostate cancer. It is essential for the radiologist involved in prostate MRI interpretation to be familiar with key imaging findings and advantages of different sequences to reach a confident diagnosis in the post-treatment setting. In this pictorial review, we present imaging findings of post-treatment prostate MRI including expected post-treatment anatomy and imaging characteristics, and the typical appearances of local tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and focal therapy for prostate cancer. While a multi-parametric MRI approach remains key just as in the treatment-naïve gland, this review emphasizes the much greater importance of the dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI sequence for evaluation in the post-treatment setting.
Collapse
|
8
|
Dubinsky TJ, Khokhlova TD, Khokhlova V, Schade GR. Histotripsy: The Next Generation of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Focal Prostate Cancer Therapy. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE 2020; 39:1057-1067. [PMID: 31830312 DOI: 10.1002/jum.15191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2019] [Revised: 11/12/2019] [Accepted: 11/17/2019] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
This article reviews the most current methods and technological aspects of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), which is termed histotripsy. The rationale for focal therapy for prostate carcinoma rather than prostatectomy, which is being used extensively throughout Europe and Asia, is presented, and an argument for why HIFU is the modality of choice for primary therapy and recurrent disease is offered. The article presents a review of the technical advances including higher ultrasound beam energy than current thermal HIFU which allows for more accurate tissue targeting, less collateral tissue damage, and faster treatment times. Finally, the article presents a discussion about the advantage of ultrasound guidance for histotripsy in preference to magnetic resonance imaging guidance primarily based on cost, ease of application, and portability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore J Dubinsky
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Tanya D Khokhlova
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Gastroenterology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Vera Khokhlova
- Center for Industrial and Medical Ultrasound, Applied Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Acoustics, Physics Faculty, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia
| | - George R Schade
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kleinclauss F, Frontczak A, Balssa L, Lebdai S, Azzouzi R. Photothérapie dynamique dans le cancer de la prostate à faible risque. Revue de la littérature. Prog Urol 2019; 29:393-401. [DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2019.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2018] [Revised: 04/05/2019] [Accepted: 05/18/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
10
|
Bakavicius A, Sanchez-Salas R, Muttin F, Sivaraman A, Dell'Oglio P, Barret E, Rozet F, Mombet A, Prapotnich D, Cathala N, Cathelineau X. Comprehensive Evaluation of Focal Therapy Complications in Prostate Cancer: A Standardized Methodology. J Endourol 2019; 33:509-515. [PMID: 31017001 DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Today, up to one-third of newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) cases may be suitable for focal treatment. The lack of data about the toxicity profiles of lesion-targeting therapies, however, has made it difficult to compare treatment modalities. The aim of the present study was to evaluate comprehensively the incidence, severity, and timing of onset of complications for PCa patients undergoing focal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and focal cryosurgical ablation of the prostate (CSAP). Materials and Methods: A total of 336 patients were included who underwent focal HIFU or focal CSAP as a primary treatment for PCa between January 2009 and December 2017. Mean follow-up was 11 months (standard deviation: 3.0). All complications were captured and graded according to severity, and classified by timing of onset. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of the most common side effects. Results: There were 98 complications in 79/210 patients (38%) undergoing focal HIFU and 34 complications in 27/126 patients (21%) undergoing focal CSAP. In terms of severity, 95% of the complications of focal HIFU and 91% of the complications of focal CSAP were minor. Most complications presented in the early postoperative period. On multivariate analysis, subtotal HIFU was associated with acute urinary retention (AUR), while a smaller prostate size and longer catheterization time with dysuria. In CSAP patients, longer catheterization time was associated with AUR and urethral sloughing. The main limitation is the nonrandomized and retrospective nature. Conclusions: Focal HIFU and focal CSAP provide a tolerable toxicity, with primarily minor complications presenting in the early postoperative period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnas Bakavicius
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.,2 Urology Centre, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | | | - Fabio Muttin
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.,3 Unit of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, URI-Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Arjun Sivaraman
- 4 Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Paolo Dell'Oglio
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.,3 Unit of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, URI-Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Eric Barret
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Francois Rozet
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Annick Mombet
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | | | - Nathalie Cathala
- 1 Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Choi YH, Yu JW, Kang MY, Sung HH, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Jeon SS, Lee HM, Jeon HG. Combination of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies is not enough for identifying patients eligible for hemiablative focal therapy for prostate cancer. World J Urol 2019; 37:2129-2135. [DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-02617-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2018] [Accepted: 12/24/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
|
12
|
Guillaumier S, Peters M, Arya M, Afzal N, Charman S, Dudderidge T, Hosking-Jervis F, Hindley RG, Lewi H, McCartan N, Moore CM, Nigam R, Ogden C, Persad R, Shah K, van der Meulen J, Virdi J, Winkler M, Emberton M, Ahmed HU. A Multicentre Study of 5-year Outcomes Following Focal Therapy in Treating Clinically Significant Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2018; 74:422-429. [PMID: 29960750 PMCID: PMC6156573 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 187] [Impact Index Per Article: 31.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2017] [Accepted: 06/01/2018] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Background Clinically significant nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is currently treated using whole-gland therapy. This approach is effective but can have urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects. Objective To report on 5-yr PCa control following focal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy to treat individual areas of cancer within the prostate. Design, setting, and participants This was a prospective study of 625 consecutive patients with nonmetastatic clinically significant PCa undergoing focal HIFU therapy (Sonablate) in secondary care centres between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015. A minimum of 6-mo follow-up was available for599 patients. Intermediate- or high-risk PCa was found in 505 patients (84%). Intervention Disease was localised using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) combined with targeted and systematic biopsies, or transperineal mapping biopsies. Areas of significant disease were treated. Follow-up included prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement, mpMRI, and biopsies. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary endpoint, failure-free survival (FFS), was defined as freedom from radical or systemic therapy, metastases, and cancer-specific mortality. Results and limitations The median follow-up was 56 mo (interquartile range [IQR] 35–70). The median age was 65 yr (IQR 61–71) and median preoperative PSA was 7.2 ng/ml (IQR 5.2–10.0). FFS was 99% (95% confidence interval [CI] 98–100%) at 1 yr, 92% (95% CI 90–95%) at 3 yr, and 88% (95% 85–91%) at 5 yr. For the whole patient cohort, metastasis-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival at 5 yr was 98% (95% CI 97–99%), 100%, and 99% (95% CI 97–100%), respectively. Among patients who returned validated questionnaires, 241/247 (98%) achieved complete pad-free urinary continence and none required more than 1 pad/d. Limitations include the lack of long-term follow-up. Conclusions Focal therapy for select patients with clinically significant nonmetastatic prostate cancer is effective in the medium term and has a low probability of side effects. Patient summary In this multicentre study of 625 patients undergoing focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), failure-free survival, metastasis-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were 88%, 98%, 100%, and 99%, respectively. Urinary incontinence (any pad use) was 2%. Focal HIFU therapy for patients with clinically significant prostate cancer that has not spread has a low probability of side effects and is effective at 5 yr.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie Guillaumier
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Max Peters
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Manit Arya
- Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; Department of Urology, The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK
| | - Naveed Afzal
- Department of Urology, Dorset County Hospital NHS Trust, Dorset, UK
| | - Susan Charman
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| | - Tim Dudderidge
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Feargus Hosking-Jervis
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Richard G Hindley
- Department of Urology, Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Basingstoke, UK
| | | | - Neil McCartan
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Raj Nigam
- Department of Urology, Royal County Surrey Hospital NHS Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Chris Ogden
- Department of Academic Urology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Raj Persad
- Department of Urology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Karishma Shah
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Jaspal Virdi
- Department of Urology, The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK; Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
van der Poel HG, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Cornford P, Govorov A, Henry AM, Lam TB, Mason MD, Rouvière O, De Santis M, Willemse PPM, van Poppel H, Mottet N. Focal Therapy in Primary Localised Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018. Eur Urol 2018; 74:84-91. [PMID: 29373215 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 118] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2017] [Accepted: 01/02/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Radical treatment of localised prostate cancer is recognised to be an unnecessary intervention or overtreatment in many men. Consequently, there has been a rapid uptake in the use of focal ablative therapies. However, there are several biological and practical concerns about such approaches as they have yet to be proved as robust treatment options. In particular, the multifocal nature of prostate cancer argues against unifocal treatment, while limitations in imaging can preclude the accurate identification of the number, location, and extent of prostate cancer foci. To date, a number of ablative options have reported results on mainly low-risk disease. Most series are relatively immature, with a lack of consistent follow-up, and the morbidity of retreatment is often not considered. The authors consider focal therapy to be an investigational modality, and encourage prospective recording of outcomes and recruitment of suitable patients. PATIENT SUMMARY Focal therapy of prostate cancer is the targeted destruction of cancer within a specific part of the prostate gland, sparing the rest of the prostate and nearby tissue. This procedure could potentially reduce side effects when compared with established standard treatments, such as surgery or radiotherapy, which treat the entire prostate. Studies show that for most men with low-risk cancer, active surveillance is the preferred treatment option. However, the available data regarding all forms of focal therapy are still poor and inconclusive. Consequently, due to both the lack of clear results associated with focal therapy and the difficulties in detecting all cancerous areas of the prostate, focal therapy should be considered an investigational modality only.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henk G van der Poel
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | - Philip Cornford
- Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Alex Govorov
- Department of Urology, Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Moscow, Russia
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Thomas B Lam
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Malcolm D Mason
- Division of Cancer & Genetics, School of Medicine Cardiff University, Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK
| | - Olivier Rouvière
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Radiology Department, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
| | - Maria De Santis
- Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, UK; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | - Nicolas Mottet
- Department of Urology, University Hospital, St. Etienne, France
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Kothari G, Loblaw A, Tree AC, van As NJ, Moghanaki D, Lo SS, Ost P, Siva S. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Primary Prostate Cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2018; 17:1533033818789633. [PMID: 30064301 PMCID: PMC6069023 DOI: 10.1177/1533033818789633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2018] [Revised: 06/07/2018] [Accepted: 06/14/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer in males. There are a number of options for patients with localized early stage disease, including active surveillance for low-risk disease, surgery, brachytherapy, and external beam radiotherapy. Increasingly, external beam radiotherapy, in the form of dose-escalated and moderately hypofractionated regimens, is being utilized in prostate cancer, with randomized evidence to support their use. Stereotactic body radiotherapy, which is a form of extreme hypofractionation, delivered with high precision and conformality typically over 1 to 5 fractions, offers a more contemporary approach with several advantages including being non-invasive, cost-effective, convenient for patients, and potentially improving patient access. In fact, one study has estimated that if half of the patients currently eligible for conventional fractionated radiotherapy in the United States were treated instead with stereotactic body radiotherapy, this would result in a total cost savings of US$250 million per year. There is also a strong radiobiological rationale to support its use, with prostate cancer believed to have a low α/β ratio and therefore being preferentially sensitive to larger fraction sizes. To date, there are no published randomized trials reporting on the comparative efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy compared to alternative treatment modalities, although multiple randomized trials are currently accruing. Yet, early results from the randomized phase III study of HYPOfractionated RadioTherapy of intermediate risk localized Prostate Cancer (HYPO-RT-PC) trial, as well as multiple single-arm phase I/II trials, indicate low rates of late adverse effects with this approach. In patients with low- to intermediate-risk disease, excellent biochemical relapse-free survival outcomes have been reported, albeit with relatively short median follow-up times. These promising early results, coupled with the enormous potential cost savings and implications for resource availability, suggest that stereotactic body radiotherapy will take center stage in the treatment of prostate cancer in the years to come.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gargi Kothari
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Center, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Alison C. Tree
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Drew Moghanaki
- Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Simon S. Lo
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Shankar Siva
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Jadvar H. Multimodal Imaging in Focal Therapy Planning and Assessment in Primary Prostate Cancer. Clin Transl Imaging 2017; 5:199-208. [PMID: 28713796 DOI: 10.1007/s40336-017-0228-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE There is increasing interest in focal therapy (male lumpectomy) of localized low-intermediate risk prostate cancer. Focal therapy is typically associated with low morbidity and provides the possibility of retreatment. Imaging is pivotal in stratification of men with localized prostate cancer for active surveillance, focal therapy or radical intervention. This article provides a concise review of focal therapy and the evolving role of imaging in this clinical setting. METHODS We performed a narrative and critical literature review by searching PubMed/Medline database from January 1997 to January 2017 for articles in the English language and the use of search keywords "focal therapy", "prostate cancer", and "imaging". RESULTS Most imaging studies are based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Transrectal ultrasound is inadequate independently but multiparametric ultrasound may provide new prospects. Positron emission tomography with radiotracers targeted to various underlying tumor biological features may provide unprecedented new opportunities. Multimodal Imaging appears most useful in localization of intraprostatic dominant index lesions amenable to focal therapy, in early assessment of therapeutic efficacy and potential need for additional focal treatments or transition to whole-gland therapy, and in predicting short-term and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION Multimodal imaging is anticipated to play an increasing role in the focal therapy planning and assessment of low-intermediate risk prostate cancer and thereby moving this form of treatment option forward in the clinic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hossein Jadvar
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|