Comparative study of HIFU partial gland ablation and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: an evidence-based approach.

PURPOSE: This research aims to use a data-driven analytical method to compare the effectiveness of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) partial gland ablation with Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) for treating localized prostate cancer, evaluating variations in treatment results. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature, covering key databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, with the latest information updated until August 2024. We utilized Stata 18 for data analysis, computing weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous data and odds ratios (ORs) for categorical data, with all results reported alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Additionally, the studies included were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). RESULTS: This meta-analysis incorporated data from three paired studies, encompassing a total of 1,503 patients. Patients treated with HIFU experienced a shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.78, 95%CI -5.14,-0.43; p = 0.02) compared to those who received RARP. Additionally, evaluations at 3 and 12 months post-surgery revealed that the HIFU group exhibited better recovery in urinary continence and sexual function than the RARP group. However, there were no notable disparities in complication rates (OR = 1.48, 95%CI 0.92,2.40; p = 0.110) and the requirement for salvage therapy (OR = 2.92, 95%CI 0.60,14.33; p = 0.186) between the two treatment methods. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this meta-analysis appears to suggest potential benefits of HIFU partial gland ablation in possibly reducing the length of hospital stays and seems to indicate that it might be associated with improved recovery in terms of urinary incontinence and sexual function, particularly during the early to mid-term postoperative period. Although the differences in complication rates and the requirement for salvage therapy between the two surgical methods were not statistically significant, the findings provided by this analysis are instrumental in guiding clinical decision-making.

Salvage Cryoablation for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Radiation-A Comprehensive Review.

The treatment options for prostate cancer typically entail active surveillance, surgery, radiation, or a combination of the above. Disease recurrence remains a concern, with a wide range of recurrence rates having been reported in the literature. In the setting of recurrence, the salvage treatment options include salvage prostatectomy, salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), salvage brachytherapy, and salvage cryoablation. In this review, we analyze the currently available data related to salvage cryoablation for recurrent prostate cancer following radiation.

Early functional outcomes following partial gland cryo-ablation.

INTRODUCTION: Given the increasing interest in partial gland cryo-ablation as a treatment modality and the lack of data surrounding urinary and sexual outcomes after the procedure, the goal of this analysis was to assess functional outcomes following partial gland cryo-ablation (PGCA) stratified according to baseline severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and erectile function (EF). A secondary goal was to also determine if there were any clinical factors associated with significant change in LUTS and EF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Since 3/2017, all men undergoing primary PGCA were offered enrollment into an IRB-approved prospective outcomes registry. Men were given International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) surveys prior to and 6 months post treatment. Differences in IPSS and SHIM scores are described, and factors associated with clinically significant change were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 100 men completed 6 month follow up. The mean IPSS for the overall cohort decreased 2.1 units (p > 0.05). The mean changes in IPSS for men with baseline mild, moderate, and severe LUTS were 0.9 (p = 0.06), -4.2 (p = 0.001), and -11.1(p = 0.001) units, respectively. The mean changes in the SHIM score for all men were - 5.1 units (p = 0.001). The mean changes in SHIM score for baseline none, mild/mild-to-moderate, moderate-severe ED were -7.6 (p = 0.001), -6.5 (p = 0.001) and -1.1 units (p = 0.27), respectively. No variables of interest were significantly associated with changes in IPSS or SHIM scores. CONCLUSION: Stratifying functional outcomes according to baseline IPSS and SHIM is imperative to assess the true impact of PGCA on functional outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Procedures in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer: an Interventional Radiologist's Perspective.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Minimal invasive procedures, including targeted biopsy (TB) and focal therapy (FT), are increasingly used in diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer. Here, we review the current role of these procedures, from a perspective of an interventional radiologist. RECENT FINDINGS: TB is an established part of current guidelines for diagnosis of PCa. Several modalities of FT are gaining prevalence in recent years, as a tissue-preserving alternative for definitive treatment of localized PCa. FT is currently at early research stages, offered to selected patients in clinical trials settings. TB and FT are minimally invasive procedures used by multidisciplinary teams for diagnosis and treatment of localized PCa.

Salvage partial gland ablation for recurrent prostate cancer following primary partial gland ablation: Functional and oncological outcomes.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Partial gland ablation (PGA) for localised prostate cancer (CaP) aims to eradicate clinically significant tumours while preserving healthy tissue, thereby decreasing the likelihood of side effects compared to whole-gland approaches. Although salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) is a well-described salvage option in cases of PGA failure, the evidence supporting salvage PGA (sPGA) is limited. We hereby report the oncologic and functional outcomes of patients treated with sPGA following initial treatment with primary PGA (pPGA). METHODS: We describe the findings of a retrospective review of patients who had a CaP recurrence after pPGA and then underwent sPGA, at 3 medical centers in Ontario, Canada, between 2005 and 2017. Oncological outcomes following sPGA were assessed for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and biopsy-proven recurrence (BPR). Functional outcomes were described using the international prostate symptom score (IPSS), international index of erectile function (IIEF), and rates of urinary incontinence (use of >1 pad/day). RESULTS: We identified 25 patients who underwent sPGA following pPGA (hemiablation in 48% and zonal ablation in 52% of the patients). The median length of time was 16.8 months (interquartile range [IQR] 14.0-19.1) from pPGA to sPGA and 47.06 months (IQR 19.9-171.3) from pPGA to date of last follow up. High intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) was the only modality used in all patients. At baseline, the median age was 65 years (IQR 52-77) and median prostate specific antigen (PSA) level was 7.46 ng/mL (IQR 1-25). The median time from pPGA to BPR was 12.7 months (IQR 5.19-36). At BPR following pPGA, 4 patients (17%) had CaP grade group (GG) 1, 10 patients (42%) had GG2, 6 patients (25%) had GG3, and 4 patients (17%) had GG4 disease, with a median PSA of 3.58 ng/mL (IQR 0.67-19). The median length of follow up after sPGA was 27.3 months (IQR 14.5-86.3). Following sPGA, 13/25 patients (52%) had BCR with median time to recurrence of 14 months (IQR 2.5-82.15), with a recurrence-free survival of 24.5 months (95% confidence interval: 15.3-not reached). Of those 13 patients, 4 were managed with sRP, 4 were managed with salvage radiotherapy, 3 were managed with androgen-deprivation therapy, 1 had a third PGA with HIFU, and 1 was managed with active surveillance. The mean change from baseline to last follow up in IPSS and IIEF scores was +1.3 (P = 0.66) and -2.3 (P = 0.32), respectively. Urinary incontinence was reported by 9% of patients at baseline, with only one additional patient developing incontinence following sPGA. CONCLUSION: Our present study demonstrates that after a median follow-up of 27 months, sPGA for recurrent CaP following pPGA provides disease control in up to 50% of patients with nonsignificant detrimental effects on functional outcomes. Appropriate patient selection and adequate staging are important to consider before offering PGA to patients.

Triggers and oncologic outcome of salvage radical prostatectomy, salvage radiotherapy and active surveillance after focal therapy of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Due to the tissue preserving approach of focal therapy (FT), local cancer relapse can occur. Uncertainty exists regarding triggers and outcome of salvage strategies. METHODS: Patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer (PCa) after FT for localized PCa from 2011 to 2020 at eight tertiary referral hospitals in Germany that underwent salvage radical prostatectomy (S-RP), salvage radiotherapy (S-RT) or active surveillance (AS) were reported. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) changes, suspicious lesions on mpMRI and histopathological findings on biopsy were analyzed. A multivariable regression model was created for adverse pathological findings (APF) at S-RP specimen. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to determine oncological outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 90 men were included. Cancer relapse after FT was detected at a median of 12 months (IQR 9-16). Of 50 men initially under AS 13 received S-RP or S-RT. In total, 44 men underwent S-RP and 13 S-RT. At cancer relapse 17 men (38.6%) in the S-RP group [S-RT n = 4 (30.8%); AS n = 3 (6%)] had ISUP > 2. APF (pT ≥ 3, ISUP ≥ 3, pN + or R1) were observed in 23 men (52.3%). A higher ISUP on biopsy was associated with APF [p = 0.006 (HR 2.32, 97.5% CI 1.35-4.59)] on univariable analysis. Progression-free survival was 80.4% after S-RP and 100% after S-RT at 3 years. Secondary therapy-free survival was 41.7% at 3 years in men undergoing AS. Metastasis-free survival was 80% at 5 years for the whole cohort. CONCLUSION: With early detection of cancer relapse after FT S-RP and S-RT provide sufficient oncologic control at short to intermediate follow-up. After AS, a high secondary-therapy rate was observed.

Potential Candidates for Focal Therapy in Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Focal therapy (FT) with its favorable side-effect profile represents an option between active surveillance and traditional whole-gland treatment in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Consensus statements recommend eligibility criteria based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and systematic combination biopsy. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the future potential of FT by analyzing the number of men eligible for FT among all men with biopsy-proven PCa and to judge the potential of different energy sources. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Consensus criteria on FT were analyzed. Patients with biopsy-proven PCa from six tertiary referral hospitals and one outpatient practice in Germany had received a software-based combination biopsy. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions based on PI-RADS v2 were included. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients were analyzed for potential treatment by FT and hemiablation. MRI lesions were mapped according to prostatic zones. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 2371 patients were analyzed. According to consensus criteria (biopsy-proven unifocal lesion of International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade group ≤2, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤15ng/mL, and life expectancy >10yr), 303 patients (12.8%; ISUP 1: n=148 [6.2%]; ISUP 2: n=155 [6.5%]) were potential candidates for FT. A maximum PSA level of <10ng/mL would exclude further 60 (2.5%) of these men. The eligibility for hemiablation is slightly higher (16.2%). Unifocal lesions (n=288) were equally distributed within the prostate (anteriorly [31%], apically [29%], and dorsally [36%]). CONCLUSIONS: With adherence to consensus statements, only a minority of PCa patients present as potential candidates for FT. Distribution of tumor localization suggests the need for different energy modalities to warrant an optimal FT treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: We analyzed how many men who receive a magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy are candidates for the experimental focal therapy of the prostate. When following expert recommendations, only a small number of men are potential candidates for this alternative treatment.

Utilization of focal therapy for patients discontinuing active surveillance of prostate cancer: Recommendations of an international Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: With the advancement of imaging technology, focal therapy (FT) has been gaining acceptance for the treatment of select patients with localized prostate cancer (CaP). We aim to provide details of a formal physician consensus on the utilization of FT for patients with CaP who are discontinuing active surveillance (AS). METHODS: A 3-stage Delphi consensus on CaP and FT was conducted. Consensus was defined as agreement by ≥80% of physicians. An in-person meeting was attended by 17 panelists to formulate the consensus statement. RESULTS: Fifty-six respondents participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (82% urologist, 16% radiologist, 2% radiation oncology). The participants confirmed that there is a role for FT in men discontinuing AS (48% strongly agree, 39% agree). The benefit of FT over radical therapy for men coming off AS is: less invasive (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve erectile function (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve urinary continence (91%), has fewer side effects (86%), and has early recovery post-treatment (80%). Patients will need to undergo mpMRI of the prostate and/or a saturation biopsy to determine if they are potential candidates for FT. Our limitations include respondent's biases and that the participants of this consensus may not represent the larger medical community. CONCLUSIONS: FT can be offered to men coming off AS between the age of 60 to 80 with grade group 2 localized cancer. This consensus from a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, international expert panel provides a contemporary insight utilizing FT for CaP in select patients who are discontinuing AS.

A systematic review of outcomes after thermal and nonthermal partial prostate ablation.

We sought to compare oncologic and functional outcomes between thermal and nonthermal energy partial gland ablation (PGA) modalities. We conducted comprehensive, structured literature searches, and 39 papers, abstracts, and presentations met the inclusion criteria of pre-PGA magnetic resonance imaging, oncologic outcomes of at least 6 months, and systematic biopsies after PGA. Twenty-six studies used thermal ablation: high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, focal laser ablation, or radiofrequency ablation. In-field recurrence rates ranged from 0 to 36% for HIFU, 6 to 24% for cryotherapy, 4 to 50% for focal laser ablation, and 20 to 25% for radiofrequency ablation. Twelve studies used nonthermal technologies of focal brachytherapy, vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy, or irreversible electroporation. Focal brachytherapy had the lowest reported failure rate of 8%, vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy had >30% positive in-field biopsies, and irreversible electroporation had in-field recurrence rates of 12-35%. PGA was well tolerated, and nearly all patients returned to baseline urinary function 12 months later. Most modalities caused transient decreases in erectile function. Persistent erectile dysfunction was highest in patients who underwent HIFU. Although oncologic outcomes vary between treatment modalities, systematic review of existing data demonstrates that PGA is a safe treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer.

Standardized Nomenclature and Surveillance Methodologies After Focal Therapy and Partial Gland Ablation for Localized Prostate Cancer: An International Multidisciplinary Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Focal therapy (FT) and partial gland ablation (PGA) are quickly adopted by urologists and radiologists as an option for the management of localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To find consensus on a standardized nomenclature and to define a follow-up guideline after FT and PGA for localized prostate cancer in clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A review of the literature identified controversial topics in the field of FT. Online questionnaires were distributed to experts during three rounds, with the goal to achieve consensus on debated topics. The consensus project was concluded with a face-to-face meeting in which final conclusions were formulated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Controlled feedback of responses of previous rounds were summarized and returned to the participants allowing them to re-evaluate their decisions. The level of agreement to achieve consensus on a topic was set at 80%. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sixty-five experts participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (72% urologists; 28% radiologists). The experts propose the use of the herein standardized nomenclature for ablative procedures. After FT/PGA, the following tests should be performed to assess treatment outcomes: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), imaging, biopsies, and functional outcome assessment. Although not a reliable marker for treatment failure, PSA should be measured every 3 mo in the 1st year and every 6 mo thereafter. Magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred image modality and should be performed at 6 and 18 mo after treatment. A systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy combined with a targeted biopsy of the treated area should be performed 6-12 mo after treatment. Functional outcomes should be obtained 3-6 mo after treatment for the first time and until stability is attained. CONCLUSIONS: The panel recommends the use of the proposed nomenclature and follow-up protocols to generate reliable data supporting a broader implementation of FT as a standard of care for select patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we present expert opinion on the use of a standardized nomenclature, and surveillance methodologies after focal therapy and partial gland ablation for localized prostate cancer.

Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although still considered experimental, focal irreversible electroporation (IRE) as a primary treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is considered one of the most promising ablative technologies for focal therapy. This review provides a description of the principle of IRE for the treatment of PCa, combined with an overview of the recent research. RECENT FINDINGS: It has been almost a decade since the first human studies of focal IRE for PCa were trying to demonstrate its feasibility and safety, and recently new data are emerging regarding the functional and oncological outcomes. It was shown that the expected ablation efficacy of IRE is dependent on increased safety margins of > 9 mm and an uninterrupted IRE procedure, but these findings need further investigation in larger cohorts and randomized control trials (RCT). Recent data from larger cohorts with a longer follow-up of up to 12 months prove that focal IRE as primary treatment for localized PCa is indeed safe, has effective short-term oncological control in selected patients, and it has good functional outcomes by retaining urinary function and causing only mild erectile dysfunction.

[Focal therapy for prostate cancer]. / Fokale Therapie bei Prostatakrebs.

Focal therapy (FT) should have the same oncological efficacy as whole gland therapy with fewer side effects. Precise diagnosis with PI-RADS v2 standard multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and fusion or template biopsy is a basic prerequisite. Numerous ablation technologies and treatment strategies have been developed, including hemiablation. Treatment success is still inconsistently defined. The only large randomized study available compares one of the procedures to standard therapy. Therefore, even in 2019, FT must still be regarded as experimental and should only be carried out within the context of studies. Follow-up should correspond to active surveillance (AS), including MRI and fusion biopsy. Advantages and disadvantages of each ablation technique should be taken into consideration as well as the suitability of certain regions in the gland. Ideally, an individualized "à la carte" selection of various procedures should be offered. FT is well suited for patients with highly localized cancers at intermediate risk if standard therapies or AS is not possible or has been refused.