Multicenter transperineal MRI-TRUS fusion guided outpatient clinic prostate biopsies under local anesthesia.

INTRODUCTION: Transperineal Prostate biopsies (TPBx) are usually performed under general anesthesia without image fusion. This study aimed to evaluate prostate cancer (Pca) detection rates (CDR), pain, and adverse events using a novel, free-hand TPBx technique, based on elastic fusion of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) under local anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included all consecutive patients scheduled for a TPBx. All had clinical suspicion of Pca, active surveillance scheduled for a re-biopsy, or suspicion of local recurrence after previous treatment. Bi-parametric or multiparametric MRI was performed in all patients and classified as positive in the case of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) suspicion ≥3. At least 1 targeted TPBx was realized from each PIRADS ≥3 index lesion. Six to 12 systematic random TPBx were done in patients with negative MRI. All biopsies were performed under local anesthesia in an outpatient clinic with MRI-TRUS fusion and the 3D navigation system Trinity Perine (Koelis, France). Any- and clinically significant Pca (csPca) (ISUP gr. ≥2) was recorded. Biopsy-related pain and adverse events were reported according to a visual analogue score of 0-10. RESULTS: In total, 377 patients were included for analyses. The mean age was 67 years (95% Confidence Interval: 66-68) and the median prostate-specific antigen was 7.2 ng/ml (interquartile range [IQR] 4.8-11.0). MRI was negative in 6% and positive in 94%. The median MRI prostate volume was 43 ml (IQR 31-60) and the median MRI index tumor volume was 0.9 ml (IQR 0.5-2.1). The median number of TPBx was 4 (IQR 3-4). The overall detection of any- and csPca was 64% and 52%, respectively. The overall CDR according to PIRADS 3, 4, and 5 was 30%, 70%, and 94%, respectively. In patients with negative MRI, any- and csPca was detected in 23% and 9%, respectively. The median visual analogue score score was 2 (IQR 1-3, range 0-7). Two patients (0.5%) developed postbiopsy infection, of which one developed urosepsis. Treatment requiring haematuria or urinary retention did not occur. CONCLUSION: Free-hand MRI/TRUS fusion-guided and systematic random TPBx in LA is a feasible, safe, and well-tolerated technique for diagnosing Pca.

Perioperative Changes and Progress in Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate with GreenLight XPS 180 W System: A Single Center Experience.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to evaluate progression of GreenLight-XPS 180 W photoselective vaporization of the prostate (GL-XPS) with respect to effectiveness, efficacy, and safety over time at a tertiary referral high volume center. METHODS: The retrospective study included 375 men who underwent GL-XPS for symptomatic benign prostate obstruction (BPO) between June 2010 and February 2015. Primary outcome measurements were operation time (OT; min) and effective laser time (LT; min of OT) analyzed with regard to prostatic volume (PV; mL) (group 1 <40 mL up to 4 >80 mL in 20 mL steps) and the year of surgery (2010-2015). RESULTS: The median age was 72 years (range 64-79), the median PV was 58 mL (range 33-98) and the median PV increased from 42 mL in 2012 to 80 mL in 2015. The OT and LT clearly correlated with the PV, being doubled for glands of median 95 mL compared to median 30 mL while the applied laser energy per LT likewise steadily increased. Overall, both OT and LT could be significantly reduced each year by 37% (OT; p < 0.05) and 36% (LT; p < 0.05) within 5 years. The hospital stay (days) and catheterization time (days) remained constant, without any changes over time. The overall complication rate (Clavien-Dindo >2) ranged from 36 to 15% between 2010 and 2015. The pre (median 22 + 4) and postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score-Quality of Life (median 5 + 1) showed a sufficient reduction in symptomatic BPO. CONCLUSION: GL-XPS is a safe and effective surgical method for symptomatic BPO. Our single center experience showed a significant improvement of both OT and effective LT within 5 years whilst maintaining stable low complication rate and high patient satisfaction.

Systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Current systemic treatment of targeted therapies, namely the vascular endothelial growth factor-antibody (VEGF-AB), VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, have improved progression-free survival and replaced non-specific immunotherapy with cytokines in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: A panel of experts convened to review currently available phase 3 data for mRCC treatment of approved agents, in addition to available EAU guideline data for a collaborative review as the plurality of substances offers different options of first-, second- and third-line treatment with potential sequencing. RESULTS: Sunitinib and pazopanib are approved treatments in first-line therapy for patients with favorable- or intermediate-risk clear cell RCC (ccRCC). Temsirolimus has proven benefit over interferon-alfa (IFN-α) in patients with non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC). In the second-line treatment TKIs or mTOR inhibitors are treatment choices. Therapy options after TKI failure consist of everolimus and axitinib. Available third-line options consist of everolimus and sorafenib. Recently, nivolumab, a programmed death-1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor, improved overall survival benefit compared to everolimus after failure of one or two VEGFR-targeted therapies, which is likely to become the first established checkpoint inhibitor in mRCC. Data for the sequencing of agents remain limited. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high level of evidence for first and second-line treatment in mRCC, data for third-line therapy are limited. Possible sequences include TKI-mTOR-TKI or TKI-TKI-mTOR with the upcoming checkpoint inhibitors in perspective, which might settle a new standard of care after previous TKI therapy.

Sequence therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: comparison of common targeted treatment options following failure of receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The best sequence of targeted therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has not been sufficiently defined. OBJECTIVE: To describe the efficacy and toxicity of sequential everolimus (EV) versus receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (rTKI) following failure of first rTKI treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective study of 108 patients receiving rTKI or EV after progression on rTKI therapy at two German academic centres. INTERVENTION: Sequence of systemic targeted treatment with sunitinib (n=85) or sorafenib (n=23) followed by EV (n=62) or another rTKI (n=46; sorafenib, n=35; sunitinib, n=11). MEASUREMENTS: We measured response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.0) and toxicity. Survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression) was conducted for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Main patient characteristics did not significantly differ by sequence of treatment groups (rTKI-rTKI vs rTKI-EV). Response rate following first rTKI failure was not significantly different between sequential therapies with a disease control rate of 51.6% (EV) and 43.5% (rTKI). The corresponding median PFS was 3.6 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-5.4) for EV and 4.0 mo (3.2-4.9) for rTKI treatment. The estimated OS was longer for the rTKI-EV group (43 mo; 95% CI, 33.9-52.1) than for the rTKI-rTKI group (29 mo; 95% CI, 18.6-39.5; p=0.03), but this difference lost statistical significance in multivariable-adjusted analyses. Intrinsic rTKI resistance was independently associated with inferior subsequent PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.79; 95% CI, 1.15-3.62; p=0.015) and OS (HR: 6.54; 95% CI, 3.01-14.20; p<0.001). Limitations are the retrospective design, limited numbers of cases, and residual confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: The sequence therapies rTKI-EV and rTKI-rTKI may be equally efficacious in terms of PFS and response rate, whereas a tendency towards superior survival was observed for the rTKI-EV sequence. These data, particularly the potential benefit of an early change of mode of action, need confirmation in randomised comparative trials.

Intrinsic resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors is associated with poor clinical outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Data on sequential therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and intrinsic resistance to receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (rTKI) treatment remains vague. METHODS: We retrospectively studied treatment characteristics and outcome of mRCC patients refractory to first rTKI therapy. RESULTS: Thirty-five mRCC patients (male, 18; female, 11) with primary resistance to first rTKI therapy (sunitinib, n = 28; sorafenib, n = 7) and a median treatment interval of 2.4 months (1 - 4.6) were identified. In 22 patients, progressive disease (PD) was determined by a new metastatic lesion. Of these, 16 patients received subsequent therapy with 12 patients remaining refractory and 4 patients achieving disease stabilization. In 13 patients continuous growth of existing metastatic lesions determined PD. Of these, 9 received sequential therapy with 6 achieving disease stabilization. Altogether, 25 patients were treated sequentially (rTKI: n = 15; mTOR-inhibitor: n = 10) and achieved a median PFS of 3.2 months (range, 1-16.6). Fifteen patients failed to respond to either line of therapy. Disease control was not associated with type of subsequent therapy. Median OS was 14.9 months (CI: 5.5-24.4). CONCLUSION: Intrinsic resistance to rTKI is associated with a low chance of response to sequential therapy and a poor prognosis in mRCC patients.