Partial ablation versus radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: the PART feasibility RCT.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men in the UK. Patients with intermediate-risk, clinically localised disease are offered radical treatments such as surgery or radiotherapy, which can result in severe side effects. A number of alternative partial ablation (PA) technologies that may reduce treatment burden are available; however the comparative effectiveness of these techniques has never been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of a RCT of PA using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) versus radical prostatectomy (RP) for intermediate-risk PCa and to test and optimise methods of data capture. DESIGN: We carried out a prospective, multicentre, open-label feasibility study to inform the design and conduct of a future RCT, involving a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to understand barriers to participation. SETTING: Five NHS hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: Men with unilateral, intermediate-risk, clinically localised PCa. INTERVENTIONS: Radical prostatectomy compared with HIFU. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The randomisation of 80 men. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Findings of the QRI and assessment of data capture methods. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients consented to participate by 31 March 2017 and 82 men were randomised by 4 May 2017 (41 men to the RP arm and 41 to the HIFU arm). The QRI was conducted in two iterative phases: phase I identified a number of barriers to recruitment, including organisational challenges, lack of recruiter equipoise and difficulties communicating with patients about the study, and phase II comprised the development and delivery of tailored strategies to optimise recruitment, including group training, individual feedback and 'tips' documents. At the time of data extraction, on 10 October 2017, treatment data were available for 71 patients. Patient characteristics were similar at baseline and the rate of return of all clinical case report forms (CRFs) was 95%; the return rate of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) questionnaire pack was 90.5%. Centres with specific long-standing expertise in offering HIFU as a routine NHS treatment option had lower recruitment rates (Basingstoke and Southampton) - with University College Hospital failing to enrol any participants - than centres offering HIFU in the trial context only. CONCLUSIONS: Randomisation of men to a RCT comparing PA with radical treatments of the prostate is feasible. The QRI provided insights into the complexities of recruiting to this surgical trial and has highlighted a number of key lessons that are likely to be important if the study progresses to a main trial. A full RCT comparing clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and quality-of-life outcomes between radical treatments and PA is now warranted. FUTURE WORK: Men recruited to the feasibility study will be followed up for 36 months in accordance with the protocol. We will design a full RCT, taking into account the lessons learnt from this study. CRFs will be streamlined, and the length and frequency of PROMs and resource use diaries will be reviewed to reduce the burden on patients and research nurses and to optimise data completeness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99760303. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Overcoming difficulties with equipoise to enable recruitment to a randomised controlled trial of partial ablation vs radical prostatectomy for unilateral localised prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how clinicians conceptualised equipoise in the PART (Partial prostate Ablation vs Radical prosTatectomy in intermediate-risk unilateral clinically localised prostate cancer) feasibility study and how this affected recruitment. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: PART included a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to optimise recruitment. Phase I aimed to understand recruitment, and included: scrutinising recruitment data, interviewing the trial management group and recruiters (n = 13), and audio-recording recruitment consultations (n = 64). Data were analysed using qualitative content and thematic analysis methods. In Phase II, strategies to improve recruitment were developed and delivered. RESULTS: Initially many recruiters found it difficult to maintain a position of equipoise and held preconceptions about which treatment was best for particular patients. They did not feel comfortable about approaching all eligible patients, and when the study was discussed, biases were conveyed through the use of terminology, poorly balanced information, and direct treatment recommendations. Individual and group feedback led to presentations to patients becoming clearer and enabled recruiters to reconsider their sense of equipoise. Although the precise impact of the QRI alone cannot be determined, recruitment increased (from a mean [range] of 1.4 [0-4] to 4.5 [0-12] patients/month) and the feasibility study reached its recruitment target. CONCLUSION: Although clinicians find it challenging to recruit patients to a trial comparing different contemporary treatments for prostate cancer, training and support can enable recruiters to become more comfortable with conveying equipoise and providing clearer information to patients.

Laparoscopic high-intensity focused ultrasound for renal tumours: a proof of concept study.

UNLABELLED: Study Type--Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Renal cancer is increasingly diagnosed when tumours are small and asymptomatic, during routine abdominal imaging. Whilst surgery is an effective and potentially curative option, it carries a significant risk of complications. Recent work suggests that thermally ablative therapies (RFA, cryotherapy, HIFU) may be suitable minimally invasive treatment options in selected patients. The success of extracorporeal HIFU has been limited by the abdominal wall and rib-cage limiting energy delivery. For this study, a purpose-built laparoscopic HIFU probe was designed to allow direct application of the transducer to the tumour surface, thus facilitating tumour destruction. Successful and accurate tumour destruction was demonstrated, paving the way for further clinical trials, subject to device modifications. OBJECTIVE: • To test and establish clinical proof of concept for a laparoscopic high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) device that facilitates delivery of ultrasound by direct application of a probe to the tumour surface. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Twelve patients with renal tumours were treated with laparoscopic HIFU using a newly designed probe inserted via an 18-mm laparoscopic port. • HIFU treatment was targeted at a pre-defined proportion of the tumour and immediate laparoscopic partial or radical nephrectomy was then performed. RESULTS: • No tumour ablation was seen in the first five patients which made modifications in the treatment protocol necessary. After this, definite histological evidence of ablation was seen in the remaining seven patients. • The ablated zones were within the targeted area in all patients and no intra-lesional skipping was seen. • Subcapsular skipping was seen at the probe-tumour interface in two patients with viable tumour cells seen at microscopy. • One patient did not undergo surgical extirpation; subsequent biopsy revealed no viable tumour cells. • There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications directly related to HIFU therapy and patients have reached a mean (range) follow-up of 15 (8-24) months with no evidence of metastatic disease or late complications. CONCLUSIONS: • Tumour ablation with laparoscopic HIFU is feasible. • Homogenous ablation can be achieved with no vital tissue within the targeted zone. • The technique is associated with low morbidity and may have a role in the definitive management of small tumours.

Visually directed high-intensity focused ultrasound for organ-confined prostate cancer: A proposed standard for the conduct of therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a standard for the conduct of visually directed transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and to offer a formal description of the changes observed on B-mode ultrasonography (US) during this procedure. We describe our early experience of using two different treatment methods; algorithm-based HIFU and visually directed HIFU for the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November 2004 and October 2005, 34 men were treated using the Sonablate-500 (Focus Surgery, Indianapolis, IN, USA) as primary therapy for T1 or T2 prostate cancer. None had had previous hormone therapy and all had > or = 3-month PSA nadirs recorded at the follow-up. Nine men were treated using an algorithm-based protocol (group 1) and 25 using visually directed therapy (group 2). The conduct of visually directed treatment was described and changes seen using B-mode US were categorized using three 'Uchida' grades. RESULTS The mean PSA nadir achieved in group 2 was 0.15 ng/mL, vs 1.51 ng/mL in group 1 (P < 0.005). In group 2, 21 of 25 men achieved PSA nadirs of < or = 0.2 ng/mL 3 months after treatment. Seven men achieved undetectable PSA values. The occurrence rate of treatment-related toxicity was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Visually directed, transrectal HIFU enables clinically important and statistically significantly lower PSA nadirs to be achieved than algorithm-based HIFU. This is the first reported experience of visually directed HIFU for the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. We think that this is the first attempt to standardize the conduct of therapy; such standardization facilitates teaching it, and makes it possible to derive quality standards. The standardization of the conduct of therapy is a key step in the process of health technology assessment.