Focal therapy for prostate cancer: what is really needed to move from investigational to valid therapeutic alternative?-a narrative review.

Background and Objective: The most widely accepted therapeutic alternatives for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer (PCa) are mainly represented by whole gland therapies such as surgery or radiotherapy. However, these treatments can carry in some cases profound functional side effects. With the improvement of risk assessment tools and imaging modalities, in particular with the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate, a fine topographic characterisation of PCa lesions within the prostatic gland is now possible. This has allowed the development of gland-sparing therapies such as focal therapy (FT) as a means to provide an even more tailored approach in order to safely reduce, where feasible, the harms carried by whole gland therapies. Unfortunately, adoption of FT has been considered so far investigational due to some unsolved issues that currently hamper the use of FT as a valid alternative. Here, we aim to identify the main aspects needed to move FT forward from investigational to a valid therapeutic alternative for clinically localized PCa. Methods: The literature discussing the evolution of focal therapy in the years and its current landscape was broadly searched to identify the factors hindering FT adoption and possible solutions. Key Content and Findings: There are three broad areas hindering FT as a valid therapeutic alternative: (I) Correct patient selection; (II) harmonising the different FT technologies; (III) the lack of oncological outcomes. Conclusions: By targeting the three aforementioned weaknesses of FT, greater adoption is expected, finally making FT a valid therapeutic alternative, potentially reshaping prostate cancer treatment and functional outcomes.

Assessing in-hospital morbidity after urethroplasty using the European Association of Urology Quality Criteria for standardized reporting.

PURPOSE: To conduct a rigorous assessment of in-hospital morbidity after urethroplasty according with the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for complication reporting. METHODS: We retrospectively (2015-2019) identified 469 consecutive patients receiving urethroplasty (e.g. bulbar urethroplasty with grafts, penile urethroplasty with/without grafts/flaps, Johanson, de novo or revision perineostomy, end-to-end anastomosis, meatoplasty and/or meatotomy) at our tertiary care institution. Complications were graded with Clavien-Dindo score and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). Complications were classified in: bleeding no gastrointestinal, cardiac, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, infectious, neurological, oral, wound, miscellaneous, and pulmonary. Logistic regression tested for predictors of in-hospital complications and prolonged hospitalization (> 75th percentile). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression investigated the effect of complications on failure after urethroplasty. RESULTS: Overall, 161 (34.3%) patients experienced at least one complication. Of those, 47 (10%) experienced two or more complications and 59 (12.6%) experienced at least one Clavien-Dindo ≥ II complication. Only two patients had Clavien-Dindo III complications. Infectious was the most frequent complication, and de novo or revision perineostomy was associated with the highest rate of complications. The occurrence of any complications, as well as complication with Clavien-Dindo ≥ II were associated with prolonged hospitalizations, but not with higher rates of post-urethroplasty failure. CONCLUSIONS: Complications after urethroplasty were common events, but rarely with severe sequelae. Infectious were the most common complications and perineostomy was the type of urethroplasty with the highest rate of complications. The application of the EAU recommendations allowed the identifications of a higher number of complications after urethroplasty if compared with previous reports based on unsupervised chart review.

Association Between Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate and Oncological Outcomes after Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: The diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis has been extensively explored. Little is known about the prognostic value of mpMRI suspicion scores and other quantitative mpMRI information. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the current literature assessing the relationship between pretreatment mpMRI and oncological outcomes after primary treatment for PCa to assess the role of mpMRI as a prognostic tool. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A computerized bibliographic search of MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library CENTRAL databases was performed for all studies assessing the relationship between mpMRI and oncological outcomes after primary treatment for PCa. The review protocol is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020209899). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of six studies were included. Reliable evidence is still limited in this field. The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score was an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in the majority of the studies included. The tumor volume at mpMRI was not significantly associated with BCR after RP for PCa. Data on disease progression and PCa-specific mortality are limited. Heterogeneity among the studies was substantial. CONCLUSIONS: The review shows that PI-RADS scores provide information on the future likelihood of cancer recurrence or progression, at least for men undergoing RP. We are of the view that this information should be taken into account to identify men at higher risk of unfavorable outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: A higher Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score for magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate seems to be positively associated with oncological failure in prostate cancer and should be incorporated into future risk models.