1
|
Campbell SP, Deivasigamani S, Arcot R, Adams ES, Orabi H, Elshafei A, Tan WP, Davis L, Wu Y, Chang A, Jones JS, Polascik TJ. Salvage Cryoablation for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Primary External Beam Radiotherapy or Primary Cryotherapy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of Mid-term Oncologic and Functional Outcomes. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:555-562. [PMID: 37438234 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2023.06.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Revised: 05/29/2023] [Accepted: 06/25/2023] [Indexed: 07/14/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Local prostate cancer recurrence following radiotherapy (XRT) or cryoablation (CRYO) may be addressed with salvage cryotherapy (SCT), although little is known about how the primary treatment modality affects SCT results. Oncologic and functional outcomes of patients who underwent SCT after primary XRT (XRT-SCT) or cryoablation (CRYO-SCT) were studied. METHODS Data was collected using the Duke Prostate Cancer database and the Cryo On-Line Data (COLD) registry. The primary outcome was biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS). Urinary incontinence, rectourethral fistula, and erectile dysfunction were secondary outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier log-rank test and univariable/multivariable Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models were utilized to evaluate BPFS between groups. RESULTS 419 XRT-SCT and 63 CRYO-SCT patients met inclusion criteria, that was reduced to 63 patients in each cohort after propensity matching. There was no difference in BPFS at 2 and 5 years both before (P = .5 and P = .7) and after matching (P = .6 and P = .3). On multivariable CPH, BPFS was comparable between treatment groups (CRYO-SCT, HR=1.1, [0.2-2.2]). On the same analysis, BPFS was lower in D'Amico high-risk (HR 3.2, P < .01) and intermediate-risk (HR 1.95, P < .05) categories compared to low-risk. There was no significant difference in functional outcomes between cohorts. CONCLUSION Following primary cryotherapy, salvage cryoablation provides comparable intermediate oncological outcomes and functional outcomes compared to primary radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott P Campbell
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
| | - Sriram Deivasigamani
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | - Rohith Arcot
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Oschner Medical Center, Jefferson, LA
| | - Eric S Adams
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | - Hazem Orabi
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Urology Department, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt
| | - Ahmed Elshafei
- Department of Urology, University of Florida Health, Jacksonville, FL
| | - Wei Phin Tan
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Department of Urology, New York University Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Leah Davis
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | - Yuan Wu
- Duke Cancer Institute, Durham NC
| | - Andrew Chang
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Moffit Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | | | - Thomas J Polascik
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham NC
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
French AFU Cancer Committee Guidelines - Update 2022-2024: prostate cancer - Diagnosis and management of localised disease. Prog Urol 2022; 32:1275-1372. [DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2022.07.148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
3
|
Recommandations françaises du Comité de cancérologie de l’AFU – actualisation 2020–2022 : cancer de la prostate. Prog Urol 2020; 30:S136-S251. [DOI: 10.1016/s1166-7087(20)30752-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
4
|
Gaullier M, Tricard T, Garnon J, Cazzato RL, Munier P, De Marini P, Werle P, Lindner V, Gangi A, Lang H. [Percutaneous MR-guided prostate cancer cryoablation: Predictive factors and oncologic outcomes]. Prog Urol 2019; 30:12-18. [PMID: 31837926 DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2019.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2019] [Revised: 10/10/2019] [Accepted: 10/24/2019] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the pejorative predictive factors on oncologic outcomes of percutaneous MR-guided whole gland prostate cancer cryoablation (CA). METHODS Medical records of patients treated from 2009 to 2012, to assess medium-term oncologic outcomes, were reviewed. Prostate biopsies were performed in local recurrence suspicion (biochemical failure, MR follow-up failure). RESULTS Among 18 patients, mean age of 72.6 (61-78), 2 (11 %) and 7 (38.9 %) biological and reported biopsy-proven local recurrence respectively with our initial technic of CA. Mean follow-up and recurrence were 56.3 (±21.7) and 20.7 (±13.9) months respectively. A previous treatment of prostate cancer (P=0.5), pre-treatment PSA (P=0.2), pre-treatment Gleason/ISUP score (P=0.4), nadir PSA post-CA (P=0.22) were not associated with recurrence. Bilateral positive cores appears as a pejorative predictive factor (P=0.04). However mean pre-treatment positive cores percentage, 25 (±16.5) in responding patients versus 40.7 (±25.2) in case of recurrence, and maximum percentage of cancer extent in each positive core, 10.6 (±9.3) in responding patients versus 18.7 (±16.5) in case of recurrence, seemed associated with local recurrence after prostate CA but our analysis wasn't able to find a difference (P=0.09 and P=0.3 respectively) due to a lack of power. CONCLUSION Bilateral positive cores appears as a pejorative predictive factor. In our experience, important tumor volume seem to be a pejorative predictive factor for oncologic outcomes after PCA whereas treatment, PSA, Gleason/ISUP score, nadir PSA are not. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Gaullier
- Service de chirurgie urologique, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France.
| | - T Tricard
- Service de chirurgie urologique, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - J Garnon
- Service d'imagerie interventionnelle, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - R-L Cazzato
- Service d'imagerie interventionnelle, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - P Munier
- Service de chirurgie urologique, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - P De Marini
- Service d'imagerie interventionnelle, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - P Werle
- Service de chirurgie urologique, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - V Lindner
- Service d'anatomopathologie, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - A Gangi
- Service d'imagerie interventionnelle, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| | - H Lang
- Service de chirurgie urologique, nouvel hopital civil, hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rozet F, Hennequin C, Beauval JB, Beuzeboc P, Cormier L, Fromont-Hankard G, Mongiat-Artus P, Ploussard G, Mathieu R, Brureau L, Ouzzane A, Azria D, Brenot-Rossi I, Cancel-Tassin G, Cussenot O, Rebillard X, Lebret T, Soulié M, Penna RR, Méjean A. RETRACTED: Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l’AFU – Actualisation 2018–2020 : cancer de la prostate French ccAFU guidelines – Update 2018–2020: Prostate cancer. Prog Urol 2018; 28:S79-S130. [PMID: 30392712 DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2018.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2018] [Accepted: 08/14/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy).
Cet article est retiré de la publication à la demande des auteurs car ils ont apporté des modifications significatives sur des points scientifiques après la publication de la première version des recommandations.
Le nouvel article est disponible à cette adresse: DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007.
C’est cette nouvelle version qui doit être utilisée pour citer l’article.
This article has been retracted at the request of the authors, as it is not based on the definitive version of the text because some scientific data has been corrected since the first issue was published.
The replacement has been published at the DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007.
That newer version of the text should be used when citing the article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Rozet
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, université René-Descartes, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75674, Paris, France.
| | - C Hennequin
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service de radiothérapie, Saint-Louis Hospital, AP-HP, 75010, Paris, France
| | - J-B Beauval
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, oncologie médicale, institut universitaire du cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, CHU Rangueil, 31100, Toulouse, France
| | - P Beuzeboc
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital Foch, 92150, Suresnes, France
| | - L Cormier
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, CHU François-Mitterrand, 21000, Dijon, France
| | - G Fromont-Hankard
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; CHU de Tours, 2, boulevard Tonnellé, 37000, Tours, France
| | - P Mongiat-Artus
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefaux, Paris cedex 10, France
| | - G Ploussard
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, clinique La Croix du Sud-Saint-Jean Languedoc, institut universitaire du cancer, 31100, Toulouse, France
| | - R Mathieu
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital de Rennes, 2, rue Henri-le-Guilloux, 35033, Rennes cedex 9, France
| | - L Brureau
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Inserm, U1085, IRSET, 97145 Pointe-à-Pitre, Guadeloupe
| | - A Ouzzane
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital Claude-Huriez, CHRU de Lille, rue Michel-Polonovski, 59000, Lille, France
| | - D Azria
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Inserm U1194, ICM, université de Montpellier, 34298, Montpellier, France
| | - I Brenot-Rossi
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Institut Paoli-Calmettes, 232, boulevard de Sainte-Marguerite, 13009, Marseille, France
| | - G Cancel-Tassin
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; GRC no 5 ONCOTYPE-URO, institut universitaire de cancérologie, Sorbonne université, 75020, Paris, France
| | - O Cussenot
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital Tenon, AP-HP, Sorbonne université, 75020, Paris, France
| | - X Rebillard
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, clinique mutualiste Beau-Soleil, 119, avenue de Lodève, 34070, Montpellier, France
| | - T Lebret
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital Foch, 92150, Suresnes, France
| | - M Soulié
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Centre hospitalier universitaire Rangueil, 31059, Toulouse, France
| | - R Renard Penna
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; GRC no 5 ONCOTYPE-URO, institut universitaire de cancérologie, Sorbonne université, 75020, Paris, France; Service de radiologie, hôpital Tenon, AP-HP, 75020, Paris, France
| | - A Méjean
- Comité de cancérologie de l'Association française d'urologie, groupe prostate, maison de l'urologie, 11, rue Viète, 75017, Paris, France; Service d'urologie, hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, université Paris Descartes, Assistance publique des hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 75015, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rozet F, Hennequin C, Beauval JB, Beuzeboc P, Cormier L, Fromont-Hankard G, Mongiat-Artus P, Ploussard G, Mathieu R, Brureau L, Ouzzane A, Azria D, Brenot-Rossi I, Cancel-Tassin G, Cussenot O, Rebillard X, Lebret T, Soulié M, Renard Penna R, Méjean A. Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l’AFU – Actualisation 2018–2020 : cancer de la prostate. Prog Urol 2018; 28 Suppl 1:R81-R132. [DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2018] [Accepted: 08/14/2018] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
|
7
|
Chen S, Rao H, Liu J, Geng Q, Guo J, Kong P, Li S, Liu X, Sun X, Zhan Y, Xu D. Lymph nodes ratio based nomogram predicts survival of resectable gastric cancer regardless of the number of examined lymph nodes. Oncotarget 2018; 8:45585-45596. [PMID: 28489596 PMCID: PMC5542210 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.17276] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2017] [Accepted: 03/27/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
To develop a nomogram to predict the prognosis of gastric cancer patients on the basis of metastatic lymph nodes ratio (mLNR), especially in the patients with total number of examined lymph nodes (TLN) less than 15. The nomogram was constructed based on a retrospective database that included 2,205 patients underwent curative resection in Cancer Center, Sun Yat-sen University (SYSUCC). Resectable gastric cancer (RGC) patients underwent curative resection before December 31, 2008 were assigned as the training set (n=1,470) and those between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2012 were selected as the internal validation set (n=735). Additional external validations were also performed separately by an independent data set (n=602) from Jiangxi Provincial Cancer Hospital (JXCH) in Jiangxi, China and a data set (n=3,317) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The Independent risk factors were identified by Multivariate Cox Regression. In the SYSUCC set, TNM (Tumor-node-metastasis) and TRM-based (Tumor-Positive Nodes Ratio-Metastasis) nomograms were constructed respectively. The TNM-based nomogram showed better discrimination than the AJCC-TNM staging system (C-index: 0.73 versus 0.69, p<0.01). When the mLNR was included in the nomogram, the C-index increased to 0.76. Furthermore, the C-index in the TRM-based nomogram was similar between TLN ≥16 (C-index: 0.77) and TLN ≤15 (C-index: 0.75). The discrimination was further ascertained by internal and external validations. We developed and validated a novel TRM-based nomogram that provided more accurate prediction of survival for gastric cancer patients who underwent curative resection, regardless of the number of examined lymph nodes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shangxiang Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Huamin Rao
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, Nanchang, China
| | - Jianjun Liu
- Department of Breast Surgery, Anhui Provincial Cancer Hospital, West branch of Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, China
| | - Qirong Geng
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Hematology Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jing Guo
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Pengfei Kong
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Shun Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xuechao Liu
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiaowei Sun
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Youqing Zhan
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Dazhi Xu
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China.,Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Renard-Penna R, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Cosset JM, de Vergie S, Sapetti J, Ingels A, Gangi A, Lang H, Cathelineau X. [Evaluation and results of ablative therapies in prostate cancer]. Prog Urol 2017; 27:887-908. [PMID: 28939336 DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2017.08.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2017] [Accepted: 08/04/2017] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To perform a state of the art about methods of evaluation and present results in ablative therapies for localized prostate cancer. METHODS A review of the scientific literature was performed in Medline database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) and Embase (http://www.embase.com) using different associations of keywords. Publications obtained were selected based on methodology, language and relevance. After selection, 102 articles were analysed. RESULTS Analyse the results of ablative therapies is presently difficult considering the heterogeneity of indications, techniques and follow-up. However, results from the most recent and homogeneous studies are encouraging. Oncologically, postoperative biopsies (the most important criteria) are negative (without any tumor cells in the treated area) in 75 to 95%. Functionally, urinary and sexual pre-operative status is spared (or recovered early) in more than 90% of the patients treated. More and more studies underline also the correlation between the results and the technique used considering the volume of the gland and, moreover, the "index lesion" localization. CONCLUSION The post-treatment pathological evaluation by biopsies (targeted with MRI or, perhaps in a near future, with innovative ultrasonography) is the corner stone of oncological evaluation of ablative therapies. Ongoing trials will allow to standardize the follow-up and determine the best indication and the best techniques in order to optimize oncological and functional results for each patient treated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Renard-Penna
- Service d'imagerie, hôpitaux Tenon-Pitié Salpêtrière, AP-HP, UPMC université Paris VI, 75013 Paris, France
| | - R Sanchez-Salas
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France
| | - E Barret
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France
| | - J M Cosset
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France
| | - S de Vergie
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France
| | - J Sapetti
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France
| | - A Ingels
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France
| | - A Gangi
- Service de radiologie interventionnelle, CHU de Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France
| | - H Lang
- Service de chirurgie urologique, CHU de Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France
| | - X Cathelineau
- Département d'urologie, institut mutualiste Montsouris, 75014 Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The purpose of the guidelines national committee CCAFU was to propose updated french guidelines for localized and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS A Medline search was achieved between 2013 and 2016, as regards diagnosis, options of treatment and follow-up of PCa, to evaluate different references with levels of evidence. RESULTS Epidemiology, classification, staging systems, diagnostic evaluation are reported. Disease management options are detailed. Recommandations are reported according to the different clinical situations. Active surveillance is a major option in low risk PCa. Radical prostatectomy remains a standard of care of localized PCa. The three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the technical standard. A dose of > 74Gy is recommended. Moderate hypofractionation provides short-term biochemical control comparable to conventional fractionation. In case of intermediate risk PCa, radiotherapy can be combined with short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In case of high risk disease, long-term ADT remains the standard of care. ADT is the backbone therapy of metastatic disease. In men with metastases at first presentation, upfront chemotherapy combined with ADT should be considered as a new standard. In case of metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC), new hormonal treatments and chemotherapy provide a better control of tumor progression and increase survival. CONCLUSIONS These updated french guidelines will contribute to increase the level of urological care for the diagnosis and treatment for prostate cancer. © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
Collapse
|
10
|
Cryosurgery would be An Effective Option for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review. Sci Rep 2016; 6:27490. [PMID: 27271239 PMCID: PMC4895342 DOI: 10.1038/srep27490] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2015] [Accepted: 05/17/2016] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Cryosurgery (CS) has been used on patients with clinically localized PCa for more than 10 years. However, clinical studies evaluating its effectiveness and safety have reported conflicting results. This systematic assessment was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence regarding the potential benefits and safety of CS compared with those of radiotherapy (RT) and radical prostatectomy (RP), respectively. All controlled trials comparing CS with RT or RP and single-arm studies reporting results of CS therapy were identified through comprehensive searches of PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase. Ten publications from seven trials, with totally 1252 patients, were included in the meta-analysis, which revealed no significant differences in comparisons of CS vs RT and CS vs RP for overall survival and disease specific survival. However, a significantly lower disease-free survival could be observed for CS than RP. Moreover, a systematic review of literature focusing on comparative data of databases and materials of single-arm trials revealed satisfactory survival results in both primary and salvage CS. Our results showed that cryosurgery would be a relatively effective method for clinically localized prostate cancer with survival results comparable to radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy. However, the large percentage of complications caused by cryosurgery should be carefully monitored.
Collapse
|