[Active surveillance in prostate cancer]

[On the practice of therapy decision in locally limited prostate cancer: surgery vs. radiation-who benefits? : Allocation and results of a monocentric, cumulative long-term study]

AIM

The goal of this two-armed observational study was to map the clinical therapy effectiveness of radical prostatovesiculectomy (RPVE) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in locally limited prostate cancer (PCA) in direct comparison over 20 years under clinical conditions. Retrospectively, the various variables and predictors for the individual therapy decision were identified, and the preference was to compared with studies on survival and recurrence characteristics. The presentation of toxicity was not the focus of this work.

METHODOLOGY

In all, 743 patients from a single center were enrolled according to biopsy/staging chronologically in the sequence of the initial consultation after clarification and informed consent: 494 patients were in the RPVE arm and 249 patients in the EBRT arm. We used retrospective data analysis with univariate and multivariate comparisons in the alternative therapy arms. Multivariate logical regression models were developed to objectify the allocation process. Univariate processing of survival analyses, the comparison of tumor- and comorbidity-specific mortality rates was co-founded.

RESULTS

Predictive variables for RPVE vs. EBRT therapy decision are significantly age, Gleason score, D'Amico index, Charlson index, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and prostate volume. There was no significance level for the biopsy score. The age gap was in the median 67 (RPVE) and 73 (EBRT) years. Overall survival (n = 734, 20 years, all risks) in the RPVE arm was 56.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45.1-67.0%) and in the EBRT arm 19.2% (95%CI 9.2-31.8%). Comorbid risk was highly significantly (p < 0.0001) different (27.1% [95%CI 18.0-36.1%] in the RPVE arm, and 60.4% [95%CI 47.3-73.5%] in the EBRT arm). The risk of tumor-specific death at 16.2% (95%CI 8.1-24.4%) after RPVE and 20.5% (95%CI 11.7-29.3%) after EBRT was not significantly different (p = 0.2122, overlapping 95%CI). After stratification, a clear advantage can be demonstrated for the high-risk tumors after allocation to the RPVE arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of the predictive variables of the PCA further complicates the individual therapy decision. According to our data, the higher D'Amico score, the rather low Charlson index, a high Gleason score and a higher organ volume speak for a valid therapy for RPVE.

Interventional therapy in malignant conditions of the prostate

Interventional therapies are emerging modalities for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Their aim is to reduce the morbidity associated with radical therapies (rT) by minimizing damage to non-cancerous tissue, with priority given to sparing key structures such as the neurovascular bundles, external sphincter, bladder neck, and rectum, while maintaining local cancer control. Interventional ablative technologies deliver energy in different ways to destroy cancer cells. The most widely investigated techniques are brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, cryotherapy, and high-intensity focused ultrasound. Although functional outcomes of focal therapies have been encouraging, with generally low rates of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, robust medium- and long-term oncological outcomes are not available for all techniques. To date, major controversies in focal therapy concern appropriate patient selection, efficacy of focal therapies, as well as treatment paradigms based on the dominant index lesion hypothesis. This review articles discusses the current status of interventional therapies and the oncological and functional outcomes.