Focal brachytherapy for selected low-risk prostate cancers: a pilot study

Iodine-125 low-dose rate prostate brachytherapy

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy are the most common radical treatments for localized prostate cancer, and brachytherapy (BT) also plays a role in this field. Iodine-125 (I-125) low-dose rate (LDR) prostate BT is an established treatment. However, it remains controversial. Specifically, there are a variety of issues, such as indications for combined treatment with external beam radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy, prostate-specific antigen follow-up, the significance of postimplant biopsy, the usefulness of salvage BT and focal therapy, reduction of toxicities, and bladder cancer after BT. In this review, we summarize the recent developments in I-125 LDR BT.

169Yb-based high dose rate intensity modulated brachytherapy for focal treatment of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

This study compares conventional 192Ir-based high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) with 169Yb-based HDR intensity modulated brachytherapy (IMBT) for focal prostate cancer treatment. Additionally, the study explores the potential to generate less invasive treatment plans with IMBT by reducing the number of catheters needed to achieve acceptable outcomes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective dosimetric study of ten prostate cancer patients initially treated with conventional 192Ir-based HDR-BT and 5-14 catheters was employed. RapidBrachyMCTPS, a Monte Carlo-based treatment planning system was used to calculate and optimize dose distributions. For 169Yb-based HDR IMBT, a custom 169Yb source combined with 0.8 mm thick platinum shields placed inside 6F catheters was used. Furthermore, dose distributions were investigated when iteratively removing catheters for less invasive treatments.

RESULTS

With IMBT, the urethra D10 and D0.1cc decreased on average by 15.89 and 15.65 percentage points (pp) and the rectum V75 and D2cc by 1.53 and 11.54 pp, respectively, compared to the conventional clinical plans. Similar trends were observed when the number of catheters decreased. On average, there was an observed increase in PTV V150 from 2.84 pp with IMBT when utilizing all catheters to 8.83 pp when four catheters were removed. PTV V200 increased from 0.42 to 2.96 pp on average. Hotspots in the body were however lower with IMBT compared to conventional clinical plans.

CONCLUSIONS

169Yb-based HDR IMBT for focal treatment of prostate cancer has the potential to successfully deliver clinically acceptable, less invasive treatment with reduced dose to organs at risk.

Oncological results and cancer control definition in focal therapy for Prostate Cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Focal therapy (FT) is a promising alternative to whole-gland treatments for Localized Prostate Cancer. Ten different FT modalities have been described in literature. However, FT is not yet recommended by the International Guidelines, due to the lack of robust data on Oncological Outcomes. The objective of our Narrative Review is to evaluate the oncological profile of the available FT modalities and to offer a comprehensive overview of the definitions of Cancer Control for FT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Literature search was performed on 21^st February 2023 using PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA). Articles reporting whole gland-treatments were excluded. All articles reporting oncological outcomes were included.

RESULTS

One-hundred-twenty-four studies, reporting data on more than 8000 patients treated with FT, were included. Overall, 40 papers were on High Intensity Focal Ultrasound (HIFU), 24 on Focal Cryotherapy, 13 on Irreversible Electroporation (IRE), 11 on Focal brachytherapy, 10 on Focal Laser Ablation (FLA), 8 on Photo-Dynamic Therapy (PDT), 3 on Microwave ablation, 3 on Robotic Partial Prostatectomy, 2 on bipolar Radio Frequency Ablation (bRFA), 1 on Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) and 9 comparative papers. Overall, the Biochemical Recurrence (BCR) rate ranged from 0% (Focal Brachytherapy) to 67.5% (HIFU); the Salvage treatment rate ranged from 1% (IRE) to 54% (HIFU) considering re-treatment with FT and from 0% (Focal Brachytherapy) to 66.7% considering standard Radical Treatments. There is no univocal definition of Cancer Control, however the "Phoenix criteria" for BCR were the most commonly used.

CONCLUSIONS

FT is a promising alternative treatment for localized prostate cancer in terms of Oncological Outcomes, however there is a wide heterogeneity in the definition of cancer control, the reporting of oncological outcomes and a lack of high-quality clinical trials. Solid comparative studies with standard treatments and an unambiguous consensus on how to describe Cancer Control in the field of Focal Therapy are needed.

Functional outcomes and safety of focal therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review on results and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

INTRODUCTION

Focal therapy (FT) is a promising alternative with curative intent for Low- to Intermediate-risk localized Prostate Cancer (PCa), claiming better functional outcomes and safety profile than standard whole-gland treatments. Ten different FT modalities have been described in the literature. The objective of our narrative review is to evaluate the safety profile and functional outcomes of these different modalities and the current most used tools of assessment for those outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Literature search was performed on 21st February 2023 using PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA). Articles reporting whole-gland treatments were excluded. All articles reporting functional outcomes were included.

RESULTS

One-hundred-seven studies, reporting data on 6933 patients, were included (26 on High Intensity Focal Ultrasound, 22 on Focal Cryotherapy, 14 on Irreversible Electroporation, 11 on Focal brachytherapy, 10 on Focal Laser Ablation, 8 on Photodynamic Therapy, 3 on Microwave ablation, 3 on Robotic Partial Prostatectomy, 2 on bipolar Radio Frequency Ablation, 1 on Prostatic Artery Embolization, and 7 studies comparing different FTs). Post-operative pad-free rate ranged between 92.3-100%. Greater heterogeneity exists considering the Change in Erectile Function, with Changing in Erectile function- rates ranging between 0-94.4% (Cryotherapy). The most used Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) were the International Prostate Symptom Score and the International Index of Erectile Function for incontinence/urinary function and potency, respectively. The most common reported complications were hematuria, infections, and urethral strictures, with rates widely ranging among different treatments. The Clavien-Dindo Classification was the most used (40/88 papers) to describe adverse events.

CONCLUSION

FT is a promising treatment for localized PCa, achieving excellent results in terms of safety and functional outcomes. There is a wide heterogeneity in the definition of PROMS and time of collection between studies. High quality comparative studies with standard treatments are needed to reinforce these findings.

Is hemi-gland focal LDR brachytherapy as effective as whole-gland treatment for unilateral prostate cancer?

PURPOSE

The Hemi-Ablative Prostate Brachytherapy (HAPpy) trial evaluated hemi-gland (HG) low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR-PB) as a focal approach to control unilateral localized prostate cancer and reduce treatment-related toxicity at 2-years postimplant. Herewith we present further outcomes with a minimum of 5 years post-implant follow-up.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Outcomes of 30 HG implants and 362 whole-gland (WG) brachytherapy controls were monitored with IPSS, urinary Quality-of-Life (QoLU), GI component of EORTC-PR25 (QoLB), and IIEF-5 instruments, and PSA values. The median (range) follow-up for HG and WG cases was 72 (60-96) months and 84 (24-144) months respectively.

RESULTS

The IPSS was significantly reduced in HG relative to WG patients and trends indicating improved bowel QoL and erectile function were observed. The mean of change in PSA from baseline to last follow-up was -5.6 and -6.5 in HG and WG respectively (p = 0.1). The mean time to nadir was 4.2 and 4.8 years in HG and WG respectively (p = 0.06). Over time PSA in HG patients mirrored the sustained decline observed in WG cases but levels were higher by an average 0.5 ng/ml over WG controls (p < 0.001). Treatment failure occurred in 2 (6.7%) HG patients and in 20 (5.5%) WG cases. Five-year relapse-free survival was 97% in both groups (p = 0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

At 5 years postimplant HG LDR-PB was as effective as WG treatment for control of unilateral localized prostate cancer with moderate improvement in treatment-related symptoms. Importantly, PSA is a valuable marker to assess disease control in this form of focal therapy.

Prostate cancer brachytherapy: SFRO guidelines 2021

Prostate brachytherapy techniques are described, concerning both permanent seed implant and high dose rate brachytherapy. The following guidelines are presented: brachytherapy indications, implant procedure for permanent low dose rate implants and high dose rate with source projector, as well as dose and dose-constraints objectives, immediate postoperative management, post-treatment evaluation, and long-term follow-up.

Focal brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: 5.7-year clinical outcomes and a pair-matched study with radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To report experience with focal brachytherapy (FB) and compare its clinical outcomes with those of radical prostatectomy (RP) in localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

Fifty-one patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer underwent low-dose-rate FB. Survival rates free from biochemical failure (BF), additional treatment (AT) including re-FB, and whole-gland or systemic salvage therapy (ST) were calculated and oncological risk factors were investigated. Patient-reported outcomes on genitourinary function were also assessed. Using propensity scoring, 51 pair-matched RP patients were selected. Oncological control, urinary continence, and ejaculation status after FB and RP were compared.

RESULTS

During a median 5.7-year follow-up, BF, AT, and ST occurred in 12 (24%), 10 (20%), and 4 FB patients (8%), respectively. 6 of 10 AT patients were managed with re-FB alone. In the RP cohort, 3 patients (6%) underwent ST. 5-year BF-free survival rate after FB was 79%. Compared to 5-year ST-free survival rate of 94% after RP, ST-free and AT-free survival rates after FB were 93% (P = 0.813) and 87% (P = 0.049), respectively. Multivariate analyses of FB-treated patients showed that time to PSA nadir was negatively associated with BF and AT (hazard ratio 0.84 and 0.83, respectively, P <0.001 for each). The difference in oncological outcomes between low- and intermediate-risk categories was not significant. At 2 years after FB and RP, pad-free continence rates were 100% and 81%, respectively (P = 0.001). Ejaculation was preserved in 67% and 0% of patients who had been capable of ejaculation at baseline, respectively (P <0.001).

CONCLUSION

In low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer, FB-treated patients achieved superior genitourinary function compared to pair-matched RP patients. The need for ST was not substantially different between the 2 treatment cohorts. Over half of patients requiring AT could be managed by re-focal treatment rather than whole-gland ST. Early PSA nadir may predict poor oncological control after FB.

A systematic review of outcomes after thermal and nonthermal partial prostate ablation

We sought to compare oncologic and functional outcomes between thermal and nonthermal energy partial gland ablation (PGA) modalities. We conducted comprehensive, structured literature searches, and 39 papers, abstracts, and presentations met the inclusion criteria of pre-PGA magnetic resonance imaging, oncologic outcomes of at least 6 months, and systematic biopsies after PGA. Twenty-six studies used thermal ablation: high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, focal laser ablation, or radiofrequency ablation. In-field recurrence rates ranged from 0 to 36% for HIFU, 6 to 24% for cryotherapy, 4 to 50% for focal laser ablation, and 20 to 25% for radiofrequency ablation. Twelve studies used nonthermal technologies of focal brachytherapy, vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy, or irreversible electroporation. Focal brachytherapy had the lowest reported failure rate of 8%, vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy had >30% positive in-field biopsies, and irreversible electroporation had in-field recurrence rates of 12-35%. PGA was well tolerated, and nearly all patients returned to baseline urinary function 12 months later. Most modalities caused transient decreases in erectile function. Persistent erectile dysfunction was highest in patients who underwent HIFU. Although oncologic outcomes vary between treatment modalities, systematic review of existing data demonstrates that PGA is a safe treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer.

Focal low dose-rate brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk prostate cancer: preliminary experience at an Australian institution

Background

Focal treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a hybrid approach combining ablative treatment of the involved prostate gland and continued active surveillance (AS) of the unaffected gland. Low dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy can be used as a lesion-targeted focal therapy, however, further studies are required to support its use. The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetry, toxicity and oncological outcomes of men receiving lesion-targeted focal LDR brachytherapy for low to intermediate risk PCa.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 26 men with unifocal, low to intermediate grade PCa diagnosed on a combination of multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and targeted plus template transperineal (TP) biopsy, who received focal LDR brachytherapy at a single institution. Brachytherapy involved a single monotherapy implant using iodine-125 seeds to deliver a prescribed dose of 145 Gy to the index lesion.

Results

The mean focal planning target volume (F-PTV) as a percentage of the prostate volume was 24.5%. The percentage of the focal gross tumour volume (F-GTV) receiving 100% of the prescription dose was 100% for 12 patients and ≥98% for 18 patients. The median follow-up for toxicity and biochemical control outcomes was 23.1 [interquartile range (IQR) 19.1–31.3] and 24.2 (IQR 17.9–30.0) months, respectively. Grade 2 urinary and erectile toxicities were reported by 29.2% and 45.8% of patients, respectively, with resolution of urinary symptoms to baseline by last follow-up. There were no grade ≥3 urinary or erectile toxicities or grade ≥2 rectal toxicity. All 21 patients who underwent a repeat mp-MRI and TP biopsy at 12–24 months post-treatment were negative for clinically significant disease and 25 (96.2%) patients were free from biochemical failure (FFBF).

Conclusions

Focal LDR brachytherapy is associated with a favourable toxicity profile and a high rate of control of significant PCa at 12–18 months post-treatment. We have commenced the LIBERATE prospective registry in focal LDR brachytherapy based on the highly encouraging outcomes of this initial experience.

Transperineal prostate biopsy identifies locations of clinically significant prostate cancer in men considering focal therapy with PI‐RADS 3–5 regions of interest

Objectives

To determine the benefit of performing transperineal prostate mapping biopsy (TPMB) following multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to increase the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) with Gleason grade group (GG) ≥ 2 and their locations outside of the PI‐RADS v2 3–5 category lesions.

Methods

mpMRI was performed in 80 men prior TPMB from two institutions. The mpMRI was considered clinically significant (csMRI) if it contained one or more PI‐RADS 3–5 category lesion. mpMRI findings were compared against csPCa diagnosed by TPMB, performed between 16 November 2010, and 13 September 2019, for the entire gland, both lobes and to the right and left anterior and right and left posterior quadrants (RA, LA, RP and LP). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), accuracy and the area under curve (AUC) were determined. Thirteen men also underwent radical prostatectomy and had comparison of TPMB pathology to prostatectomy specimen grading.

Results

TPMB was positive in 60/80 (75%) of which 32 (53.3%) were csPCa. csPCa was present in the RA in 9 (11.3%), LA in 11 (13.8%), RP in 25 (31.3%) and LP in 27 (33.8%) and involved 1 quadrant in 7 (21.9%), 2 quadrants in 12 (37.5%), 3 quadrants in 11 (34.4%) and all 4 quadrants in 2 (6.3%) patients; 57/80 (71.3%) men had a mpMRIs with lesions designated as PI‐RADS 3 in 24 (30%), 4 in 25 (31.3%) and 5 in 8 (10%). A csMRI was present in the RA in 7 (8.8%), LA in 8 (10%), RP in 31 (38.8%) and in the LP in 29 (36.3%), which were limited to one quadrant in 39 (68.4%), 2 quadrants in 16 (28.1%), and 3 quadrants in 2 (3.5%). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were determined from the results of the TPMB and were for the entire gland 81.3%, 35.4%, 45.6% and 73.9%. There were 31 csMRIs involving the right posterior of the gland but only 25 csPCa by TPMB of which 12/31 (38.7%) were concordant for high grade disease. There were 29 men who have a csMRI in the left posterior quadrant, and 14 (48.3%) were concordant with csPCa from the TPMB.

Conclusions

MpMRI should be supplemented with TPMB to correctly identify the regions of the prostate that would require ablation in men considering focal therapy.

Detailing Sexual Outcomes After Focal Therapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Focal therapy has emerged as a promising option to treat well-selected men with localised prostate cancer while preserving healthy prostate tissue and key structures, such as the urethral sphincter and neurovascular bundles. However, how this tissue preservation may translate into improved outcomes, particularly into improved sexual outcomes, is still an active research field.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to summarise the existing evidence, in order to provide patients with updated data on what to expect after treatment and help identify gaps in current knowledge that may warrant future research.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was conducted on Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy was defined using the "litsearchr" function in R based on a preliminary "naïve" search using the following terms on Medline: (("focal therapy" OR "focal treatment") AND ("prostate cancer") AND ("sexual function" OR "erectile function")). A total of 42 studies, comprising 3117 patients treated and 2352 with available sexual outcomes, were included in the qualitative data synthesis and 26 in a random-effect meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The five-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) was the most frequently used questionnaire (30/42 studies), with completion rates ranging from 24% to 100% at 18-24 mo. A decrease was noted at 3 mo (IIEF-5 decrease estimate -3.70 [95% confidence interval -4.43, -2.96]), with improvements at 6 mo (-2.18 [-2.91, -1.46]) and 12 mo (-2.14 [-2.96, -1.32]). Studies in which patients had an altered baseline sexual function were more likely to report a significant and durable postoperative decrease in erectile function scores. The patient-reported outcome questionnaires used were not designed for a diverse population. Functional outcomes were not the primary endpoint and have not been reported consistently in most studies considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Focal therapy led to changes in erectile function in most cases under the significance threshold of the patient-reported outcome questionnaires used. However, patients should be counselled according to their baseline erectile function. More research is warranted to detail aspects other than erectile function, such as ejaculation or orgasm. The early postoperative period appears key to study sexual changes after focal therapy, while only a moderate decrease is expected at 12 mo.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the published literature detailing the sexual consequences of focal therapy for localised prostate cancer using patient-reported outcome questionnaires. Patients were likely to describe a significant decrease in their erectile function at 3 mo, with improvements noted at 6 and 12 mo. The results obtained may not be reproducible in a more diverse population, and further research is warranted to better study aspects other than erectile function, such as ejaculation or orgasm.

MRI-TRUS registration methodology for TRUS-guided HDR prostate brachytherapy

Purpose

High‐dose‐rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy is an established technique for whole‐gland treatment. For transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)‐guided HDR prostate brachytherapy, image fusion with a magnetic resonance image (MRI) can be performed to make use of its soft‐tissue contrast. The MIM treatment planning system has recently introduced image registration specifically for HDR prostate brachytherapy and has incorporated a Predictive Fusion workflow, which allows clinicians to attempt to compensate for differences in patient positioning between imaging modalities. In this study, we investigate the accuracy of the MIM algorithms for MRI‐TRUS fusion, including the Predictive Fusion workflow.

Materials and Methods

A radiation oncologist contoured the prostate gland on both TRUS and MRI. Four registration methodologies to fuse the MRI and the TRUS images were considered: rigid registration (RR), contour‐based (CB) deformable registration, Predictive Fusion followed by RR (pfRR), and Predictive Fusion followed by CB deformable registration (pfCB). Registrations were compared using the mean distance to agreement and the Dice similarity coefficient for the prostate as contoured on TRUS and the registered MRI prostate contour.

Results

Twenty patients treated with HDR prostate brachytherapy at our center were included in this retrospective evaluation. For the cohort, mean distance to agreement was 2.1 ± 0.8 mm, 0.60 ± 0.08 mm, 2.0 ± 0.5 mm, and 0.59 ± 0.06 mm for RR, CB, pfRR, and pfCB, respectively. Dice similarity coefficients were 0.80 ± 0.05, 0.93 ± 0.02, 0.81 ± 0.03, and 0.93 ± 0.01 for RR, CB, pfRR, and pfCB, respectively. The inclusion of the Predictive Fusion workflow did not significantly improve the quality of the registration.

Conclusions

The CB deformable registration algorithm in the MIM treatment planning system yielded the best geometric registration indices. MIM offers a commercial platform allowing for easier access and integration into clinical departments with the potential to play an integral role in future focal therapy applications for prostate cancer.

Medium-term oncological and functional outcomes of hemi-gland brachytherapy using iodine-125 seeds for intermediate-risk unilateral prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To examine medium-term outcomes of hemi-gland low-dose-rate brachytherapy as a primary treatment for intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We recruited intermediate-risk unilateral prostate cancer patients for a prospective trial of hemi-gland brachytherapy. Twenty-four patients underwent hemi-gland iodine-125 seed implantation with a prescribed dose of 160 Gy. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was measured regularly and follow-up biopsy was scheduled after 2-3 years of treatment. When clinically needed afterward, for-cause biopsy was performed to confirm pathology. Treatment failure (TF)-free survival, which was defined as freedom from radical or systemic therapy, metastases, and cancer-specific mortality, was assessed, as was biochemical failure (BF)-free survival. Urinary and sexual functions were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Median follow-up duration was 61 months. Twenty-two patients (92%) exhibited a declining trend or decreased value of PSA for 12 months or longer after the treatment. Follow-up biopsy in the initial triennium and for-cause biopsy in the subsequent triennium were performed in 16 and four patients, respectively, and cancer was found from the treated lobe in one patient (4% of the cohort) and significant cancer was found from untreated lobes in four patients (17%) in total. Secondary treatments were performed in six patients successfully. Five-year freedom from BF, TF, and metastasis was 71%, 90%, and 100%, respectively. The International Prostate Symptom Score significantly deteriorated at 3 months and reversed itself afterward. The International Index of Erectile Function 5 had no significant decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

Hemi-gland low-dose-rate brachytherapy provides favorable medium-term oncological outcomes with genito-urinary functional preservation for men with intermediate-risk unilateral prostate cancer.

Focal low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

To prospectively investigate the efficacy and feasibility of focal low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Material and methods

Between October 2014 and May 2019, nineteen low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients who presented with abnormality on both diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underwent focal LDR brachytherapy at our institution. Focal gross tumor volume (F-GTV) was delineated on transrectal ultrasound, based on abnormality seen on fused T2-weighted MRI. F-GTV was expanded by 5 mm, as a safety margin, to create focal clinical target volume (F-CTV). Prescribed dose to F-CTV was 145 Gy. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was determined using Phoenix criterion (prostate specific antigen nadir + 2 ng/ml). Pre- and post-implant dosimetry data were compared using non-parametric Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated using common terminology criteria for adverse events.

Results

Mean F-CTV D_90% was significantly lower in the post-implant evaluation than in intraoperative planning (p = 0.004). On post-implant dosimetry, the mean D_90% for F-GTV and mean V_100% for the entire prostate were 222 Gy and 35%, respectively. Median follow-up time for all patients was 31 months. BCR occurred in one patient after 23 months. Kaplan-Meier 2-year BCR-free rate was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.4-100%). No patients had grade 1 or greater gastrointestinal toxicity. Three patients who were taking α-blockers to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (present before brachytherapy), experienced no treatment-related genitourinary toxicities. Two patients suffered from temporary grade 2 urinary frequency. None of the remaining patients experienced grade 2 or higher genitourinary toxicity.

Conclusions

Focal LDR prostate brachytherapy appears acceptable for MRI-based index tumors, with a low cumulative incidence of BCR. Such brachytherapy might offer a feasible minimally invasive therapeutic option for localized prostate cancer.

Focal Brachytherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Midterm Outcomes

PURPOSE

Focal brachytherapy (F-BT) is a suitable technique for focal therapy in localized prostate cancer. It has the ability to adapt the seed implantation to the volume and location of the tumor. The aim of this study was to assess F-BT oncologic, functional, and toxicity midterm outcomes in men who underwent prostate cancer treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The study included 39 men with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with F-BT between 2010 and 2015. The dose prescription was 145 Gy. Failure was defined as the presence of any residual prostate cancer in the treated area. The primary and secondary endpoints were the F-BT oncologic and functional outcomes, respectively. A 2-sided P value < .05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 65 months (range, 43-104 months). After 24 months, 34 patients underwent control biopsies and 5 patients refused. The biopsies were negative in 27 cases (79%) and positive in 7 cases (21%), all outside the volume treated. Biochemical relapse-free survival at 5 years, disease-free survival, and overall survival were 96.8% ± 0.032%, 79.5% ± 0.076%, and 100%, respectively. The mean International Prostate Symptom Score at 2 months was significantly higher than initially (P = .0003), with no significant difference later. No late urinary, sexual, or rectal toxicity was observed. Salvage treatment was possible with good tolerance at 3.4 years of follow-up. Limitations of this study include the retrospective nature and lack of randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

F-BT is a safe and effective treatment for selected patients presenting with low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer.

Feasibility and early toxicity of focal or partial brachytherapy in prostate cancer patients

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare short-term oncologic outcomes and toxicity of focal or partial low-dose-rate brachytherapy (focal/partial LDR-BT) with whole gland low-dose-rate brachytherapy (whole LDR-BT) in localized prostate cancer patients.

Material and methods

Medical records of eligible patients who underwent focal/partial LDR-BT and whole LDR-BT between 2015 and 2017 at our institution were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical characteristics and pathologic outcomes were compared between focal/partial LDR-BT group and whole LDR-BT group. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and difference between two groups was assessed with log-rank test. Genitourinary and rectal toxicity were also evaluated between the two groups.

Results

Of the 60 patients analyzed, 30 focal/partial LDR-BT patients and 30 whole LDR-BT brachytherapy patients were included. Relative to the whole LDR-BT group, the focal/partial LDR-BT group had significantly higher initial PSA level (p = 0.002), smaller number of implanted seeds (p < 0.001), and shorter follow-up duration (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to prostate volume, biopsy Gleason score, and risk group stratification. The 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival estimates for focal/partial LDR-BT group and whole LDR-BT group were 91.8% and 89.6%, respectively, which was not significantly different (p = 0.554). Genitourinary symptoms were significantly worse in whole LDR-BT group than in focal/partial LDR-BT group. The incidence of rectal toxicity was similar between two groups.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that the focal/partial LDR-BT is comparable to the whole LDR-BT with respect to short-term biochemical recurrence and toxicities.

Ablative options for prostate cancer management

This review provides an overview of the available ablative options for prostate cancer (PCa) management. It contemplates the ablative concepts and the role of prostate ablation in different settings, from primary treatment to repeat ablation, and as an alternative to radiorecurrent disease. Improvements in prostate imaging have allowed us to ablate prostate lesions through thermal, mechanical, and vascular-targeted sources of energy. Partial gland ablation (PGA) has an emerging role in the management of localized PCa because toxicity outcomes have been proven less harmful compared with whole-gland treatments. Although long-term oncological outcomes are yet to be consolidated in comparative studies, recent large series and prospective studies in PGA have reported encouraging results. A second ablation after disease recurrence has demonstrated low toxicity, and future studies must define its potential to avoid radical treatments. PGA is an attractive option for PCa management in different scenarios because of its low-toxicity profile. As expected, recurrence rates are higher than those seen in whole-gland procedures. Long-term oncological outcomes of primary and salvage options are required to endorse it among the standard treatments.

Erectile function after focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review

Focal therapy modalities achieved interest in the management of prostate cancer (PCa) over the last a few years. This systematic review was aimed to investigate erectile function after focal therapy for localized PCa. Twenty-six out of 1287 reports were identified through a database systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science, supplemented with hand search, on June 1st, 2020, according to PRISMA guidelines. Focal therapy modalities investigated were cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), photodynamic therapy (TOOKAD), irreversible electroporation (IRE), and focal radiotherapy (RT) (i.e. brachytherapy or stereotactic RT). Overall, reported sexual function outcomes after these treatment modalities were generally good, with many studies reporting a complete recovery of EF at 1-year follow-up. However, the quality of current evidence is affected both by the lack of well-conducted comparative studies and by a significant heterogeneity in terms of study design, study population, erectile and sexual function assessment modalities.

Focal ablation of apical prostate cancer lesions with irreversible electroporation (IRE)

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety, oncological and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes of focal ablation of apical prostate cancer (PCa) lesions with irreversible electroporation (IRE).

METHODS

Patients were included in the study if they had a PCa lesion within 3 mm of the apical capsule treated with IRE. The IRE procedure was performed in our institution by a single urologist. The QoL and functional data was collected prospectively from patients who provided consent using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC). Oncological follow up included 3-month PSA levels, mpMRI at 6 months and transperineal biopsy at 1-year post treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients had apical PCa lesions treated between February 2013 and September 2018. Median follow-up was 44 months. There were no Clavien-Dindo grade 3 events or higher. No perioperative complications were recorded. No significant difference was observed in the EPIC urinary or bowel QoL domain between baseline and 12-month post-treatment. One patient (2%) required one pad per day for urinary incontinence 12-month post-treatment. There was a small but significant decline in EPIC sexual QoL (65 at baseline and 59 at 12-month post-IRE). Of patient's potent pre-treatment, 94% remained potent after treatment. The median PSA nadir decreased by 71% (6.25-1.7 ng/mL). Only one patient (2.5%) had in-field residual disease on repeat biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Focal ablation using IRE for PCa in the distal apex appears safe and feasible with acceptable early QoL and oncologic outcomes.

Targeting the cancer lesion, not the whole prostate

Modern cancer treatment aims to conserve as much healthy tissue as possible. This has been challenging in the treatment of prostate cancer due to the difficulty in imaging the gland and concerns over leaving multifocal cancer untreated. With improvements in imaging and understanding of multifocal prostate cancer evidence now shows accurate treatment of just the primary focus of cancer or the index lesion can control progression or recurrence of the disease. Many different energy sources are now available to target the cancer lesion within the prostate with less significant side-effects on urinary and sexual function compared to radical treatment. Evidence shows that men value these functions highly and would even trade years of life in exchange for preserved retention of continence or erectile function. Focal treatment of prostate cancer aims to provide both cancer control and preservation of sexual and urinary functions so that men do not have to make a choice between the two. This is a treatment option that men clearly want and deserve.

Current state of image-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To review the current evidence regarding protocols and outcomes of image-guided focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A literature search of the latest published studies assessing primary FT for PCa was carried out in Medline and Cochrane library databases followed by a critical review. FT modalities, follow-up strategies, and oncological and toxicity outcomes were summarized and discussed in this review.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies with six different sources of energy met the inclusion criteria. A heterogeneity of patient selection, energy sources, treatment templates, and definitions of failure was found among the studies. While a third of patients may be found to have additional cancer burden over 3-5 years following FT, most patients will remain free of a radical procedure. The vast majority of patients maintain urinary continence and good erectile function after FT. Acute urinary retention is the most common complication, whilst severe complications remain rare.

CONCLUSION

An increasing number of prospective studies with longer follow-up have been recently published. Acceptable cancer control and low treatment toxicity after FT have been consistently reported. Follow-up imaging and routine biopsy must be encouraged post-FT. While there is no reliable PSA threshold to predict failure after FT, reporting post-FT positive biopsies and retreatment rates appear to be standard when assessing treatment efficacy.

Focal high-dose-rate brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: toxicity and preliminary biochemical results

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes and the toxicity of focal high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in selected localized prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

Fifty patients were treated with focal high-dose-rate brachytherapy between March 2013 and November 2017, representing 5% of the cases treated by our group during this period. Only patients with very limited and localized tumors, according to strict criteria, were selected for the procedure. The prescribed dose for the focal volume was 24 Gy.

RESULTS

The treated volume corresponded to a mean value of 32% of the total prostatic volume. The mean focal D₉₀ in our series was 23 Gy (range 16-26 Gy). The mean initial IPSS was 8.2 (range 0-26), at 6 months 7.5 (range 0-23), and at 24 months 6.7 (range 0-18). No acute or late urinary retention was seen. When the ICIQ-SF score was 0 at the end of treatment, it remained nil thereafter at 1 and 2 years for all patients. No intraoperative or perioperative complications occurred. No rectal toxicity was reported after treatment. Of the total patients identified as potent, only three patients had a very slight decrease of the mean IIEF5. The mean initial PSA was 6.9 ng/mL (range 1.9-13.4). At the last follow-up visit, the mean PSA was 3 ng/ml (range 0.48-8.11).

CONCLUSION

HDR focal brachytherapy in selected patients with low intermediate-risk prostate cancer could achieve the same satisfactory results in terms of relapse-free survival as conventional whole prostate brachytherapy with less toxicity.

Transperineal mapping biopsy improves selection of brachytherapy boost for men with localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To determine if transperineal mapping biopsy (TPMB) can improve the selection of brachytherapy alone (BT) or brachytherapy boost (BTB) in men with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Two hundred and eighteen men underwent TPMB with a mean of 48.6 cores retrieved. Comparisons were made between prebiopsy risk features and biopsy results to treatment choice with associations tested with ANOVA (bootstrap), χ² test (Pearson), and linear regression. Survival estimates were tested by the Kaplan-Meier method with comparisons by log rank.

RESULTS

Mean age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), prostate specific antigen density (PSAD), and prostate volume were 67.2 years, 8.1 ng/mL, 0.19, and 50.3 cc, respectively. 105 (48.2%) biopsies were positive for Gleason Group (GG) 1: 34 (32.4%), 2: 21 (20%), 3: 31 (29.5%), 4: 7 (6.7%), and 5: 12 (11.4%). The mean number of positive cores (PCs) was 7.3 (median 6, range 1-37). Men with six or more PCs had higher PSA (11.3 vs. 6.0 ng/mL, p = 0.025) and PSAD (0.34 vs. 0.13, p = 0.013). Overall brachytherapy was used in 74 (70.5%) as either monotherapy or boost therapy. Men with BTB had higher PSA (9.7 vs. 6.7 ng/mL, p = 0.029), PSAD (0.27 vs. 0.16, p = 0.007), GG (3.3 vs. 1.8, p < 0.001), more bilateral disease (75.9% vs. 55.6%, odds ratio 3.9, p = 0.008), and PCs (10.9 vs. 4.4, p < 0.001). On linear regression, only GG (p = 0.008) and PCs (p = 0.044) were associated with BTB. Biochemical-free failure at 5 years was 92.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

TPMB improves the selection of patients for BTB. Men with more PCs are more likely to have BTB. Restricting the need for BTB to those with greater volume prostate cancer may reduce radiation side effects.

MRI-Guided Ultrafocal HDR Brachytherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Median 4-Year Results of a feasibility study

PURPOSE

For the treatment of localized prostate cancer, focal therapy has the potential to cure with fewer side effects than traditional whole-gland treatments. We report an update on toxicity, quality of life (QoL), and tumor control in our magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided ultrafocal high-dose-rate brachytherapy cohort.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Disease status was evaluated by systematic biopsies and 3T multiparametric MRI. The brachytherapy implant procedure under fused transrectal ultrasound/MRI guidance was followed by a 1.5 T MRI for contour adjustments and catheter position verification. A single dose of 19 Gy was delivered to the tumor with a margin of 5 mm. Genitourinary (GU) toxicity, gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, and erectile dysfunction (ED) were graded with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. QoL was measured with RAND-36, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and PR25. International Prostate Symptom Scores and International Index of Erectile Function scores were obtained. Prostate-specific antigen level was monitored, with biochemical recurrence defined as nadir + 2 ng/mL (Phoenix).

RESULTS

Thirty patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network low- (13%) to intermediate-risk (87%) prostate cancer were treated between May 2013 and April 2016. Median follow-up was 4 years. Median age was 71 years (interquartile range, 68-73) and median initial prostate-specific antigen level was 7.3 ng/mL (5.2-8.1). Maximum Gleason score was 4 + 3 = 7 (in 2 patients). All tumors were radiologic (MRI) stage T2. No grade >2 GU or >1 GI toxicity occurred. International Prostate Symptom Scores only deteriorated temporarily. Mild pretreatment ED deteriorated to moderate/severe ED in 50% of patients. Long-term clinically relevant QoL deterioration was seen in sexual activity and tiredness, whereas emotional and cognitive functioning improved. At 4 years, biochemical disease-free survival was 70% (95% confidence interval, 52%-93%), metastases-free survival was 93% (85%-100%), and overall survival was 100%. Of intraprostatic recurrences, 7 of 9 were out of field.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrafocal high-dose-rate brachytherapy conveys minimal GU or GI toxicity and has a marginal effect on QoL. An early decline in erectile function was seen. Tumor control outcomes are poor (biochemical disease-free survival of 70% [52%-93%] at 4 years), most likely as a result of poor patient selection.

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: is there a "middle ground" between active surveillance and definitive treatment?

In recent years, it has come a long way in the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of prostate cancer. Beside this, it was argued that definitive treatments could cause overtreatment, particularly in the very low, low, and favorable risk group. When alternative treatment and follow-up methods are being considered for this group of patients, active surveillance is seen as a good alternative for patients with very low and low-risk groups in this era. However, it has become necessary to find other alternatives for patients in the favorable risk group or patients who cannot adopt active follow-up. In the light of technological developments, the concept of focal therapy was introduced with the intensification of research to treat only the lesioned area instead of treating the entire organ for prostate lesions though there are not many publications about many of them yet. According to the initial results, it was understood that the results could be good if the appropriate focal therapy technique was applied to the appropriate patient. Thus, focal therapies have begun to find their "middle ground" place between definitive therapies and active follow-up.

Long-term outcomes of partial prostate treatment with magnetic resonance imaging-guided brachytherapy for patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Partial prostate treatment has emerged as a potential method for treating patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer while minimizing toxicity. The authors previously demonstrated poor rates of biochemical disease control for patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate-risk disease using partial gland treatment with brachytherapy. The objective of the current study was to estimate the rates of distant metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) for this cohort.

METHODS

Between 1997 and 2007, a total of 354 men with clinical T1c disease, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level < 15 ng/mL, and Gleason grade ≤3 + 4 prostate cancer underwent partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy to the peripheral zone under 0.5-Tesla magnetic resonance guidance. The cumulative incidences of metastasis and PCSM for the NCCN very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk groups were estimated. Fine and Gray competing risk regression was used to evaluate clinical factors associated with time to metastasis.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients developed metastases at a median of 11.0 years (interquartile range, 6.9-13.9 years). The 12-year metastasis rates for patients with very low-risk, low-risk, and intermediate-risk disease were 0.8% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.1%-4.4%), 8.7% (95% CI, 3.4%-17.2%), and 15.7% (95% CI, 5.7%-30.2%), respectively, and the 12-year PCSM estimates were 1.6% (95% CI, 0.1%-7.6%), 1.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-6.8%), and 8.2% (95% CI, 1.9%-20.7%), respectively. On multivariate analysis, NCCN risk category (low risk: hazard ratio, 6.34 [95% CI, 1.18-34.06; P = .03] and intermediate risk: hazard ratio, 6.98 [95% CI, 1.23-39.73; P = .03]) was found to be significantly associated with the time to metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial prostate treatment with brachytherapy may be associated with higher rates of distant metastasis and PCSM for patients with intermediate-risk disease after long-term follow-up. Treatment of less than the full gland may not be appropriate for this cohort.

Twelve-month prostate volume reduction after MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation of the prostate

PURPOSE

To quantitatively assess 12-month prostate volume (PV) reduction based on T2-weighted MRI and immediate post-treatment contrast-enhanced MRI non-perfused volume (NPV), and to compare measurements with predictions of acute and delayed ablation volumes based on MR-thermometry (MR-t), in a central radiology review of the Phase I clinical trial of MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) in patients with localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment day MRI and 12-month follow-up MRI and biopsy were available for central radiology review in 29 of 30 patients from the published institutional review board-approved, prospective, multi-centre, single-arm Phase I clinical trial of TULSA. Viable PV at 12 months was measured as the remaining PV on T2-weighted MRI, less 12-month NPV, scaled by the fraction of fibrosis in 12-month biopsy cores. Reduction of viable PV was compared to predictions based on the fraction of the prostate covered by the MR-t derived acute thermal ablation volume (ATAV, 55°C isotherm), delayed thermal ablation volume (DTAV, 240 cumulative equivalent minutes at 43°C thermal dose isocontour) and treatment-day NPV. We also report linear and volumetric comparisons between metrics.

RESULTS

After TULSA, the median 12-month reduction in viable PV was 88%. DTAV predicted a reduction of 90%. Treatment day NPV predicted only 53% volume reduction, and underestimated ATAV and DTAV by 36% and 51%.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative volumetry of the TULSA phase I MR and biopsy data identifies DTAV (240 CEM43 thermal dose boundary) as a useful predictor of viable prostate tissue reduction at 12 months. Immediate post-treatment NPV underestimates tissue ablation.

KEY POINTS

• MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) achieved an 88% reduction of viable prostate tissue volume at 12 months, in excellent agreement with expectation from thermal dose calculations. • Non-perfused volume on immediate post-treatment contrast-enhanced MRI represents only 64% of the acute thermal ablation volume (ATAV), and reports only 60% (53% instead of 88% achieved) of the reduction in viable prostate tissue volume at 12 months. • MR-thermometry-based predictions of 12-month prostate volume reduction based on 240 cumulative equivalent minute thermal dose volume are in excellent agreement with reduction in viable prostate tissue volume measured on pre- and 12-month post-treatment T2w-MRI.

[Prostate brachytherapy: New techniques, new indications]

Prostate brachytherapy has been for a long time one of the standard treatments for low risk prostate cancer, with high rates of biochemical control and low levels of urinary and sexual late toxicity compared to other available techniques, namely external beam radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy. The aim of this article is to review the recent innovations of prostate brachytherapy, which suggest a bright future for the technique. We will discuss the extension of indications of permanent implant brachytherapy to favorable intermediate-risk patients, the use of novel isotopes such as Palladium 103 and Cesium 131, and the benefit of brachytherapy as a boost following external beam radiotherapy for intermediate and high-risk patients. We will also discuss the rise of high dose rate brachytherapy, as a boost or monotherapy, the increasing use of MRI for patient selection and treatment planning, as well as the development of brachytherapy as a means of focal therapy.

The role of salvage brachytherapy for local relapse after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer amongst men. For localized disease, there currently exist several reliable treatment modalities including surgery, radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Our growing understanding of this disease indicates that local control plays a very important role in prevention of subsequent dissemination. Many improvements to external beam radiotherapy over recent years have decreased toxicity and improved outcomes, but nonetheless, local relapse remains common. Many salvage options exist for locally recurrent prostate cancer, but are rarely offered, partly because of the fear of toxicity. Many men with isolated local recurrence therefore do not receive potentially curative second line treatment and are instead treated with palliative androgen suppression. Selection plays an important role in determining which individuals are likely to benefit from salvage. Those at high risk of pre-existing micro-metastatic disease despite negative staging scans are unlikely to benefit. Prostate brachytherapy has evolved over the more than 3 decades of experience. Modern techniques allow more precise tumor localization and dose delivery. Better understanding of dosimetric parameters can distinguish optimal from suboptimal implants. Salvage brachytherapy can be an effective treatment for locally recurrent prostate cancer after prior external beam radiotherapy. We review the literature pertaining to both low dose rate (LDR) and high dose rate (HDR) salvage brachytherapy and discuss patient selection, optimal dose, treatment volume and toxicity avoidance.

Which technology to select for primary focal treatment of prostate cancer?-European Section of Urotechnology (ESUT) position statement

BACKGROUND

With growing interest in focal therapy (FT) of prostate cancer (PCa) there is an increasing armamentarium of treatment modalities including high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, focal laser ablation (FLA), irreversible electroporation (IRE), vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP), focal brachytherapy (FBT) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Currently there are no clear recommendations as to which of these technologies are appropriate for individual patient characteristics. Our intention was to review the literature for special aspects of the different technologies that might be of advantage depending on individual patient and tumour characteristics.

METHODS

The current literature on FT was screened for the following factors: morbidity, repeatability, tumour risk category, tumour location, tumour size and prostate volume and anatomical issues. The ESUT expert panel arrived at consensus regarding a position statement on a structured pathway for available FT technologies based on a combination of the literature and expert opinion.

RESULTS

Side effects were low across different studies and FT modalities with urinary continence rates of 90-100% and erectile dysfunction between 5 and 52%. Short to medium cancer control based on post-treatment biopsies were variable between ablative modalities. Expert consensus suggested that posterior lesions are better amenable to FT using HIFU. Cryotherapy provides best possible outcomes for anterior tumours. Apical lesions, when treated with FBT, may yield the least urethral morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Further prospective trials are required to assess medium to long term disease control of different ablative modalities for FT. Amongst different available FT modalities our ESUT expert consensus suggests that some may be better for diffe`rent tumour locations. Tumour risk, tumour size, tumour location, and prostate volume are all important factors to consider and might aid in designing future FT trials.

The prostate cancer focal therapy

Despite prostate cancer (PCa) is the leading form of non-cutaneous cancer in men, most patients with PCa die with disease rather than of the disease. Therefore, the risk of overtreatment should be considered by clinicians who have to distinguish between patients with high risk PCa (who would benefit from radical treatment) and patients who may be managed more conservatively, such as through active surveillance or emerging focal therapy (FT). The aim of FT is to eradicate clinically significant disease while protecting key genito-urinary structures and function from injury. While effectiveness studies comparing FT with conventional care options are still lacking, the rationale supporting FT relies on evidence-based advances such as the understanding of the index lesion's central role in the natural history of the PCa and the improvement of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the detection and risk stratification of PCa. In this literature review, we want to highlight the rationale for FT in PCa management and the current evidence on patient eligibility. Furthermore, we summarize the best imaging modalities to localize the target lesion, describe the current FT techniques in PCa, provide an update on their oncological outcomes and highlight trends for future research.

New approach of ultra-focal brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer with custom-linked I-125 seeds: A feasibility study of optimal dose coverage

PURPOSE

To present the feasibility study of optimal dose coverage in ultra-focal brachytherapy (UFB) with multiparametric MRI for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

UFB provisional dose plans for small target volumes (<7 cc) were calculated on a prostate training phantom to optimize the seeds number and strength. Clinical UFB consisted in a contour-based nonrigid registration (MRI/Ultrasound) to implant a fiducial marker at the location of the tumor focus. Dosimetry was performed with iodine-125 seeds and a prescribed dose of 160 Gy. On CT scans acquired at 1 month, dose coverage of 152 Gy to the ultra-focal gross tumor volume was evaluated. Registrations between magnetic resonance and CT scans were assessed on the first 8 patients with three software solutions: VariSeed, 3D Slicer, and Mirada, and quantitative evaluations of the registrations were performed. Impact of these registrations on the initial dose matrix was performed.

RESULTS

Mean differences between simulated dose plans and extrapolated Bard nomogram for UFB volumes were 36.3% (26-56) for the total activity, 18.3% (10-30) for seed strength, and 22.5% (16-38) for number of seeds. Registration method implemented in Mirada performed significantly better than VariSeed and 3D Slicer (p = 0.0117 and p = 0.0357, respectively). For dose plan evaluation between Mirada and VariSeed, D₁₀₀% (Gy) for ultra-focal gross tumor volume had a mean difference of 28.06 Gy, mean values being still above the objective of 152 Gy. D₉₀% for the prostate had a mean difference of 1.17 Gy. For urethra and rectum, dose limits were far below the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

This UFB study confirmed the possibility to treat with optimal dose coverage target volumes smaller than 7 cc.

IDEAL 2a Phase II Study of Ultrafocal Brachytherapy for Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Focal therapy of prostate cancer requires precise positioning of therapeutic agents within well-characterized index tumors (ITs). We assessed the feasibility of low-dose-rate ultrafocal brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The present study was an institutional review board-approved European Clinical Trials Database-registered phase II protocol. Patients referred (October 2013 to August 2016) for active surveillance (prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/mL, cT1c-cT2a, Gleason score on referring biopsy specimens ≤6 (3+3), ≤3 positive biopsy cores, ≤50% of cancer) were preselected. Inclusion was confirmed when complementary image-guided biopsy findings informed a single Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3, Gleason score ≤7a (3+4) lesion. A ultrasound-visible ancillary marker was positioned within the IT using a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) elastic fusion-guided system (Koelis). Ultrafocal transperineal delivery of ¹²⁵I seeds used classic 2-dimensional TRUS (Bard-FlexFocus) and dose optimization (Variseed Treatment Planning System). Following Simon's optimal design, 17 patients were required to assess the feasibility of delivering ≥95% of the prescribed dose (160 Gy) to the IT (primary objective). Adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) and quality of life (5-item International Index of Erectile Function, International Prostate Symptom Score) were recorded. One-year control biopsy specimens were obtained from the IT and untreated segments.

RESULTS

Of the 44 preselected patients, 27 did not meet the inclusion criteria. Of the 17 ultrafocal brachytherapy-treated patients, 16 met the primary objective (per protocol success). The prescription dose was delivered to 14.5% ± 6.4% of the prostate volume, resulting in negligible urethral and rectal irradiation and toxicity. No recurrence was evidenced on the 1-year follow-up MRI studies or IT biopsy specimens. Seven nonclinically significant cancers and one Gleason score 7a (3+4) cancer (salvage prostatectomy) were observed in the untreated parenchyma.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent technology has allowed for selective and effective brachytherapy of small MRI targets.

Reductions in prostatic doses are associated with less acute morbidity in patients undergoing Pd-103 brachytherapy: Substantiation of the rationale for focal therapy

PURPOSE

Interest in prostate dose reduction or focal treatment exists due to expected reductions in treatment morbidity. Prior analyses have not generally corroborated relationships between prostate or urethral dose and urinary toxicity after brachytherapy, but such analyses have been performed on cohorts all receiving the same prescribed dose. We analyzed patients treated to differing prescription doses to assess acute urinary morbidity with dose reduction.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated with Pd-103 to either 125 Gy or 90-100 Gy were compared using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 1-month postimplant. Patients in the 90-100 Gy cohort began external beam radiation therapy after their 1-month assessment; thus, toxicities were measured before contribution from external beam radiation therapy. Patient/treatment characteristics were compared to verify subgroup homogeneity. Dose and change in IPSS 1 month after treatment were assessed using a multivariate linear regression model.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-one and 41 patients were treated with 125 Gy versus 90-100 Gy, respectively. Preimplant and postimplant prostate volumes and initial IPSS were similar between groups. Higher prescription dose and increased pretreatment IPSS were independent predictors of increased 1-month IPSS. In addition, every 10 percentage point additional prostate volume receiving a given dose was associated with increase in IPSS after treatment for the same level of pretreatment IPSS.

CONCLUSION

Lower prescription dose and decreased volume of high-dose regions to the prostate correlated with reduced acute urinary morbidity after brachytherapy. Our findings suggest that focal treatment approaches with modest dose reductions to subregions of the prostate may reduce acute morbidity and potentially expand the number of patients eligible for brachytherapy.

[Evaluation and results of ablative therapies in prostate cancer]

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.

[Indications and limits of ablative therapies in prostate cancer]

OBJECTIVE

To perform a state of the art about indications and limits of 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, 107 articles were analysed.

RESULTS

The objective to combine reduction of side effects and oncological control has induced recent development of several ablative therapies. Beyond this heterogeneity, some preferential indications appear: unilateral cancer of low risk (but with significant volume, excluding active surveillance) or intermediate risk (excluding majority of grade 4); treatment targeted the index lesion, by quarter or hemi-ablation, based on biopsy and mpMRI. In addition, indications must considered specific limits of each energy, such as gland volume and tumor localization.

CONCLUSION

Based on new imaging and biopsy, ablative therapies will probably increased its role in the future in management of localize prostate cancer. The multiple ongoing trials will certainly be helpful to better define their indications and limits.

[Therapeutic innovations in radiation oncology for localized prostate cancer]

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, image-guided radiation therapy with fiducial markers and prostate brachytherapy allow the delivery of dose escalation for localized prostate cancer with very low rates of long-term toxicity and sequelae. Nowadays, modern radiotherapy techniques make it possible to shorten treatment time with hypofractionation, to better protect surrounding healthy tissues and to escalate the dose even further. Advances in radiotherapy are closely linked to advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and/or PET imaging. Functional imaging makes it possible to deliver personalised pelvic nodal radiotherapy, targeting the nodal areas at higher risk of microscopic involvement. In patients with an index lesion at baseline or at failure, MR-based focal therapy or focal dose escalation with brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy is also currently investigated. MR-based adaptive radiotherapy, which makes it possible to track prostate shifts during radiation delivery, is another step forward in the integration of MR imaging in radiation delivery.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: the technical challenges

Focal therapy for prostate cancer has been proposed as an alternative treatment to whole gland therapy, offering the opportunity for tumor dose escalation and/or reduced toxicity. Brachytherapy, either low-dose-rate or high-dose-rate, provides an ideal approach, offering both precision in dose delivery and opportunity for a highly conformal, non-uniform dose distribution. Whilst multiple consensus documents have published clinical guidelines for patient selection, there are insufficient data to provide clear guidelines on target volume delineation, treatment planning margins, treatment planning approaches, and many other technical issues that should be considered before implementing a focal brachytherapy program. Without consensus guidelines, there is the potential for a diversity of practices to develop, leading to challenges in interpreting outcome data from multiple centers. This article provides an overview of the technical considerations for the implementation of a clinical service, and discusses related topics that should be considered in the design of clinical trials to ensure precise and accurate methods are applied for focal brachytherapy treatments.

Focal application of low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: a pilot study

Purpose

To evaluate the feasibility and to report the early outcomes of focal treatment of prostate cancer using low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-PB).

Material and methods

Seventeen patients were screened with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), 14 of whom proceeded to receive trans-perineal template mapping biopsy (TTMB). Focal LDR-PB was performed on five eligible patients using dual air kerma strength treatment plans based on planning target volumes derived from cancer locations and determined by TTMB. Patient follow-up includes prostate specific antigen (PSA) measurements, urinary and sexual function questionnaires, repeated imaging and TTMB at specific intervals post-treatment.

Results

Feasibility of focal LDR-PB was shown and short-term outcomes are promising. While the detection rate of tumors, a majority of which were low grade GS 3 + 3, was found to be low on mpMRI (sensitivity of 37.5%), our results suggest the potential of mpMRI in detecting the presence of higher grade (GS ≥ 3 + 4), and bilateral disease indicating its usefulness as a screening tool for focal LDR-PB.

Conclusions

Low-dose-rate brachytherapy is a favorable ablation option for focal treatment of prostate cancer, requiring minimal modification to the standard (whole gland) LDR-PB treatment, and appears to have a more favorable side effect profile. Further investigation, in the form of a larger study, is needed to assess the methods used and the long-term outcomes of focal LDR-PB.

Focal therapy as primary treatment for localized prostate cancer: definition, needs and future

Focal therapy (FT) may offer a promising treatment option in the field of low to intermediate risk localized prostate cancer. The aim of this concept is to combine minimal morbidity with cancer control as well as maintain the possibility of retreatment. Recent advances in MRI and targeted biopsy has improved the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer and increased the interest in FT. However, before implementation of FT in routine clinical practice, several challenges are still to overcome including patient selection, treatment planning, post-therapy monitoring and definition of oncologic outcome surrogates. In this article, relevant questions regarding the key steps of FT are critically discussed and the main available energy modalities are analyzed taking into account their advantages and unmet needs.

Outcomes and toxicities in patients treated with definitive focal therapy for primary prostate cancer: systematic review

AIM

This systematic review summarizes the clinical data on focal therapy (FT) when used alone as definitive therapy for primary prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

The protocol is detailed in the online PROSPERO database, registration No. CRD42014014765. Articles evaluating any form of FT alone as a definitive treatment for PCa in adult male patients were included.

RESULTS

Of 10,419 identified articles, 10,401 were excluded, and thus leaving 18 for analysis. In total, 2288 patients were treated using seven modalities. The outcomes of FT in PCa seem to be similar to those observed with whole gland therapy and with fewer side effects.

CONCLUSION

Further research, including prospective randomized trials, is warranted to elucidate the potential advantages of focal radiation techniques for treating PCa. Prospero Registration Number: CRD42014014765.

Hemi-gland focal low dose rate prostate brachytherapy: An analysis of dosimetric outcomes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate sampling enable early identification of men with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer who are candidates for focal therapies that minimise side effects. We report dosimetry data from a pilot study evaluating the effectiveness of hemi-gland low dose rate (HG-LDR) brachytherapy as a focal therapy approach to control unilateral localised disease.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-two men underwent HG-LDR brachytherapy. Multi parametric MRI and transperineal template mapping biopsies were used to identify low volume unilateral disease. Whole gland therapy controls (n=120) were retrospectively obtained. All implants were performed with 4D Brachytherapy.

RESULTS

Intraoperative and postimplant dosimetry complied with established brachytherapy parameters. Mean (standard deviation) postoperative D90 for the target hemi-gland was 153.8 (11.3) Gy compared to 47.5 (12.7) Gy for the contralateral hemi-gland (P<0.001). Mean postoperative V100% was 93.1 (3.9) and 24.6 (10.5) for the target and contralateral hemi-glands respectively (P<0.001). Urethra D30 was 150.4 (19.8) Gy and 174.2 (15.0) Gy for hemi-gland and whole gland implants respectively (P<0.001). Significantly reduced dose was also observed for rectum and neurovascular bundles.

CONCLUSIONS

HG-LDR focal brachytherapy is feasible with significant reduction in dose to the contralateral hemi-gland and organs at risk.

Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Pending Questions

Focal therapy (FT) represents a potential shift in clinical practice by featuring a tissue-sparing approach for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment. It stands midway between active surveillance (AS) and more aggressive options like radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy. The field has enormously evolved in the last few years but there are still pending questions to answer in the future. The manuscript overlooks FT in terms of indications, available energies, situation of tumor microenvironment, follow-up, re-interventions, and the future of this approach for PCa.