Prospective Multicenter Phase II Study on Focal Therapy (Hemiablation) of the Prostate with High Intensity Focused Ultrasound

The Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with Magnetic Resonance Imaging After Focal Therapy (TARGET): A Systematic Review and International Consensus Recommendations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect recurrences after focal therapy for prostate cancer but there is no robust guidance regarding its use. Our objective was to produce consensus recommendations on MRI acquisition, interpretation, and reporting after focal therapy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in July 2022 to develop consensus statements. A two-round consensus exercise was then performed, with a consensus meeting in January 2023, during which 329 statements were scored by 23 panellists from Europe and North America spanning urology, radiology, and pathology with experience across eight focal therapy modalities. Using RAND Corporation/University of California-Los Angeles methodology, the Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with MRI after Focal Therapy (TARGET) were based on consensus for statements scored with agreement or disagreement.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

In total, 73 studies were included in the review. All 20 studies (100%) reporting suspicious imaging features cited focal contrast enhancement as suspicious for cancer recurrence. Of 31 studies reporting MRI assessment criteria, the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score was the scheme used most often (20 studies; 65%), followed by a 5-point Likert score (six studies; 19%). For the consensus exercise, consensus for statements scored with agreement or disagreement increased from 227 of 295 statements (76.9%) in round one to 270 of 329 statements (82.1%) in round two. Key recommendations include performing routine MRI at 12 mo using a multiparametric protocol compliant with PI-RADS version 2.1 standards. PI-RADS category scores for assessing recurrence within the ablation zone should be avoided. An alternative 5-point scoring system is presented that includes a major dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) sequence and joint minor diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted sequences. For the DCE sequence, focal nodular strong early enhancement was the most suspicious imaging finding. A structured minimum reporting data set and minimum reporting standards for studies detailing MRI data after focal therapy are presented.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The TARGET consensus recommendations may improve MRI acquisition, interpretation, and reporting after focal therapy for prostate cancer and provide minimum standards for study reporting.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans can detect recurrent of prostate cancer after focal treatments, but there is a lack of guidance on MRI use for this purpose. We report new expert recommendations that may improve practice.

An Update on Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Radical treatments and active surveillance are valid therapeutic approaches for low-risk prostate cancer. The oncologic effectiveness and morbidity of Radical Prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy have been broadly validated. Focal therapies pursue to reduce the morbidity observed after radical treatments, while preserving the oncologic effectiveness. This study aims to review the state-of-the-art about principles, oncologic effectiveness, morbidity, and side-effects associated with leading focal therapies. We review and summarize articles related with Cryotherapy, High-Intensity Focal Ultrasound (HIFU), Photodynamic Therapy (PDT), and Irreversible Electroporating (IRE) published in MEDLINE from 2000 to 2022. There is a wide heterogeneity in terms of the measurement of effectiveness and morbidity. Hence, comparing different energies, strategies and protocols seem to be unprecise and controversial. Cryosurgery and HIFU have reported more clinical experience than PDT and IRE. Biochemical recurrence rate after the first session varied from 4.5% to 23%, and up to 20% of patients underwent a salvage radical treatment. The reported incidence of erectile disfunction and urinary incontinence ranges from 3% to 50% and 0% to 34%, respectively. None randomized clinical trial comparing any focal therapy to any radical treatment has been published. We conclude that the expansion of focal therapies requires the consolidation of MRI-guided fusion biopsies in everyday clinical practice. Short-term oncologic effectiveness has been proved and supports their usefulness in low-risk patients unfit for surgical treatment. However, long-term effects and the clinical experience in intermediate and high-risk patients remains limited. Currently none of the focal therapies can be considered the Gold Standard for low-risk patients.

[Oncological and functional results of focal treatment of localized prostate cancer with HIFU]

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, improved diagnosis of prostate cancer has allowed the development of focal therapy, in order to reduce the morbidity of treatments. Our study assesses the medium-term oncological and functional results of FocalOne® HIFU treatment in localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, multicentre study including patients with low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer treated with Focal one HIFU between November 2014 and December 2019. The primary endpoint was the retreatment rate and subgroup analyses were performed to identify predictive factors of retreatment.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-seven patients were included with a median follow-up of 25.5 months. Seventy percent of patients had clinical stage T2, 64% had an ISUP score of 2 or 3 on initial biopsies and 38% were treated with hemi-ablation. Follow-up biopsies were performed in 76.6% of patients during follow-up with 21.8% having clinically significant cancers. The retreatment rate at 24 months was 37.2%, with positive biopsies being the primary criterion for retreatment. Patients with a PSA>8ng/mL had a significantly higher retreatment rate. Finally, morbidity remained acceptable with 5.8% of patients requiring reoperation for complications and 21% for de novo erectile dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Our results are in agreement with those of the literature, seeming to indicate a lower morbidity of the focal treatment by HIFU compared to the radical treatments while offering an acceptable oncological control. Prospective randomized trials are ongoing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Current status and future outlook of ultrasound treatment for prostate cancer

Radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy are the standard treatment options for localized prostate cancer (PC). However, radical prostatectomy may cause the deterioration of urinary and sexual function, and radiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis and severe rectal bleeding are risk factors for fatal conditions in patients after radiation therapy. With the recent development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the localization of clinically significant PC (csPC) and treatment modalities, "focal therapy", which cures csPC while preserving anatomical structures related to urinary and sexual functions, has become a minimally invasive treatment for localized PC. Based on the clinical results of transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for localized PC in the whole gland and focal therapy, HIFU is considered an attractive treatment option for focal therapy. Recently, the short-term clinical results of transurethral high-intensity directional ultrasound (HIDU) have been reported. With the resolution of some issues, HIDU may be commonly used for PC treatment similar to HIFU. Because HIFU and HIDU have limitations regarding the treatment of patients with large prostate calcifications and large prostate volumes, the proper use of these modalities will enable the treatment of any target area in the prostate. To establish a standard treatment strategy for localized PC, pair-matched and historically controlled studies are required to verify the oncological and functional outcomes of ultrasound treatment for patients with localized PC.

Prediction and Mapping of Intraprostatic Tumor Extent with Artificial Intelligence

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underestimation of prostate cancer extent complicates the definition of focal treatment margins.

Objective

To validate focal treatment margins produced by an artificial intelligence (AI) model.

Design setting and participants

Testing was conducted retrospectively in an independent dataset of 50 consecutive patients who had radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk cancer. An AI deep learning model incorporated multimodal imaging and biopsy data to produce three-dimensional cancer estimation maps and margins. AI margins were compared with conventional MRI regions of interest (ROIs), 10-mm margins around ROIs, and hemigland margins. The AI model also furnished predictions of negative surgical margin probability, which were assessed for accuracy.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Comparing AI with conventional margins, sensitivity was evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and negative margin rates using chi-square tests. Predicted versus observed negative margin probability was assessed using linear regression. Clinically significant prostate cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥2) delineated on whole-mount histopathology served as ground truth.

Results and limitations

The mean sensitivity for cancer-bearing voxels was higher for AI margins (97%) than for conventional ROIs (37%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (93%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (94%, p < 0.001). For index lesions, AI margins were more often negative (90%) than conventional ROIs (0%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (82%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (66%, p = 0.004). Predicted and observed negative margin probabilities were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.98, median error = 4%). Limitations include a validation dataset derived from a single institution's prostatectomy population.

Conclusions

The AI model was accurate and effective in an independent test set. This approach could improve and standardize treatment margin definition, potentially reducing cancer recurrence rates. Furthermore, an accurate assessment of negative margin probability could facilitate informed decision-making for patients and physicians.

Patient summary

Artificial intelligence was used to predict the extent of tumors in surgically removed prostate specimens. It predicted tumor margins more accurately than conventional methods.

Evolving imaging methods of prostate cancer and the emergence of magnetic resonance imaging guided ablation techniques

Established therapies for prostate cancer (PCa), surgery and radiotherapy, treat the entire gland regardless of the location of the cancerous lesion within the prostate. Although effective, these methods include a significant risk of worsening genitourinary outcomes. Targeted image-guided cancer therapy has gained acceptance through improved PCa detection, localization, and characterization by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Minimally-invasive ablative techniques aim to achieve comparable oncological outcomes to radical treatment while preserving genitourinary function. Transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) and next-generation transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) utilize MRI guidance to thermally ablate prostate tissue under real-time MRI monitoring and active temperature feedback control. Previous trials performed by our group and others, including a large multicenter study in men with localized favorable-risk disease, have demonstrated that TULSA provides effective prostate ablation with a favorable safety profile and low impact on quality of life. Recently, MRI-guided HIFU focal therapy was also shown as a safe and effective treatment of intermediate-risk PCa. Here we review the current literature on ablative techniques in the treatment of localized PCa with a focus on TULSA and HIFU methods.

Outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy after initial irreversible electroporation treatment for recurrent prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate: (i) safety, (ii) feasibility, and medium-term (iii) oncological and (iv) functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) for recurrent localised prostate cancer (PCa) following initial focal therapy using irreversible electroporation (IRE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An international, multicentre and retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients that underwent sRP for recurrent localised PCa after initial primary IRE treatment. Data were reported on (i) surgical complications, (ii) feasibility of sRP reported by surgeons, (iii) time interval between IRE and sRP and pathology results, and (iv) urinary continence, erectile function, and quality of life.

RESULTS

In four participating centres, a total of 39 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age 64 (60-67) years were identified. No serious adverse events occurred during or following sRP and surgery was deemed feasible without difficulties. The median (IQR) time to recurrence following IRE was 14.3 (9.1-38.8) months. Pathology results showed localised disease in 21 patients (53.8%) and locally-advanced disease in 18 (46.2%). Positive surgical margins (PSMs) were observed in 10 patients (25.6%), of which six (15.4%) had significant PSMs. A persistent detectable prostate-specific antigen level was found in one case after sRP, caused by metastatic disease. One patient had a biochemical recurrence 6 months after sRP. These two cases, together with a PSM case, required additional therapy after sRP. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 17.7 (11.8-26.4) months, urinary continence and erectile function were preserved in 34 (94.4%) and 18 patients (52.9%), respectively, while quality of life remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage RP is safe and feasible for patients with recurrent localised PCa following initial IRE treatment. The medium-term oncological and functional outcomes are similar to primary RP. Strict patient selection for focal therapy and standardised follow-up is needed as some patients developed high-grade disease.

Focal therapy of localized prostate cancer

In the treatment of localized prostate cancer, controlling the cancer and maintaining quality of life are important. Focal therapy of localized prostate cancer aims to treat the lesion/part of the prostate that includes the index lesion, which determines the prognosis. We performed a non-systematic review of novel studies on focal therapy of localized prostate cancer as primary treatment published between 2016 and 2021. For mainly intermediate-risk patients, therapeutic technology, such as cryoablation, brachytherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, photodynamic therapy, microwave-coagulation, electroporation, and laser ablation, etc., were performed. These procedures are minimally invasive and safe, and provide good functional outcome: a 94-100% pad-free rate against urinary incontinence and 47-86% erectile function, which is sufficient for sexual intercourse. Accurate three-dimensional mapping of the targeted lesion could be an essential navigation technique for therapeutic success. Intermediate- to short-term oncological outcomes were good, resulting in downstaging of the patient's status to no clinically significant cancer; however, transition to conventional whole-gland treatment was necessary in about 10-30% of patients. It is important to select appropriate patients by both multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy, and to follow-up postoperatively with methods such as active surveillance. Clinically significant prostate-specific antigen reduction, image response using preoperative and postoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, and histological analysis should be combined for follow-up.

Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer: The Impact on Sexual Function

Focal therapy (FT) has emerged as a potential treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa) with encouraging functional outcomes. According to the compelling evidence based on meta-analyses and recent trials, erectile function (EF) is mostly retained at 6 and 12 months after FT when compared to baseline. These findings are consistent across different energy sources reported to date. However, overall, quality of life, including impotence, was not the endpoint for most studies. Additionally, impotency has not been consistently reported in most of the recent literature. Furthermore, confounding factors such as baseline potency and usage of phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors (PDE5-I) were also frequently undisclosed. Long-term functional outcomes are awaited. To fully comprehend how FT affects EF, more extensive long-term randomized clinical trials using EF as a primary outcome are needed.

Value of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy to select patients for focal therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate the role of transrectal MRI fusion biopsy to select patients for prostate cancer focal therapy.

METHODS

Patients with suspected prostate cancer underwent transrectal MRI fusion biopsy with the Koelis trinity device. Two focal therapy eligibility criteria were subsequently defined: Group 1: PSA ≤ 15 ng/ml, unilateral csPCa, ISUP grade ≤ 2, no contralateral PIRADS 3-5 lesion; Group 2: same criteria but ISUP grade 3. These subgroups were correlated with histopathological post-prostatectomy parameters for stage pT2, unilateral csPCa, no ISUP upgrading. In addition, parameters of csPCa detection were analyzed for patients undergoing primary and re-biopsy.

RESULTS

Four hundred fourteen consecutive patients were analyzed (314 for primary biopsy, 100 for re-biopsy). Post-prostatectomy whole mount section analysis was available from 155 patients. 39 and 62 of these patients met focal therapy inclusion criteria for group 1 and group 2, respectively. A correlation with final pathology parameters following radical prostatectomy (stage pT2, unilateral csPCa, no ISUP upgrading) revealed a positive predictive value of only 53.8% and 64.5% for Group 1 and 2, respectively. The overall csPCa detection rate was 73.7%. In the re-biopsy group 20% additional patients with csPCa were detected by targeted biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Despite high csPCa detection rates following MRI fusion biopsy our study demonstrated that, using final pathology to confirm locally advanced tumor stage, presence of bilateral csPCa and ISUP upgrading, between 35.5 and 46.2% of patients would have been incorrectly selected for focal therapy.

Boosting the Immune Response—Combining Local and Immune Therapy for Prostate Cancer Treatment

Due to its slow progression and susceptibility to radical forms of treatment, low-grade PC is associated with high overall survival (OS). With the clinical progression of PC, the therapy is becoming more complex. The immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) makes PC a difficult target for most immunotherapeutics. Its general immune resistance is established by e.g., immune evasion through Treg cells, synthesis of immunosuppressive mediators, and the defective expression of surface neoantigens. The success of sipuleucel-T in clinical trials initiated several other clinical studies that specifically target the immune escape of tumors and eliminate the immunosuppressive properties of the TME. In the settings of PC treatment, this can be commonly achieved with radiation therapy (RT). In addition, focal therapies usually applied for localized PC, such as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy, cryotherapy, photodynamic therapy (PDT), and irreversible electroporation (IRE) were shown to boost the anti-cancer response. Nevertheless, the present guidelines restrict their application to the context of a clinical trial or a prospective cohort study. This review explains how RT and focal therapies enhance the immune response. We also provide data supporting the combination of RT and focal treatments with immune therapies.

Multifocality of Prostate Cancer and Candidacy for Focal Therapy Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-detected and targeted biopsy-confirmed multifocal and unifocal prostate cancer (PCa) among patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions. Focal therapy (FT) options for PCa are tied to accurate spatial identification on mpMRI.

METHODS

Men without prior diagnosis of PCa receiving mpMRI, targeted and systematic prostate biopsy in the Prospective Loyola Urology mpMRI (PLUM) Prostate Biopsy Cohort from 2015-2021 were included. Patients with PI-RADS ≥3 lesions were classified by mpMRI lesion location, targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy. Patients with single biopsy-confirmed grade group (GG) 2 lesions and concordant systematic biopsy were defined as FT candidates. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated predictors of mpMRI-undetected contralateral PCa.

RESULTS

Of 897 patients, 450 (50.2%) had a single, 141 (15.7%) had multiple unilateral, and 306 (34.1%) had bilateral mpMRI lesions. 28.7% had a single targeted biopsy-confirmed lesion while 10.4% were multifocal. Among single targeted biopsy-confirmed patients, 92/257 (35.8%) had contralateral PCa missed by mpMRI with DRE, PSA, and biopsy history identified as independent predictors. Systematic biopsy findings dropped the rate of single confirmed lesions from 28.7% to 18.4% and multifocal PCa increased from 10.4% to 20.6%. After GG restrictions, 61/897 (6.8%) remained potential FT candidates.

CONCLUSIONS

Among men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer receiving mpMRI, 28.7% had a single targeted biopsy-confirmed lesion and 10.4% had multifocality on mpMRI, but many mpMRI-undetected contralateral PCa were identified. Only 6.0% of biopsy-naïve men remained with a single GG2 mpMRI lesion potentially amenable to FT.

Impact of prostate biopsy technique on outcomes of the precision prostatectomy procedure

Objective

To assess the impact of iterative changes in preoperative and postoperative biopsy techniques on the outcomes of men undergoing the precision prostatectomy procedure. Precision prostatectomy is a novel surgical treatment for prostate cancer that aims to maximally preserve erectogenic nerves via partial preservation of the prostate capsule.

Design

Retrospective.

Setting

Single tertiary care center.

Participants

This study included 120 patients who consented to undergo prostate cancer treatment with the precision prostatectomy procedure. Patients were originally enrolled in one of two separate prospective protocols studying precision prostatectomy.

Interventions

Preoperatively, 60 patients were screened with transrectal (TR) biopsy and 60 were screened by transperineal (TP) biopsy. Ultimately, 117 patients underwent precision prostatectomy. Of the 43 postoperative biopsies, 19 were TR; 17 were TP with ultrasound; and 7 were TP with microultrasound (mUS).

Main outcome measures

Preoperatively, we evaluated whether the transition to TP biopsy was associated with differences in postoperative treatment failure defined as a neoplasm-positive postoperative biopsy. Postoperative biopsies were compared with respect to their ability to sample the remnant tissue, specifically percentage of cores positive for prostate tissue.

Results

Preoperatively, 9/60 (15%) positive postoperative biopsies occurred in the TR group and 6/60 (10%) in the TP group; Kaplan-Meier survival estimates did not differ between groups (p=0.69 by log rank). Postoperatively, the numbers of cores positive for prostate tissue were 99/160 (62%), 63/107 (59%), and 36/39 (92%) in the TR biopsy, TP with ultrasound, and TP with mUS groups, respectively; this difference was statistically significant versus the rate in the TR and standard TP groups (p=0.0003 and 0.0002).

Conclusion

We found no significant improvement in patient screening, preoperatively—though limited by small sample size and relatively short follow-up. The incorporation of high-frequency mUS for postoperative biopsies improved the ability to sample the remnant tissue with a higher efficiency.

Applications of Focused Ultrasound in the Treatment of Genitourinary Cancers

Simple Summary

Cancer is a prevalent disease globally, and conventional treatment options have been associated with substantial morbidity for patients. The unique acoustic properties and biological effects of focused ultrasound have been investigated for use as an alternative treatment option for various forms of cancer with lower associated morbidity than standard treatments. The objective of our review was to assess the current state and various applications of focused ultrasound for the treatment of genitourinary cancers, including prostate, kidney, bladder, penile, and testicular malignancies. Current research demonstrates that focused ultrasound-based focal therapy shows promise for the treatment of localized prostate and kidney cancer, and the effect of ultrasound on cell membranes may increase the efficacy of chemotherapeutics and radiotherapy. Focused ultrasound-based treatment modalities should continue to be investigated as an alternative or complementary treatment option for cancer patients.

Abstract

Traditional cancer treatments have been associated with substantial morbidity for patients. Focused ultrasound offers a novel modality for the treatment of various forms of cancer which may offer effective oncological control and low morbidity. We performed a review of PubMed articles assessing the current applications of focused ultrasound in the treatment of genitourinary cancers, including prostate, kidney, bladder, penile, and testicular cancer. Current research indicates that high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) focal therapy offers effective short-term oncologic control of localized prostate and kidney cancer with lower associated morbidity than radical surgery. In addition, studies in mice have demonstrated that focused ultrasound treatment increases the accuracy of chemotherapeutic drug delivery, the efficacy of drug uptake, and cytotoxic effects within targeted cancer cells. Ultrasound-based therapy shows promise for the treatment of genitourinary cancers. Further research should continue to investigate focused ultrasound as an alternative cancer treatment option or as a complement to increase the efficacy of conventional treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

Available evidence on HIFU for focal treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common oncologic disease among men. Radical treatment with curative intent provides good oncological results for PCa survivors, although definitive therapy is associated with significant number of serious side-effects. In modern-era of medicine tissue-sparing techniques, such as focal HIFU, have been proposed for PCa patients in order to provide cancer control equivalent to the standard-of-care procedures while reducing morbidities and complications. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence about focal HIFU therapy as a primary treatment for localized PCa.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review of focal HIFU therapy in the MEDLINE database (PROSPERO: CRD42021235581). Articles published in the English language between 2010 and 2020 with more than 50 patients were included.

RESULTS

Clinically significant in-field recurrence and out-of-field progression were detected to 22% and 29% PCa patients, respectively. Higher ISUP grade group, more positive cores at biopsy and bilateral disease were identified as the main risk factors for disease recurrence. The most common strategy for recurrence management was definitive therapy. Six months after focal HIFU therapy 98% of patients were totally continent and 80% of patients retained sufficient erections for sexual intercourse. The majority of complications presented in the early postoperative period and were classified as low-grade.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights that focal HIFU therapy appears to be a safe procedure, while short-term cancer control rate is encouraging. Though, second-line treatment or active surveillance seems to be necessary in a significant number of patients.

High Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation for Prostate Cancer: Whole Versus Partial Gland Ablation

BACKGROUND

We compared the clinical outcomes between whole-gland ablation (WGA) and partial gland ablation (PGA) using the high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) technique for localized prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 206 patients who underwent WGA or PGA for localized PCa. Follow-up prostatic biopsy was performed 1 year postoperatively. We performed intergroup comparison of the postoperative functional and oncological outcomes and complication rates.

RESULTS

In this study, 152 and 54 patients underwent PGA and WGA, respectively. The total operation time was significantly longer in the WGA than in the PGA group (107.5 minutes vs. 95.0 minutes, P = .004). Of the 86 patients who underwent postoperative prostate biopsy, no residual cancer was detected in 70.4% of the WGA and 72.9% of the PGA group. Incontinence-free survival was significantly shorter in the PGA than in the WGA group (P= .047); however, no significant intergroup difference was observed in erectile dysfunction-free survival (P= .317). The postoperative adverse event rate was significantly lower in the PGA than in the WGA group (37.5% vs. 66.7%, P = .023). Of the total patients investigated, 43 (20.9%) required additional endoscopic surgery for bladder outlet obstruction, and the additional endoscopic surgery rate was significantly higher in the WGA than in the PGA group (35.2% vs. 15.8%, P = .005).

CONCLUSION

HIFU treatment was associated with acceptable oncological and fair functional outcomes in patients with localized PCa. Moreover, PGA was associated with significantly better clinical outcomes, including the faster recovery of urinary incontinence and adverse effects.

Development and future prospective of treatment for localized prostate cancer with high-intensity focused ultrasound

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) was experimentally used for focal therapy for anti-cancer effects in prostate cancer (PC). Focal therapy is a diagnosis-based investigational treatment option for localized PC that cures clinically significant PC (csPC) while preserving the anatomical structures related to urinary and sexual function based on its spread observed using multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). The European Association of Urology indicated that the current status of focal therapy for localized PC was an investigational modality and encouraged prospective recording of outcomes and recruitment of suitable patients in 2018. During the last few years, large-population multi- and single-center prospective studies have investigated focal therapy as a treatment strategy for localized PC. In a multicenter prospective study with 5-year follow-up, failure-free survival, which was defined as avoidance of local salvage therapy (surgery or radiotherapy), systemic therapy, metastases, and prostate cancer-specific death, was 88%. In the previous studies, there was no significant influence on urinary function before and at 3 months after the treatment, although transient impairment was reported 1 month after the treatment. Pad- and leak-free continence was preserved in 80-100% of the patients after treatment. Erectile function was significantly impaired in the initial 3 months after treatment compared to the pretreatment values, but it improved 6 months after the focal therapy in the previous reports. Paired comparison studies and cohort studies with long-term follow-up will contribute to verifying this treatment's clinical outcomes for patients with localized PC.

Clinical application of the therapeutic ultrasound in urologic disease: Part II of the therapeutic ultrasound in urology

This article aimed to review the clinical application and evidence of the therapeutic ultrasound in detail for urological diseases such as prostate cancer, kidney tumor, erectile dysfunction, and urolithiasis. We searched for articles about high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), extracorporeal shock wave therapy, ultrasound lithotripsy, and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the MEDLINE and Embase. HIFU may be indicated as a primary treatment for low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer, and salvage therapy for local recurrence as a promising way to address the limitations of current standard therapies. The application of HIFU in treating kidney tumors has scarcely been reported with unsatisfactory results. Evidence indicates that low-intensity shockwave therapy improves subjective and objective erectile function in patients with erectile dysfunction. Regarding the application of ultrasound in stone management, the novel combination of ultrasound lithotripsy and other energy sources in a single probe promises to be a game-changer in efficiently disintegrating large kidney stones in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. ESWL is losing its role in managing upper urinary tract calculi worldwide. The burst-wave lithotripsy and ultrasound propulsion could be the new hope to regain its position in the lithotripsy field. According to our investigations and reviews, cavitation bubbles of the therapeutic ultrasound are actively being used in the field of urology. Although clinical evidence has been accumulated in urological diseases such as prostate cancer, kidney tumor, erectile dysfunction, and lithotripsy, further development is needed to be a game-changer in treating these diseases.

High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer with MRI-US Fusion Platform

Objective

The study aimed at investigating the outcome of prostate HIFU focal therapy using the MRI-US fusion platform for treatment localization and delivery.

Methods

It is a prospectively designed case series of HIFU focal therapy for localized prostate cancer. The inclusion criteria include clinical tumor stage ≤T2, visible index lesion on multiparametric MRI less than 20 mm in diameter, absence of Gleason 5 pattern on prostate biopsy, and PSA ≤ 20 ng/ml. HIFU focal therapy was performed in the conventional manner in the beginning 50% of the series, whereas the subsequent cases were performed with MRI-US fusion platform. The primary outcome was treatment failure rate which is defined by the need of salvage therapy. Secondary outcomes included tumor recurrence in follow-up biopsy, PSA change, perioperative complications, and postoperative functional outcomes.

Results

Twenty patients underwent HIFU focal ablation. HIFU on an MRI-US fusion platform had a trend of a longer total operative time than the conventional counterpart (124.2 min vs. 107.1 min, p=0.066). There was no difference in the mean ablation volume to lesion volume ratio between the two. The mean PSA percentage change from baseline to 6-month is more significant in the conventional group (63.3% vs. 44.6%, p=0.035). No suspicious lesion was seen at 6-month mpMRI in all 20 patients. Two patients, one from each group, eventually underwent radical treatment because of the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer in the form of out-of-field recurrences during follow-up biopsy. No significant difference was observed before and after HIFU concerning uroflowmetry, SF-12 score, and EPIC-26 score. It was observed that energy used per volume was positively correlated with PSA density of the patient (r = 0.6364, p=0.014).

Conclusion

In conclusion, HIFU with conventional or MRI-US fusion platform provided similar oncological and functional outcomes.

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) hemiablation of the prostate: Late follow-up MRI findings in non-recurrent patients

OBJECTIVES

Focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is an emerging option for the treatment of prostate cancer and often followed up by MRI. Image assessment of treatment failure, however, requires proper knowledge about typical procedure-related changes in prostate MRI, which is sparse, in particular for unilateral HIFU treatment and late follow up (beyond 6 months). The goal of this study was therefore to compile the type and frequency of such MRI findings in selected patients without recurrent cancer 12 months after prostate hemiablation.

METHODS

Data from a prospective multicenter trial on HIFU hemiablation were reviewed retrospectively. Trial patients have had a late follow-up by MRI (at around 12 months) and either MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion or standard TRUS-guided biopsy. This work deliberately included patients with non-recurrent cancer in the treated prostate lobe in per-protocol biopsy leaving 30 men with initial International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group of 1 or 2. Six categories of potential HIFU-related MRI features were assessed by an expert committee and then evaluated by two readers in consensus: 1. shrinkage of the treated lobe, 2. residual prostate tissue, 3. fluid-filled cavity, 4. fibrosis, 5. hematoma residuals (in the prostate or seminal vesicles) and 6. contrast enhancement of the ablated area.

RESULTS

Shrinkage of the ablated lobe was seen in 93% of the cases with an average percent volume change of -37% (range: -70% to +108%). In the contralateral lobe, the volume remained practically the same (-2% on average, p = 0.804). In the ablated lobe, the frequency of fibrosis was 97%. Residual prostate tissue was seen in 93% of the cases. The frequency for fluid-filled cavities was 97%, with the wide majority (90%) contiguous with the urethra. Hematoma residuals in the prostate and in seminal vesicles were found in 47% and 10% of the patients, respectively. Contrast enhancement was both rim-like (50%) as well as diffuse (33%) within the ablated area.

CONCLUSION

In our case series of HIFU hemiablation in the prostate, shrinkage, residual prostate tissue, fluid-filled cavities contiguous with the urethra and fibrosis were very common late MRI findings of the ablated lobe in non-recurrent patients. Rim-like contrast enhancement or diffuse one within the ablated area were less frequent.

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.

Focal High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation of the Prostate

With the advancement of early detection tools for prostate cancer and ability to better localize disease, there has been increased interest in focal or targeted therapies that carry less morbidity than traditional whole-gland treatments. The Sonablate^® high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) device has Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(K) clearance in the United States for ablation of prostate tissue. HIFU utilizes an ultrasound (US) transducer that focuses US beams on a preset point as much as 4 cm from the energy source without injuring intervening tissue. The Sonablate system guides the surgeon step-by-step to perform effective ablation of a target lesion. The surgeon can assess treatment effect with tissue change monitoring, and care is taken to prevent rectal wall injury. We believe hemiablation is the most favorable focal HIFU treatment to optimize cancer control and minimize the side effects associated with whole gland therapy. We recommend considering HIFU ablation as an extension of active surveillance rather than definitive treatment. Further research on long-term oncologic and functional outcomes is warranted.

An Updated Systematic Review on Focal Therapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: What Has Changed over the Past 5 Years?

CONTEXT

Focal therapy is a promising, minimally invasive strategy to selectively treat localized prostate cancer. A previous systematic review indicated that there is growing evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but that oncological effectiveness was yet to be defined.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of focal therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer in terms of functional and oncological outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies between October 2015 and December 31, 2020. In addition, the research stages were acquired according to the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study (IDEAL) recommendations. Ongoing studies were identified through clinical trial registries.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Seventy-two studies were identified exploring eight different sources of energy to deliver focal therapy in 5827 patients. Twenty-seven studies reported on high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), nine studies on irreversible electroporation, 11 on cryoablation, eight on focal laser ablation and focal brachytherapy, seven on photodynamic therapy (PDT), two on radiofrequency ablation, and one on prostatic artery embolization. The majority of studies were prospective development stage 2a studies (n = 35). PDT and HIFU, both in stage 3, showed promising results. Overall, HIFU studies reported a median of 95% pad-free patients and a median of 85% patients with no clinically significant cancer (CSC) in the treated area. For PDT, no changes in continence were reported and a median of 90% of patients were without CSC. Both treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 5 yr, focal therapy has been studied for eight different energy sources, mostly in single-arm stage 2 studies. Although a first randomized controlled trial in focal therapy has been performed, more high-quality evaluations are needed, preferably via multicenter randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up and predefined assessment of oncological and functional outcomes and health-related quality-of-life measures.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Focal treatment (FT) of prostate cancer has potential, considering that it has less impact on continence and potency than radical treatment. Our systematic review indicates that despite the method being studied extensively over the past half decade, the majority of studies remain in an early research stage. The techniques high-intensity focused ultrasound and photodynamic therapy have shown most progression toward advanced research stages and show favorable results. However, more high-quality evidence is required before FT can become available as a standard treatment.

Image-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound, A Novel Application for Interventional Nuclear Medicine?

Image-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) has been increasingly used in medicine over the past few decades, and several systems for such have become commercially available. HIFU has passed regulatory approval around the world for the ablation of various solid tumors, the treatment of neurologic diseases, and the palliative management of bone metastases. The mechanical and thermal effects of focused ultrasound provide a possibility for histotripsy, supportive radiation therapy, and targeted drug delivery. The integration of imaging modalities into HIFU systems allows for precise temperature monitoring and accurate treatment planning, increasing the safety and efficiency of treatment. Preclinical and clinical results have demonstrated the potential of image-guided HIFU to reduce adverse effects and increase the quality of life postoperatively. Interventional nuclear image-guided HIFU is an attractive noninvasive option for the future.

Focal therapy for primary and salvage prostate cancer treatment: a narrative review

Despite innovations in surgical technology and advancements in radiation therapy, radical treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer are associated with significant patient morbidity, including both urinary and sexual dysfunction. This has created a vital need for therapies and management strategies that provide an acceptable degree of oncologic efficacy while mitigating these undesirable side effects. Successful developments in screening approaches and advances in prostate imaging have allowed clinicians to identify, localize, and more precisely target early cancers. This has afforded urologists with an important opportunity to develop and employ focal ablation techniques that selectively destroy tumors while preserving the remainder of the gland, thus avoiding detrimental treatment effects to surrounding sensitive structures. A lack of high-level evidence supporting such an approach had previously hindered widespread adoption of focal treatments, but there are now numerous published clinical trials which have sought to establish benchmarks for safety and efficacy. As the clinical evidence supporting a potential role in prostate cancer treatment begins to accumulate, there has been a growing acceptance of focal therapy in the urologic oncology community. In this narrative review article, we describe the techniques, advantages, and side effect profiles of the most commonly utilized focal ablative techniques and analyze published clinical trial data supporting their evolving role in the prostate cancer treatment paradigm.

Analysis of oncological outcomes of whole-gland therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer in clinical and technical aspects: a retrospective consecutive case-series analysis with a median 5-year follow-up

PURPOSE

This study aimed to analyze technical and clinical factors related to oncological outcomes in patients with localized prostate cancer (PC) who were treated with whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2007-2014, patients diagnosed with localized PC who underwent whole-gland HIFU were consecutively included retrospectively. Biochemical failure was defined according to the Phoenix ASTRO guidelines. The relationship between oncological outcomes and technical and clinical factors was evaluated.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 428 patients. The median age was 67 years, and the median prostate-specific antigen level was 7.61 ng/mL. Patient risk classifications were low (n = 102), intermediate (n = 240), and high (n = 86). Biochemical disease-free survival rates of patients with HIFU for localized PC in the total, low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups according to D'Amico risk groups over a median follow-up period of 5 years (range 9-144) were 68.4%, 80.4%, 65.6%, and 61.6%, respectively. In multivariate logistic regression analyses to predict biochemical failure of the treatment, neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) in the high-risk group (OR 0.225, p = 0.015), and compression method in the low- (OR 0.178, p = 0.030), intermediate- (OR0.291, p < 0.0001), and high-risk (OR 0.316, p = 0.049) groups were significant factors that reduced the risk of biochemical failure after treatment. There were no significant differences in complications between patients treated with compression and those treated conventionally.

CONCLUSIONS

NHT may potentially improve oncological outcomes for patients in the high-risk group, and compression methods can improve the oncological outcomes of whole-gland therapy with HIFU.

Significant Impact of the Anterior Transition Zone Portion Treatment on Urinary Function After Focal Therapy with High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Prostate Cancer

Background: There is lack of evaluation of the effect of the treated area on the urinary function after focal therapy. The objectives of the study is to evaluate the effects of focal therapy on urinary function in the anterior portion of the transition zone (TZ) with transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: From 2016 to 2018, patients who were diagnosed as having localized PCa and treated with focal therapy with HIFU, were included prospectively. The urinary function and complications were evaluated separately in the treated regions of the anterior TZ (TZ group) and other portions (other group) for 12 months. Before and after the treatment, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS Quality Of Life (QOL), Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS), and uroflowmetry were evaluated to assess the urinary function. Results: Ninety patients were included in the study. There was no significant differences in the patients' characteristics between the two groups. At 1 month after the treatment, IPSS (p = 0.011), IPSS QOL (p = 0.002), OABSS (p = 0.002), maximum flow rates (p = 0.011), and residual urine volume (p = 0.011) in TZ group were significantly deteriorated compared with the other group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that anterior TZ treatment (odds ratio, 3.386; p = 0.029) was an independent risk factor for the deterioration with ≥32% of preoperative status of maximum flow rates. Concerning complication, the rates of Grade 2 urinary retention and Grade 3 urethral stricture were 15.4% and 11.5% in the TZ group and 0% and 0% in the other group, respectively. Conclusions: There was a greater risk of urinary dysfunction with treatment in the anterior TZ portion than in the other portion at 1 month after focal therapy with HIFU.

Cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound, irreversible electroporation, and vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Cryoablation (CA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), irreversible electroporation (IRE), and vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) have been evaluated as novel strategies for selected patients with prostate cancer (PCa). We aim to determine the current status of literature regarding the clinical outcomes among these minimally invasive therapies. A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for all English literature published from January 2001 to December 2019 was conducted to identify studies evaluating outcomes of CA, HIFU, IRE or VTP on PCa. Proportionality with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was performed using STATA version 14.0. 56 studies consisting of 7383 participants were found to report data of interest and fulfilled the inclusion criteria in the final meta-analysis. The pooled proportions of positive biopsy after procedure were 20.0%, 24.3%, 24.2%, and 36.2% in CA, HIFU, IRE and VTP, respectively. The pooled proportions of BRFS were 75.7% for CA and 74.4% for HIFU. The pooled proportions of CSS were 96.1%, 98.2%, and 97.9% for CA, HIFU, and IRE, respectively. The pooled proportions of OS were 92.8% for CA and 85.2% for HIFU. The pooled proportions of FFS were 64.7%, 90.4%, and 76.7% for CA, IRE and VTP, respectively. The pooled proportions of MFS were 92.8% for HIFU and 99.1% for IRE. This meta-analysis shows that CA, HIFU, IRE, and VTP are promising therapies for PCa patients with similar clinical outcomes. However, further larger, well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to confirm this assertion.

Acceptance, Indications and Chances of Focal Therapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A Real-World Perspective of Urologists in Germany

Purpose: Focal therapy (FT) became a frequently discussed treatment strategy of localized prostate cancer (PCa), but the acceptance and evaluation of FT by practicing urologists are still unclear. Methods: A 25-item anonymized online questionnaire (SurveyMonkey^®) was compiled by the German Society of Residents in Urology Academics Prostate Cancer Working Group and sent to the members of the German association of Urology. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine parameters for suggestion FT. Results: Two hundred ten urologists (median age 49 years) participated, from which 72% stated PCa as their main treatment focus. Ninety-nine percent of urologists were aware of and 54% wanted to improve their knowledge about FT. Sixty-five percent do not treat PCa with FT. FT is seen as an alternative to active surveillance and radiotherapy/radical prostatectomy by 66% and 37%, respectively. Regarding FT treatment strategies, 35% and 45% would treat all or all significant PCa foci, respectively, whereas 19% would treat mainly the index foci. Currently, 27% believe that FT will be an option as standard treatment in future, but 48% would not suggest FT to their patients, owing to an absence of evidence and insufficient diagnostic tools for proper patient selection today. Suggesting FT to patients is associated with self-performing FT (odds ratio [OR] 2.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-6.31) and believing in FT as a standard treatment in future (OR 9.05, 95% CI 6.68-22.30) (both p < 0.01). Conclusion: FT has currently no wide acceptance in German practicing urologists, mainly attributable to an absence of evidence for FT superiority compared to standard treatments.

The primary treatment of prostate cancer with high-intensity focused ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We systematically evaluated the evidences on oncological and functional outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) as the primary treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A systematic review was used Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from the inception of each database. The review analyzed the oncological and functional outcomes of HIFU in the treatment of PCa. The RevMan 5.3 software was used for quantity analysis incidence of complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles were included for analysis with a total of 7393 patients. Eighteen studies investigated the whole-gland HIFU, and the duration of follow-up ranged from 2 to 168 months. After whole-gland HIFU, the mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir was found to be 0.4 to 1.95 ng/mL and the mean time to PSA nadir was 2.4 to 5.4 months. The rate of positive biopsy after HIFU was 4.5% to 91.1%. Meta-analysis revealed the incidences of urinary incontinence, impotence, urinary obstruction, retention, and infection was 10%, 44%, 15%, 11%, 7%, respectively. Nine studies investigated partial-gland HIFU, and the duration of follow-up was 1 to 131 months. After partial-gland HIFU, the mean PSA nadir was 1.9 to 2.7 ng/mL and the mean time to PSA nadir 5.7 to 7.3 months. The rate of positive biopsy after HIFU in the treatment area was 14% to 37.5%. Meta-analysis revealed the incidences of urinary incontinence, impotence, urinary obstruction, retention, and infection was 2%, 21%, 2%, 9%, 11%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Early evidence suggested the partial-gland HIFU was safer than whole-gland HIFU, and they had similar oncological outcomes. More prospective randomized controlled trials of whole-gland and partial-gland HIFU for PCa was needed.

Focused ultrasound and prostate cancer

Focused ultrasound (FUS) has been utilized for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Initially, FUS was performed as a whole-gland treatment comparable to radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. However, after overall downward stage migration due to health screening programs involving prostate-specific antigen testing, as well as advances in conservative or observative strategies such as active surveillance, FUS has evolved from a whole-gland treatment to a focal treatment. This new treatment technique aims to ablate tumors while preserving the normal prostate tissue, thereby ensuring better preservation of urinary and erectile function. In this article, we review the mechanism and clinical outcomes of the FUS procedure.

Focal therapy, time to join the multi-disciplinary team discussion?

Organ preserving management is common place in renal cancer, breast cancer and many other solid organ tumours. Current strategies in managing intermediate risk prostate cancer include either whole gland treatment, in the form of radical radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy, or active surveillance. The former is associated with significant post-treatment functional morbidity, whilst the latter associated with the burden of surveillance activity and patient anxiety. Focal therapy would logically fit as a middle ground for suitable patients in whom treatment would be recommended, but where much better functional outcomes may be possible. Ideally this comes without restricting the successful prevention of harm from the cancer. Historically limitations in developing tissue preserving focal therapy strategies in prostate cancer, were due to inaccuracies in tumour characterisation prior to treatment and during follow up. Consequently for example many patients undergoing an active surveillance strategy were being upgraded and upstaged within a short period. Recently high level evidence supporting the use of MRI and targeted biopsies, in particular the PROMIS and PRECISION trials have strengthened clinician confidence in accurate disease characterisation, thus making focal therapy to become a more feasible management option. With improved diagnostic strategies and the publication of reassuring medium term oncological and functional outcomes after focal therapy for intermediate risk prostate cancer, has the time come to require consideration of focal therapy within our multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meetings and with patients? In this review we will consider patient selection and the evidence for the various focal ablation options as well as the surveillance of these patients after treatment. The forthcoming trials to determine comparative effectiveness will be discussed.

Focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound for the localized prostate cancer for Asian based on the localization with MRI-TRUS fusion image-guided transperineal biopsy and 12-cores transperineal systematic biopsy: prospective analysis of oncological and functional outcomes

BACKGROUND

We evaluated clinical outcomes of region target focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for the localized prostate cancer (PCa) based on magnetic resonance imaging-based biopsy and systematic prostate biopsy for Asian.

METHODS

We prospectively recruited patients with localized PCa, located their significant tumors using MRI-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) elastic fusion image-guided transperineal prostate biopsy and 12-cores transperineal systematic biopsy, and focally treated these regions in which the tumors were located in the prostate using HIFU. Patients' functional and oncological outcomes were analyzed prospectively.

RESULTS

We treated 90 men (median age 70 years; median PSA level 7.26 ng/ml). Catheterization was performed within 24 h after the treatment in all patients. Biochemical disease-free rate was 92.2% during 21 months follow-up when use of Phoenix ASTRO definition. In follow-up biopsy, significant cancer was detected in 8.9% of the patients in un-treated areas. Urinary functions, including international prostate symptom score (IPSS) (P < 0.0001), IPSS quality of life (QOL) (P = 0.001), overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS) (P < 0.0001), EPIC urinary domain (P < 0.0001), maximum urinary flow rate (P < 0.0001), and IIEF-5 (P = 0.001), had significantly deteriorated at 1 month after treatment, but improved to preoperative levels at 3 or 6 months. Rates of erectile dysfunction and ejaculation who had the functions were 86% and 70%, respectively, at 12 months after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The present treatment for Asian would have similar oncological and functional outcomes to those in previous reports. Further large studies are required to verify oncological and functional outcomes from this treatment for patients with localized PCa.

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.

Prospective Feasibility Study of Single-Shot Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Transrectal Focal Ablation of Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Urinary tract infections (UTI) represent the most frequent complications after transrectal focal ablation of prostate cancer. Single-shot antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention has not yet been described.

METHODS

In this cohort study of patients who received a high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation of prostate cancer within a registered prospective single-arm trial, we analyzed posttreatment UTI (≤30 days after HIFU) related to perioperative antibiotic management in an exploratory analysis: single-shot prophylaxis or targeted treatment for bacteriuria. Potential risk factors associated with UTI were evaluated by uni- and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 55 patients were eligible for analysis. Of these, 76.4% received antibiotic single-shot prophylaxis. UTI occurred in 10.7% of all patients, 5.4% developed fever, 3.6% required hospitalization. An antibiotic single-shot prophylaxis helped to protect 90.5% of men from infectious complications. Estimated effects indicate that a longer posttreatment catheterization (OR 3.38, 95% CI 0.47-27.08) and larger ablation volume (OR 4.85, 95% CI 0.61-107.49) might be associated with the highest risk for UTI after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Single-shot antibiotic prophylaxis compared to a targeted antibiotic treatment showed a similar effectivity to prevent patients from infectious complications and should be considered as an element of antibiotic stewardship. Further research on risk factors and antibiotic strategies is required.

Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: Stratification and Management

CONTEXT

Intermediate-risk prostate cancer consists of a highly heterogeneous group of patients. Owing to this heterogeneity and variable prognoses, it is challenging to provide uniform treatment recommendations for men in this group.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature regarding the best available evidence for stratification and treatment of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched Medline and EMBASE, through September 2019 without year or language restriction, supplemented with hand search.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Different treatment options with good long-term oncological outcomes are available for intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. Best available evidence with long follow-up exists for radical prostatectomy and dose-escalated radiotherapy with short-term androgen deprivation. In favorable intermediate-risk patients, active surveillance and brachy-monotherapy also represent two valid treatment options. In carefully selected men, partial gland ablation represents a reasonable option. Patient preferences and comorbidities should also be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment options for intermediate-risk patients range from active surveillance to partial gland ablation, radical prostatectomy, and various radiotherapy methods. The best stratification and the optimal treatment remain controversial. Classification systems, such as the National Cancer Comprehensive Network guidelines, stratify this large cohort into subgroups with favorable or unfavorable disease, which may simplify treatment recommendations but still leave substantial variability within strata. Advanced imaging may further improve current stratification systems of intermediate-risk patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this review, we assessed the current literature regarding the best available evidence for stratification and treatment of intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.

Current status and future prospective of focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: development of multiparametric MRI, MRI-TRUS fusion image-guided biopsy, and treatment modalities

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been increasingly used to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) because of its usefulness in combination with anatomic and functional data. MRI-targeted biopsy, such as MRI-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion image-guided prostate biopsy, has high accuracy in the detection and localization of csPC. This novel diagnostic technique contributes to the development of tailor-made medicine as focal therapy, which cures the csPC while preserving the anatomical structures related to urinary and sexual function. In the early days of focal therapy, TRUS-guided systematic biopsy was used for patient selection, and treatment was performed for patients with low-risk PC. With the introduction of mpMRI and mapping biopsy, the treatment range is now determined based on individualized cancer localization. In recent prospective studies, 87.4% of treated patients had intermediate- and high-risk PC. However, focal therapy has two main limitations. First, a randomized controlled trial would be difficult to design because of the differences in pathological features between patients undergoing focal therapy and radical treatment. Therefore, pair-matched studies and/or historical controlled studies have been performed to compare focal therapy and radical treatment. Second, no long-term (≥ 10-year) follow-up study has been performed. However, recent prospective studies have encouraged the use of focal therapy as a treatment strategy for localized PC because it contributes to high preservation of continence and erectile function.

Cribriform pattern and perineural invasion on MR/US fusion biopsy predict failure of selection criteria for prostatic hemigland ablation

OBJECTIVES

To assess clinicopathologic factors on MR/US fusion biopsy that might predict failure of theoretical selection criteria for prostatic hemigland ablation (HA).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A retrospectively maintained single institution multiparametric MRI database (n = 1667) was queried to identify 355 patients who underwent MR/US fusion biopsy, including both targeted biopsy and concurrent systematic biopsy from December 1, 2014 to June 1, 2018. Clinical, pathological, and imaging variables were assessed on fusion biopsy (Table 1) to determine who met theoretical selection criteria for HA, defined as unilateral intermediate-risk prostate cancer per NCCN criteria (Grade Group [GG] 2 or 3 with prostate-specific antigen <20) and no evidence of extraprostatic extension (EPE) on multiparametric MRI. Predictors of selection criteria failure were then assessed in patients who also underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). Failure of the theoretical HA selection criteria was defined as presence of GG ≧ 2 on the contralateral (untreated) side, or the presence of high-risk disease (any GG ≧ 4 or EPE) in the RP specimen.

RESULTS

Of the 355 patients who underwent fusion biopsy, 84 patients met the theoretical selection criteria for HA. Of those patients eligible, 54 underwent RP, 37 (68.5%) of which represented unsuccessful HA selection criteria. Patients no longer met HA selection criteria on the basis of upgrading alone in 6/54 (11.1%), EPE alone in 9/54 (16.7%), bilateral GG 2 or 3 in 16/54 (29.6%) or combined EPE and bilateral GG 2 or 3 in 6/54 (11.1%) cases. In the HA selection failures due to upgrading, three also had EPE, one of whom also had missed contralateral GG ≧ 2 disease. The only factor independently associated with HA failure was any presence of cribriform pattern (HR 7.01, P = 0.021). Perineural invasion on systematic biopsyalso appeared to improve the performance of our multivariable model (HR 5.33, P = 0.052), though it was not statistically significant when using a cutoff of <0.05. Accuracy for predicting successful HA was 0.32 and improved to 0.74 if PNI or cribriform were excluded and 0.84 if both were excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of RP patients who underwent preoperative MRI/US fusion biopsy, current selection criteria for prostatic HA based on NCCN intermediate-risk stratification failed to accurately identify appropriate candidates in 68.5% of patients. Cribriform pattern and PNI detected on biopsy reduced the failure of hemigland selection criteria to 43%. These criteria should be routinely reported on biopsy pathology and taken into consideration when selecting patients for HA in prospective clinical trials.

Prostate focal therapy: the rule or exception?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate focal therapy has the potential to preserve urinary and sexual function while eliminating clinically significant cancer in a subset of men with low-volume, organ-confined prostate cancer. This systematic review aims to examine current evidence to determine the efficacy and safety of focal therapy for standard clinical application.

RECENT FINDINGS

Focal therapy reduces the rate of cancer progression and conversion to radical therapy in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. As a strategy, success in focal therapy is heavily dependent on the use of imaging and targeted biopsies. Despite advances in these areas, there remains a small but significant risk of under-detecting clinically significant cancer. Similarly, under-estimation of tumor volume may contribute to infield recurrences and close attention must be paid to the ablation margin. Although long-term oncological outcomes remain lacking, focal therapy has a low complication rate, minimal impact on urinary continence and a moderate impact on erectile function.

SUMMARY

With the appropriate expertise in imaging, targeted biopsy and targeted ablation, focal therapy is a good option in men with low-intermediate risk cancer who are willing to maximize their urinary and sexual function. However, close posttreatment surveillance and the possibility of conversion to whole gland therapy must be accepted.

Cost-utility analysis of focal high-intensity focussed ultrasound vs active surveillance for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer using a Markov multi-state model

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of focal high-intensity focussed ultrasound (F-HIFU) compared to active surveillance (AS) in patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer, in France.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A Markov multi-state model was elaborated for this purpose. Our analyses were conducted from the French National Health Insurance perspective, with a time horizon of 10 years and a 4% discount rate for cost and effectiveness. A secondary analysis used a 30-year time horizon. Costs are presented in 2016 Euros (€), and effectiveness is expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Model parameters' value (probabilities for transitions between health states, and cost and utility of health states) is supported by systematic literature reviews (PubMed) and random effect meta-analyses. The cost of F-HIFU in our model was the temporary tariff attributed by the French Ministry of Health to the overall treatment of prostate cancer by HIFU (€6047). Our model was analysed using Microsoft Excel 2010 (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA). Uncertainty about the value of the model parameters was handled through probabilistic analyses.

RESULTS

The five health states of our model were as follows: initial state (AS or F-HIFU), radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, metastasis, and death. Transition probabilities from the initial F-HIFU state relied on four articles eligible for our meta-analyses. All were non-comparative studies. Utilities relied on a single cohort in San Diego, CA, USA. For a fictive cohort of 1000 individuals followed for 10 years, F-HIFU would be €207 520 more costly and would yield 382 less QALYs than AS, which means that AS is cost-effective when compared to F-HIFU. For a threshold value varying from €0 to 100 000/QALY, the probability of AS being cost-effective compared to F-HIFU varied from 56.5% to 60%. This level of uncertainty was in the same range with a 30-year time horizon.

CONCLUSION

Given existing published data, our results suggest that AS is cost-effective compared to F-HIFU in patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, but with high uncertainty. This uncertainty must be scaled down by continuing to supply the model with new published data and ideally through a randomised clinical trial that includes cost-effectiveness analyses.