Randomized Trial of Partial Gland Ablation with Vascular Targeted Phototherapy versus Active Surveillance for Low Risk Prostate Cancer: Extended Followup and Analyses of Effectiveness

The Contemporary Role of Salvage Radical Prostatectomy in the Management of Recurrent Prostate Cancer: An Up-to-Date Review

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer among men, with many treatment modalities available for patients, such as radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, cryotherapy, electroporation and other whole-gland or focal ablative novel techniques. Unfortunately, up to 60% of men with prostate cancer experience recurrence at 5 to 10 years. Salvage radical prostatectomy can be offered as an option in the setting of recurrence after a primary non-surgical treatment. However, the complexity of salvage radical prostatectomy is considered to be greater than that of primary surgery, making it the least popular treatment of choice. With the wide use of robotic platforms in urologic oncologic surgery, salvage radical prostatectomy has attracted attention again because, compared to past data, modern series involving salvage Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy have shown promising results. In this narrative literature review, we comprehensively examined data on salvage radical prostatectomy. We investigated the correlation between the different types of primary prostate cancer therapy and the following salvage radical prostatectomy. Furthermore, we explored the concept of a robotic approach and its beneficial effect in salvage surgery. Lastly, we emphasized several promising avenues for future research in this field.

Comparative study of immune response to local tumor destruction modalities in a murine breast cancer model

Introduction

Immunotherapy is revolutionizing the management of multiple cancer types. However, only a subset of patients responds to immunotherapy. One mechanism of resistance is the absence of immune infiltrates within the tumor. In situ vaccine with local means of tumor destruction that can induce immunogenic cell death have been shown to enhance tumor T cell infiltration and increase efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade.

Methods

Here, we compare three different forms of localize tumor destruction therapies: radiation therapy (RT), vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) and cryoablation (Cryo), which are known to induce immunogenic cell death, with their ability to induce local and systemic immune responses in a mouse 4T1 breast cancer model. The effects of combining RT, VTP, Cryo with anti-PD1 was also assessed.

Results

We observed that RT, VTP and Cryo significantly delayed tumor growth and extended overall survival. In addition, they also induced regression of non-treated distant tumors in a bilateral model suggesting a systemic immune response. Flow cytometry showed that VTP and Cryo are associated with a reduction in CD11b+ myeloid cells (granulocytes, monocytes, and macrophages) in tumor and periphery. An increase in CD8+ T cell infiltration into tumors was observed only in the RT group. VTP and Cryo were associated with an increase in CD4+ and CD8+ cells in the periphery.

Conclusion

These data suggest that cell death induced by VTP and Cryo elicit similar immune responses that differ from local RT.

Follow-up of vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy in a real-world setting

PURPOSE

Vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) is an approved treatment option for unilateral low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Patients with unilateral low- or intermediate-risk PCa undergoing hemiablation by VTP were evaluated in a real-world setting. Oncological outcome after VTP was measured by MRI-based re-biopsy at 12 and 24 months. Functional outcome after 1 year was investigated by IIEF-5 and IPSS questionnaires. Progression was defined as the evidence3 of ISUP ≥ 2 PCa.

RESULTS

At any control biopsy (n = 46) after VTP, only 37% of patients showed no evidence of PCa. Recurrence-free survival was 20 months (95% CI 4.9-45.5) and progression-free survival was 38.5 months (95% CI 33.5-43.6 months). In-field and out-field recurrent PCa occurs in 37% (55% ISUP ≥ 2 PCa) and 35% (56% ISUP ≥ 2 PCa). Seventy-nine percent of patients preserved erectile function, respectively. Ten percent of patients presented long-term bladder outlet obstruction. None of the patients presented incontinence.

CONCLUSION

Due to the high-recurrence in- and out-field recurrence rate in a mainly low-risk prostate cancer cohort, VTP has to be regarded critically as a therapy option in these patients. Pre-interventional diagnostic evaluation is the main issue before focal therapy to reduce the risk of tumor recurrence and progression.

Versatile Design of Organic Polymeric Nanoparticles for Photodynamic Therapy of Prostate Cancer

Radical prostatectomy is a primary treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa), although high rates of recurrence are commonly observed postsurgery. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has demonstrated efficacy in treating nonmetastatic localized PCa with a low incidence of adverse events. However, its limited efficacy remains a concern. To address these issues, various organic polymeric nanoparticles (OPNPs) loaded with photosensitizers (PSs) that target prostate cancer have been developed. However, further optimization of the OPNP design is necessary to maximize the effectiveness of PDT and improve its clinical applicability. This Review provides an overview of the design, preparation, methodology, and oncological aspects of OPNP-based PDT for the treatment of PCa.

A multi-center international study to evaluate the safety, functional and oncological outcomes of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel technique to treat localized prostate cancer with the aim of achieving oncological control while reducing related side effects. We present the outcomes of localized prostate cancer treated with IRE from a multi-center prospective registry.

METHODS

Men with histologically confirmed prostate cancer were recruited to receive IRE. All the patients were proposed for prostate biopsy at 1-year post-IRE ablation. The functional outcomes were measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaires. The safety of IRE was graded by the treatment-related adverse events (AEs) according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).

RESULTS

411 patients were recruited in this study from July 2015 to April 2020. The median follow-up time was 24 months (IQR 15-36). 116 patients underwent repeat prostate biopsy during 12-18 months after IRE. Clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason ≥ 3 + 4) was detected in 24.1% (28/116) of the patients; any grade prostate cancers were found in 59.5% (69/116) of the patients. The IPSS score increased significantly from 7.1 to 8.2 (p = 0.015) at 3 months but decreased to 6.1 at 6 months (p = 0.017). Afterwards, the IPSS level remained stable during follow-up. The IIEF-5 score decreased at 3 months from 16.0 to 12.1 (p < 0.001) and then maintained equable afterwards. The rate of AEs was 1.8% at 3 months and then dropped to less than 1% at 6 months and remained stable until 48 months after IRE. Major AEs (Grade 3 or above) were rare.

CONCLUSION

For men with localized prostate cancer, IRE could achieve good urinary and sexual function outcomes and a reasonable oncological result. The real-world data are consistent with earlier studies, including recently published randomized controlled studies. The long-term oncological results need further investigation and follow-up.

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

Partial gland ablation using high-intensity focused ultrasound versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matched study

Background

We compared the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and partial gland ablation (PGA) using high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in localized prostate cancer.

Methods

We analyzed 3,859 patients who had undergone RARP and PGA using HIFU. According to the propensity score for each treatment, 137 patients after PGA were matched to 3,722 patients after RARP at a 1:4 ratio using the nearest neighbor method.

Results

The matched cohort comprised 685 subjects (RARP, 548; PGA, 137), with a median follow-up period of 22 months. Treatment failures were identified in 13.9% and 9.1% of patients in the PGA and RARP groups, respectively, after a median follow-up of 36 months postoperatively. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed significantly longer failure-free (P < 0.001) and salvage-free survival (P = 0.003) in the RARP group than in the PGA group. There was no significant difference in the postoperative urinary symptom score (P = 0.748), but the postoperative erectile function score was significantly higher in the PGA group (P < 0.001). The rate of urinary incontinence (any pad) was significantly lower in the PGA group than that in the RARP group (P < 0.001). Postoperative complications were more frequent in the PGA group (P = 0.003); however, there was no significant difference in high-grade complications (≥3) (P = 0.467).

Conclusion

PGA using HIFU showed statistically inferior oncological outcomes compared with RARP for failure-free survival and salvage-free survival. However, functional outcomes regarding postoperative incontinence and erectile dysfunction were more favorable in the PGA group.

Manipulating Neovasculature-Targeting Capability of Biomimetic Nanodiscs for Synergistic Photoactivatable Tumor Infarction and Chemotherapy

Tumor infarction therapy is a promising antitumor strategy with the advantages of taking a short therapy duration, less risk of resistance, and effectiveness against a wide range of tumor types. However, its clinical application is largely hindered by tumor recurrence in the surviving rim and the potential risk of thromboembolic events due to nonspecific vasculature targeting. Herein, a neovasculature-targeting synthetic high-density lipoprotein (sHDL) nanodisc loaded with pyropheophorbide-a and camptothecin (CPN) was fabricated for photoactivatable tumor infarction and synergistic chemotherapy. By manipulating the anisotropy in ligand modification of sHDL nanodiscs, CPN modified with neovaculature-targeting peptide on the planes (PCPN) shows up to 7-fold higher cellular uptake compared with that around the edge (ECPN). PCPN can efficiently bind to endothelial cells of tumor vessels, and upon laser irradiation, massive local thrombus can be induced by the photodynamic reaction to deprive nutrition supply. Meanwhile, CPT could be released in response to the tumor reductive environment, thus killing residual tumor cells in the surviving rim to inhibit recurrence. These findings not only offer a powerful approach of synergistic cancer therapy but also suggest the potential of plane-modified sHDL nanodiscs as a versatile drug delivery nanocarrier.

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.

Narrative review-focal therapy: are we ready to change the prostate cancer treatment paradigm?

Background and Objective

Prostate cancer (PCa) has seen improved detection methods with a subsequent rise in disease prevalence, making novel prostate cancer treatment options an exciting yet controversial topic. Current treatment modalities encompass traditional approaches, namely surgery (radical prostatectomy) and radiation therapy. While heralded as a standard of care, these modalities may come with significant risk profiles, primarily sexual (erectile dysfunction) and urinary incontinence. Advances in technology and imaging, specifically multi-parametric MRI, have afforded great leaps in targeted focal therapy as a primary treatment option for localized PCa. This review identifies and highlights published data for novel and emerging PCa focal therapy (FT) modalities.

Methods

Our study identified and reviewed the current literature for relevant investigations related to primary FT modalities as they apply to the treatment of prostate cancer. After an internal review, relevant studies (published in English, between 2000-April 2022) were included for analysis and summarization.

Key Content and Findings

We provide a concise review of several novel focal therapy modalities that offer realistic potential for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Our narrative includes studies that primarily include their respective results, specifically focusing on those that reported both oncologic and quality-of-life outcomes after focal therapy. While still in its cumulative infancy, we discuss the current limitations, future directions, and advancements that hopefully push focal therapy into the limelight.

Conclusions

While many of the mentioned focal therapies for PCa have shown promising pathologic and quality of life outcomes, further clinical evidence is required to change overall management guidelines and recommendations. The advantages of FT in avoiding sexual and urinary side-effects of radical surgery or radiation are apparent; however, it is necessary to recognize the need for further long-term evidence that is durable over time and comparable to current gold-standard treatment options.

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.

Photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer: Recent advances, challenges and opportunities

Over the past two decades, there has been a tendency toward early diagnosis of prostate cancer due to raised awareness among the general public and professionals, as well as the promotion of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. As a result, patients with prostate cancer are detected at an earlier stage. Due to the risks of urine incontinence, erectile dysfunction, etc., surgery is not advised because the tumor is so small at this early stage. Doctors typically only advise active surveillance. However, it will bring negative psychological effects on patients, such as anxiety. And there is a higher chance of cancer progression. Focal therapy has received increasing attention as an alternative option between active monitoring and radical therapy. Due to its minimally invasive, oncological safety, low toxicity, minimal effects on functional outcomes and support by level 1 evidence from the only RCT within the focal therapy literature, photodynamic treatment (PDT) holds significant promise as the focal therapy of choice over other modalities for men with localized prostate cancer. However, there are still numerous obstacles that prevent further advancement. The review that follows provides an overview of the preclinical and clinical published research on PDT for prostate cancer from 1999 to the present. It focuses on clinical applications of PDT and innovative techniques and technologies that address current problems, especially the use of nanoparticle photosensitizers in PDT of prostate cancer.

Outcomes of Salvage Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Focal Ablation for Prostate Cancer in Comparison to Primary Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer is less invasive than radical treatment but carries a risk of recurrence. Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (S-RARP) is a possible option after FT failure.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of FT on functional and oncological outcomes following S-RARP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In a retrospective analysis of data from a prospectively collected institutional database, 53 patients who underwent S-RARP following failure of focal ablation were selected as group I; patients who had whole-gland ablation and external beam therapy were excluded. This group was matched to a control sample (matched at ratios of 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 1:4) of men who had undergone primary RARP, using age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, body mass index, Sexual Health Inventory for Men score, American Urological Association symptom score, Charlson comorbidity index, prostate weight, preoperative Gleason score (GS), and history of smoking as variables.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

S-RARP after FT was performed using a standardized technique developed at our institute with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System.

MEASUREMENTS

Oncological and functional outcomes were compared between the S-RARP and primary RARP groups.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

There was no difference in estimated blood loss (p = 0.8) between the 1:1 matched groups, but operating room time was significantly longer for S-RARP (p = 0.007). The primary RARP group had a higher proportion of patients who underwent a full nerve-sparing procedure. The S-RARP group had higher incidence of positive surgical margins (40% vs 15%; p = 0.008), GS ≥8 (25% vs 15%; p = 0.07), and positive lymph node status (9.4% vs 5.7%; p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in overall complications between the groups. The primary RARP group had a higher incidence of lymphocele drainage after surgery (15% vs 0%; p = 0.006). The main limitation of the study is its retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

S-RALP after FT failure is feasible; however, surgery following FT leads to poorer oncological and functional outcomes. Despite the targeted nature of FT, significant nonfocal collateral damage is evident in tissues surrounding the prostate, which in turn translates to poorer functional outcomes after S-RARP.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We studied the surgical challenges during robot-assisted removal of the prostate after previous focal treatment (FT) for prostate cancer and compared the outcomes to those for robot-assisted prostate removal in patients who had no previous FT. We found that this technique is safe and effective with a limited risk of complications, but poor urinary and sexual functional outcomes.

Active Surveillance versus non-radical treatment for low-risk men with prostate cancer; A Review

Low-risk prostate cancer has traditionally seen a preference towards avoiding treatment-related harms with active surveillance (AS) and multimodal monitoring protocols utilized to assess for disease progression. Large trials have shown variations in mortality and cancer survival benefit between AS and radical treatment, which has prompted further trials into the management of low-risk disease. Nonradical treatments for men on AS have been an emerging field and yet to enter mainstream guidelines or practice. These include pharmacological treatments, focal therapy, nutraceuticals, immunotherapy, and exercise. We present a review of all current major randomized clinical trials for nonradical treatment of men on AS and summarize their findings.

Focal prostate cancer therapy in the era of multiparametric MRI: a review of options and outcomes

BACKGROUND

The goal of prostate cancer focal therapy is to achieve oncologic control while reducing the rate of adverse events associated with whole-gland treatments. Numerous focal therapy modalities are currently available with early data demonstrating highly variable rates of cancer control and preservation of sexual/urinary function.

METHODS

All English language clinical trial publications evaluating various focal therapies for localized prostate cancer were reviewed. The literature search was limited to studies from the modern era of MRI-guided treatment, as MRI is hypothesized to improve tumor localization and targeting. Primary outcomes were post-treatment cancer-free rates, in-field/out-of-field recurrence rates, and rates of conversion to radical therapy. Secondary outcomes were related to functional status and adverse events.

RESULTS

Numerous focal therapies were identified with clinical data including high-intensity focused ultrasound, transurethral ultrasound ablation, focal laser ablation, focal cryotherapy, irreversible electroporation, and photodynamic therapy. Recurrence rates among all technologies were low to moderate (0-51%) and rates of freedom from radical treatment were highly variable (46-98%). Rates of erectile dysfunction and incontinence generally ranged from 0 to 44% and 0 to 12%, respectively, with variability between focal therapy modalities. Caution should be exercised when comparing studies as outcomes are strongly associated with patient selection. No individual focal therapy is currently recommended by society guidelines. Randomized controlled trials are ongoing in search of a standard of care.

CONCLUSION

For localized MRI-visible prostate cancer, early clinical trial data demonstrate that focal therapy can provide good to moderate cancer control while having preferable side effect profiles compared to whole-gland treatments. While current studies do not make head-to-head comparisons between technologies, early data suggest a potential for these technologies to provide adequate cancer control in a well-selected patient population. The oncologic outcomes of some focal therapies appear promising; however, longer-term follow-up data are needed to assess the durability of early outcomes.

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer - Current status

Focal therapy (FT) has recently gained popularity for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). FT achieves cancer control by targeting the lesions or the regions of the cancer and avoids damage to the surrounding tissues thus minimizing side effects which are common to the radical treatment, such as urinary continence and sexual function, and bowel-related side effects. Various ablative methods are used to deliver energy to the cancerous tissue. We review the different modalities of treatment and the current state of FT for PCa.

Decision Regret and Quality of Life after Focal Therapy with Vascular-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy (TOOKAD®) for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to assess quality of life (QoL), decision involvement, and decisional regret after treatment with vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) (TOOKAD®) for unilateral low-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

Validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25) capturing QoL post-treatment, involvement in decision-making (Control Preferences Scale) and decision regret (Decisional Regret Scale), were given to patients at the 12-month visit after undergoing VTP at our institution between May 2018 and February 2021.

RESULTS

Out of 44 patients, 36 patients were included in this study and 31 (86.1%) responded to the questionnaires. Mean overall health score capturing QoL at 12 months was 79.3 (standard deviation: ±18.1). 70.9% of the patients (n = 22) had no decision regret, and 67.8% of men (n = 21) had an active role in decision-making. In control biopsy at 12 months post-treatment, 19.4% of patients (n = 7) presented with local recurrence and progression to higher Gleason score (GS) was found in 13.8% of patients (n = 5). Patients (n = 3) presenting with tumor recurrence or progression to higher GS in control biopsy showed a significantly higher level of decision regret (p < 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Only 9.7% of men (n = 3) felt a strong emotion of regret at 12 months after VTP. Level of decision regret was significantly higher in patients with local recurrence or tumor progression detected in control biopsy. QoL was stable after VTP.

Minimally invasive magnetic resonance image-guided prostate interventions

Whole gland prostate cancer treatment, i.e. radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy, is highly effective but also comes with a significant impact on quality of life and possible overtreatment in males with low to intermediate risk disease. Minimal-invasive treatment strategies are emerging techniques. Different sources of energy are used to aim for targeted treatment in order to reduce treatment-related complications and morbidity. Imaging plays an important role in targeting and monitoring of treatment approaches preserving parts of the prostatic tissue. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is widely used during image-guided interventions due to the multiplanar and real-time anatomical imaging while providing an improved treatment accuracy. This review evaluates the available image-guided prostate cancer treatment options using MRI or magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound (MRI/TRUS)-fusion guided imaging. The discussed minimal invasive image-guided prostate interventions may be considered as safe and feasible partial gland ablation in patients with (recurrent) prostate cancer. However, most studies focusing on minimally invasive prostate cancer treatments only report early stages of research and subsequent high-level evidence is still needed. Ensuring a safe and appropriate utilization in patients that will benefit the most, and applied by physicians with relevant training, has become the main challenge in minimally invasive prostate cancer treatments.

One ring is not enough to rule them all. Albumin-dependent ABCG2-mediated transport of chlorophyll-derived photosensitizers

Breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP, ABCG2) is a member of the ATP-binding-cassette (ABC) superfamily of membrane transporters. It is involved in the efflux of a broad range of xenobiotics of highly diverse structures. BCRP activity greatly influences drug distribution in vivo and is often associated with cancer multidrug resistance, which is observed in the case of both chemotherapy and photodynamic therapy. The set of ABCG2 substrates includes porphyrins and chlorins such as heme, hemin, protoporphyrin IX, chlorin e6, pheophorbide a, and their derivatives. Here we provide an evidence that magnesium- and zinc-substituted derivatives of pheophorbide a, which are very promising photosensitizers for use in photodynamic therapy, are also recognized and transported by ABCG2. Interestingly, despite minor structural differences, they clearly differ in the transport rate, both between each other and compared to pheophorbide a. In addition, their transport rate, like those of other structurally similar compounds, is strictly dependent on the level of serum albumin in the extracellular environment. The results that we present here are crucial for the use of metal-substituted pheophorbides in clinical practice but also provide an important insight into the mechanism of porphyrin transport by ABCG2.

Pyrrole-based photosensitizers for photodynamic therapy — a Thomas Dougherty award paper

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a therapeutic modality that uses light to treat malignant or benign diseases. A photosensitizer, light, and oxygen are the three main components needed to generate a cytotoxic effect. Pyrrole-based photosensitizers have been widely used for PDT. Many of the photosensitizers within this class are macrocyclic. This is particularly true for systems that have received regulatory approval or been the subject of clinical trials. However, in recent years, a number of boron dipyrromethanes (BODIPY) have been studied as photosensitizers. Herein, we review examples of some of the most relevant pyrrole-based photosensitizers.

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.

Investigation on Optical and Biological Properties of 2-(4-Dimethylaminophenyl)benzothiazole Based Cycloplatinated Complexes

The optical and biological properties of 2-(4-dimethylaminophenyl)benzothiazole cycloplatinated complexes featuring bioactive ligands ([{Pt(Me 2 N-pbt)(C 6 F 5 )}L] [L = Me 2 N-pbtH 1 , p -dpbH (4-(diphenylphosphino)benzoic acid) 2 , o -dpbH (2-(diphenylphosphino)benzoic acid) 3) , [Pt(Me 2 N-pbt)( o -dpb)] 4 ,  [{Pt(Me 2 N-pbt)(C 6 F 5 )} 2 (µ-PR n P)] [PR 4 P = O(CH 2 CH 2 OC(O)C 6 H 4 PPh 2 ) 2 5 , PR 12 P = O{(CH 2 CH 2 O) 3 C(O)C 6 H 4 PPh 2 } 2 6 ] are presented. Complexes 1-6 display 1 ILCT and metal perturbed 3 ILCT dual emissions. The ratio between both bands is excitation dependent, accomplishing warm-white emissions for 2 , 5 and 6 .  The phosphorescent emission is lost in aerated solutions owing to photoinduced electron transfer to 3 O 2 and formation of 1 O 2 , as confirmed in complexes 2 and 4 . They also exhibit photoinduced phosphorescence enhancement in non-degassed DMSO, due to local oxidation of DMSO by sensitized 1 O 2 , which causes a local degassing. Me 2 N-pbtH and the complexes exhibit specific accumulation in the Golgi apparatus although only 2 , 3 and 6 were active against A549 and HeLa cancer cell lines, being 6 highly selective respect to nontumoral cells. The potential photodynamic property of these complexes was demonstrated with complex 4 .

Conventional radical versus focal treatment for localised prostate cancer: a propensity score weighted comparison of 6-year tumour control

BACKGROUND

For localised prostate cancer, focal therapy offers an organ-sparing alternative to radical treatments (radiotherapy or prostatectomy). Currently, there is no randomised comparative effectiveness data evaluating cancer control of both strategies.

METHODS

Following the eligibility criteria PSA < 20 ng/mL, Gleason score ≤ 7 and T-stage ≤ T2c, we included 830 radical (440 radiotherapy, 390 prostatectomy) and 530 focal therapy (cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound or high-dose-rate brachytherapy) patients treated between 2005 and 2018 from multicentre registries in the Netherlands and the UK. A propensity score weighted (PSW) analysis was performed to compare failure-free survival (FFS), with failure defined as salvage treatment, metastatic disease, systemic treatment (androgen deprivation therapy or chemotherapy), or progression to watchful waiting. The secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Median (IQR) follow-up in each cohort was 55 (28-83) and 62 (42-83) months, respectively.

RESULTS

At baseline, radical patients had higher PSA (10.3 versus 7.9) and higher-grade disease (31% ISUP 3 versus 11%) compared to focal patients. After PSW, all covariates were balanced (SMD < 0.1). 6-year weighted FFS was higher after radical therapy (80.3%, 95% CI 73.9-87.3) than after focal therapy (72.8%, 95% CI 66.8-79.8) although not statistically significant (p = 0.1). 6-year weighted OS was significantly lower after radical therapy (93.4%, 95% CI 90.1-95.2 versus 97.5%, 95% CI 94-99.9; p = 0.02). When compared in a three-way analysis, focal and LRP patients had a higher risk of treatment failure than EBRT patients (p < 0.001), but EBRT patients had a higher risk of mortality than focal patients (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of a cohort-based analysis in which residual confounders are likely to exist, we found no clinically relevant difference in cancer control conferred by focal therapy compared to radical therapy at 6 years.

Novel Combinatorial Approaches to Tackle the Immunosuppressive Microenvironment of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second-most common cancer in men worldwide and treatment options for patients with advanced or aggressive prostate cancer or recurrent disease continue to be of limited success and are rarely curative. Despite immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) efficacy in some melanoma, lung, kidney and breast cancers, immunotherapy efforts have been remarkably unsuccessful in PCa. One hypothesis behind this lack of efficacy is the generation of a distinctly immunosuppressive prostate tumor microenvironment (TME) by regulatory T cells, MDSCs, and type 2 macrophages which have been implicated in a variety of pathological conditions including solid cancers. In PCa, Tregs and MDSCs are attracted to TME by low-grade chronic inflammatory signals, while tissue-resident type 2 macrophages are induced by cytokines such as IL4, IL10, IL13, transforming growth factor beta (TGFβ) or prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) produced by Th2 cells. These then drive tumor progression, therapy resistance and the generation of castration resistance, ultimately conferring a poor prognosis. The biology of MDSC and Treg is highly complex and the development, proliferation, maturation or function can each be pharmacologically mediated to counteract the immunosuppressive effects of these cells. Herein, we present a critical review of Treg, MDSC and M2 involvement in PCa progression but also investigate a newly recognized type of immune suppression induced by the chronic stimulation of the sympathetic adrenergic signaling pathway and propose targeted strategies to be used in a combinatorial modality with immunotherapy interventions such as ICB, Sipuleucel-T or antitumor vaccines for an enhanced anti-PCa tumor immune response. We conclude that a strategic sequence of therapeutic interventions in combination with additional holistic measures will be necessary to achieve maximum benefit for PCa patients.

Vascular-targeted Photodynamic Therapy in Unilateral Low-risk Prostate Cancer in Germany: 2-yr Single-centre Experience in a Real-world Setting Compared with Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) is an approved treatment option for unilateral low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

Herein, we report our initial experience of patients treated by VTP. We compared short-term functional and oncological outcomes with those of a consecutive cohort of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for unilateral low-risk PCa.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients with unilateral low-risk PCa undergoing VTP (n = 41) and RP (n = 49) were evaluated in a real-world setting.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Oncological outcome after VTP was measured by magnetic resonance imaging-based rebiopsy at 12 and 24 mo. Functional outcome after 1 yr was investigated by International Index of Erectile Function 5 and International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaires. Continence was evaluated by pad use.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In 12- and 24-mo control biopsy (n = 22) after VTP, 45% of VTP patients showed no evidence of PCa. Both low- and intermediate-risk PCa were detected in 27% of patients. None of the RP patients had a PCa recurrence. Of VTP and RP patients, 71% and 30%, respectively, preserved erectile function. Of VTP patients, 88% had no bladder outlet obstruction. Of RP patients, 96% and 4% used zero to one and two or more pads per day, respectively. Data acquisition was performed outside of a clinical trial. The short-term follow-up and the small number of rebiopsied patients have to be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

VTP is a promising treatment option in unilateral low-risk PCa presenting a lower complication profile than RP in a real-world setting. However, recurrence and progression after VTP are common in this low-risk PCa cohort, and have to be discussed critically with patients who wish VTP instead of active surveillance. Therefore, a rigorous surveillance strategy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and control biopsy is required.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) is a promising therapy option in patients with unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. However, tumour recurrence has to be taken into account. Noninferiority of VTP to standard curative treatment options still has to be confirmed.

Making a case "for" focal therapy of the prostate in intermediate risk prostate cancer: current perspective and ongoing trials

Focal therapy is growing as an alternative management options for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Parallel to the increasing popularity of active surveillance (AS) as a treatment for low-risk disease, there has been an increased interest towards providing focal therapy for patients with intermediate-risk disease. Focal therapy can act as a logical "middle ground" in patients who seek treatment while minimizing potential side effects of definitive whole-gland treatment. The aim of the current review is to define the rationale of focal therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and highlight the importance of patient selection in focal therapy candidacy.

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.

Photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer - A narrative review

This article is a review of approaches to treatment of low and high-grade prostate cancer including a discussion of active treatment vs. active surveillance for patients with low-grade prostate cancer. In particular, we will review PDT as an option for active treatment of low-grade prostate cancer considered in light of recent clinical trials. The mechanism and clinical methods of PDT application and the key points from clinical trials using PDT for prostate cancer with the photosensitizers m-tetrahydroxyphenyl chloride, protoporphyrin IX, motexafin lutetium, padoporfin, and padeliporfin between the years 2002 and 2017 are reviewed. Recently developed methodologies for photodynamic prostate cancer treatment that are in the experimental stage, photodynamic diagnosis, fluorescence guided resection, and PSMA-targeted PDT will also be discussed.

Can Cerenkov Light Really Induce an Effective Photodynamic Therapy?

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising therapeutic strategy for cancers where surgery and radiotherapy cannot be effective. PDT relies on the photoactivation of photosensitizers, most of the time by lasers to produced reactive oxygen species and notably singlet oxygen. The major drawback of this strategy is the weak light penetration in the tissues. To overcome this issue, recent studies proposed to generate visible light in situ with radioactive isotopes emitting charged particles able to produce Cerenkov radiation. In vitro and preclinical results are appealing, but the existence of a true, lethal phototherapeutic effect is still controversial. In this article, we have reviewed previous original works dealing with Cerenkov-induced PDT (CR-PDT). Moreover, we propose a simple analytical equation resolution to demonstrate that Cerenkov light can potentially generate a photo-therapeutic effect, although most of the Cerenkov photons are emitted in the UV-B and UV-C domains. We suggest that CR-PDT and direct UV-tissue interaction act synergistically to yield the therapeutic effect observed in the literature. Moreover, adding a nanoscintillator in the photosensitizer vicinity would increase the PDT efficacy, as it will convert Cerenkov UV photons to light absorbed by the photosensitizer.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2016 and 2020. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. Risk-adapted screening should be offered to men at increased risk from the age of 45 yr and to breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, who have been confirmed to be at risk of early and aggressive disease (mainly BRAC2), from around 40 yr of age. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is performed, a combination of targeted and systematic biopsies must be offered. There is currently no place for the routine use of tissue-based biomarkers. Whilst prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography is the most sensitive staging procedure, the lack of outcome benefit remains a major limitation. Active surveillance (AS) should always be discussed with low-risk patients, as well as with selected intermediate-risk patients with favourable International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the AS journey and the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A strong recommendation to consider moderate hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term hormonal treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2020 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for their use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Updated prostate cancer guidelines are presented, addressing screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. These guidelines rely on the available scientific evidence, and new insights will need to be considered and included on a regular basis. In some cases, the supporting evidence for new treatment options is not yet strong enough to provide a recommendation, which is why continuous updating is important. Patients must be fully informed of all relevant options and, together with their treating physicians, decide on the most optimal management for them.

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.

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.

Dual Targeting of Endothelial and Cancer Cells Potentiates In Vitro Nanobody-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) induces cell death through local light activation of a photosensitizer, although sub-optimal tumor specificity and side effects have hindered its clinical application. We introduced a new strategy named nanobody-targeted PDT in which photosensitizers are delivered to tumor cells by means of nanobodies. As efficacy of targeted PDT can be hampered by heterogeneity of target expression and/or moderate/low target expression levels, we explored the possibility of combined targeting of endothelial and cancer cells in vitro. We developed nanobodies binding to the mouse VEGFR2, which is overexpressed on tumor vasculature, and combined these with nanobodies specific for the cancer cell target EGFR. The nanobodies were conjugated to the photosensitizer IRDye700DX and specificity of the newly developed nanobodies was verified using several endothelial cell lines. The cytotoxicity of these conjugates was assessed in monocultures and in co-cultures with cancer cells, after illumination with an appropriate laser. The results show that the anti-VEGFR2 conjugates are specific and potent PDT agents. Nanobody-targeted PDT on co-culture of endothelial and cancer cells showed improved efficacy, when VEGFR2 and EGFR targeting nanobodies were applied simultaneously. Altogether, dual targeting of endothelial and cancer cells is a promising novel therapeutic strategy for more effective nanobody-targeted PDT.

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.

Contemporary treatments in prostate cancer focal therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Radical treatments for prostate cancer are associated with significant morbidity, including incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Advances in the field of prostate MRI and desire to reduce treatment morbidities have led to a rapid growth in focal treatments for prostate cancer. Here, we review novel focal prostate cancer treatments and their associated recent clinical data, with a particular focus on data reported within the last 24 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

High-intensity focal ultrasound, focal laser ablation, irreversible electroporation, focal cryotherapy, and photodynamic therapy have been used as treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer treatment. Despite the great variety of treatment techniques, each of these modalities is characterized by a significant rate of prostate cancer persistence within treatment zones (6-50%) and the presence of residual cancer within the prostate on rebiopsy (24-49%). These treatments, however, are associated with very low rates of high-grade complications, rare incontinence, and only mild or transient reductions in erectile function. The most common adverse events are urinary tract infections, hematuria, and urinary retention.

SUMMARY

Prostate cancer focal therapy is an attractive option for well-selected patients because of its low complication profile; however, long-term oncologic outcome is still lacking and early recurrence rates are high, limiting the ability of most urologic associations from endorsing its routine use.

Photodynamic Therapy and the Biophysics of the Tumor Microenvironment

Targeting the tumor microenvironment (TME) provides opportunities to modulate tumor physiology, enhance the delivery of therapeutic agents, impact immune response and overcome resistance. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a photochemistry-based, nonthermal modality that produces reactive molecular species at the site of light activation and is in the clinic for nononcologic and oncologic applications. The unique mechanisms and exquisite spatiotemporal control inherent to PDT enable selective modulation or destruction of the TME and cancer cells. Mechanical stress plays an important role in tumor growth and survival, with increasing implications for therapy design and drug delivery, but remains understudied in the context of PDT and PDT-based combinations. This review describes pharmacoengineering and bioengineering approaches in PDT to target cellular and noncellular components of the TME, as well as molecular targets on tumor and tumor-associated cells. Particular emphasis is placed on the role of mechanical stress in the context of targeted PDT regimens, and combinations, for primary and metastatic tumors.

Vascular targeted photodynamic therapy: A review of the efforts towards molecular targeting of tumor vasculature

The therapeutic value of vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) for cancer has already been recognized in the clinic: TOOKAD® has been clinically approved in Europe and Israel for treatment of men with low-risk prostate cancer. When light is applied shortly after intravenous administration of the photosensitizer, the damage is primarily done to the vasculature. This results in vessel constriction, blood flow stasis, and thrombus formation. Subsequently, the tumor is killed due to oxygen and nutrient deprivation. To further increase treatment specificity and to reduce undesired side effects such as damaging to the surrounding healthy tissues, efforts have been made to selectively target the PS to the tumor vasculature, an approach named molecular targeted VTP (molVTP). Several receptors have already been explored for this approach, namely CD13, CD276, Extra domains of fibronectin (A, B), Integrin αvβ3, Neuropilin-1, Nucleolin, PDGFRβ, tissue factor, and VEGFR-2, which are overexpressed on tumor vasculature. Preclinical studies have shown promising results, further encouraging the investigation and future application of molVTP, to improve selectivity and efficacy of cancer treatment. This strategy will hopefully lead to even more selective treatments for many cancer patients.

Prostate cancer "super-active surveillance" era opened by vascular targeted photodynamic therapy

The "super-active surveillance" concept denotes any active surveillance optimization that allows longer surveillance periods, with the main intention of avoiding overtreatment, by safely eliminating or postponing radical treatment. Super-active surveillance might add to the oncological control with minimal functional impact and similar quality of life compared to active surveillance, which has proved to be safe in well-selected patients. Vascular targeted photodynamic therapy has pioneering shown to significantly reduce the upgrade on subsequent biopsies, resulting in fewer cases converted to radical therapy, and any energy source can be applied to the super-active surveillance concept allowing more men to consider a tissue-preserving therapy for prostate cancer.

Nucleus-Targeted Organoiridium-Albumin Conjugate for Photodynamic Cancer Therapy

An organoiridium-albumin bioconjugate (Ir1-HSA) was synthesized by reaction of a pendant maleimide ligand with human serum albumin. The phosphorescence of Ir1-HSA was enhanced significantly compared to parent complex Ir1. The long phosphorescence lifetime and high 1 O2 quantum yield of Ir1-HSA are highly favorable properties for photodynamic therapy. Ir1-HSA mainly accumulated in the nucleus of living cancer cells and showed remarkable photocytotoxicity against a range of cancer cell lines and tumor spheroids (light IC50 ; 0.8-5 μm, photo-cytotoxicity index PI=40-60), while remaining non-toxic to normal cells and normal cell spheroids, even after photo-irradiation. This nucleus-targeting organoiridium-albumin is a strong candidate photosensitizer for anticancer photodynamic therapy.

[Focal therapy for prostate cancer]

Focal therapy (FT) should have the same oncological efficacy as whole gland therapy with fewer side effects. Precise diagnosis with PI-RADS v2 standard multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and fusion or template biopsy is a basic prerequisite. Numerous ablation technologies and treatment strategies have been developed, including hemiablation. Treatment success is still inconsistently defined. The only large randomized study available compares one of the procedures to standard therapy. Therefore, even in 2019, FT must still be regarded as experimental and should only be carried out within the context of studies. Follow-up should correspond to active surveillance (AS), including MRI and fusion biopsy. Advantages and disadvantages of each ablation technique should be taken into consideration as well as the suitability of certain regions in the gland. Ideally, an individualized "à la carte" selection of various procedures should be offered. FT is well suited for patients with highly localized cancers at intermediate risk if standard therapies or AS is not possible or has been refused.

Molecular superoxide radical photogeneration in cancer cells by dipyridophenazine iridium(iii) complexes

The switch from Type II to Type I photochemical mechanism by new Ir(iii) complexes for improved PDT of cancer under hypoxia is demonstrated.

Focal Ablation of Prostate Cancer

The challenge to the urology community is to reduce the risks of screening and treatment by reducing the number of men undergoing unnecessary biopsy and whole-gland curative treatment of low-risk disease. There is compelling evidence that focal ablation of prostate cancer is truly minimally invasive and offers major functional advantages over whole-gland treatment.