Focal therapy for prostate cancer is a reasonable treatment option in properly selected patients

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Correlation of Peripheral Vein Tumour Marker Levels, Internal Iliac Vein Tumour Marker Levels and Radical Prostatectomy Specimens in Patients with Prostate Cancer and Borderline High Prostate-Specific Antigen: A Pilot Study

PURPOSE

To correlate prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free to total PSA percentage (fPSA%) and prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) levels from peripheral and pelvic venous samples with prostatectomy specimens in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma and borderline elevation of PSA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective institutional review board approved study, 7 patients with biopsy proven prostate cancer had a venous sampling procedure prior to prostatectomy (mean 3.2 days, range 1-7). Venous samples were taken from a peripheral vein (PVS), the right internal iliac vein, a deep right internal iliac vein branch, left internal iliac vein and a deep left internal iliac vein branch. Venous sampling results were compared to tumour volume, laterality, stage and grade in prostatectomy surgical specimens.

RESULTS

Mean PVS PSA was 4.29, range 2.3-6 ng/ml. PSA and PAP values in PVS did not differ significantly from internal iliac or deep internal iliac vein samples (p > 0.05). fPSA% was significantly higher in internal iliac (p = 0.004) and deep internal iliac (p = 0.003) vein samples compared to PVS. One of 7 patients had unilateral tumour only. This patient, with left-sided tumour, had a fPSA% of 6, 6, 6, 14 and 12 in his peripheral, right internal iliac, deep right internal iliac branch, left internal iliac and deep left internal iliac branch samples respectively. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

fPSA%, unlike total PSA or PAP, is significantly higher in pelvic vein compared to peripheral vein samples when prostate cancer is present. Larger studies including patients with higher PSA values are warranted to further investigate this counterintuitive finding.

Endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: developing selection criteria for MR-guided focal therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate criteria that can identify dominant treatable prostate cancer foci with high certainty at endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic (MRS) imaging, and thus facilitate selection of patients who are radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified 88 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent endorectal MRI and MRS imaging prior to radical prostatectomy with creation of histopathological tumor maps. Two independent readers noted the largest tumor foci at MRI, if visible, and the volume of concordant abnormal tissue at MRS imaging, if present. A logistic random intercept model was used to determine the association between clinical and MR findings and correct identification of treatable (over 0.5 cm3) dominant intraprostatic tumor foci.

RESULTS

Readers 1 and 2 identified dominant tumor foci in 50 (57%) and 58 (65%) of 88 patients; 42 (84%) and 48 (83%) of these were dominant treatable lesions at histopathology, respectively. Within the statistical model, the volume of concordant spectroscopic abnormality was the only factor that predicted correct identification of a dominant treatable lesion on T2-weighted images (odds ratio=1.75; 95% confidence interval=1.08 to 2.82; P value=0.02). In particular, all visible lesions on T2-weighted imaging associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant spectroscopic abnormality were correctly identified dominant treatable tumor foci.

CONCLUSION

Patients with dominant intraprostatic tumor foci seen on T2-weighted MRI and associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant MRS imaging abnormality may be radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy.

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

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility and the early toxicity of focal brachytherapy in highly selected localized prostate cancer patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-one patients underwent a focal brachytherapy between February 2010 and March 2012, representing 3.7% of the cases treated by our group during this period. Patient selection was based on (at least) two series of prostate biopsies and a high-resolution MRI. Only patients with very limited and localized tumors, according to strict criteria, were selected for the procedure. The technique used a real-time procedure with the implantation of free (125)I seeds and dynamic dose calculation. The prescribed dose for the focal volume was 145Gy.

RESULTS

The treated volume corresponded to a mean value of 34% of the total prostatic volume (range, 20-48%). For the focal volume, the mean D90 and V100 was 183.2Gy (range, 176-188Gy) and 99.3% (range, 98.8-100%), respectively. The technique was performed in an hour and a half. When compared with a previous cohort treated by whole-prostate brachytherapy, urinary toxicity (International Prostate Symptom Score) was borderline reduced (p = 0.04) at 6 months only, whereas the recovery of the International Index of Erectile Function 5 was better (p = 0.014). The International Continence Score was nil in almost all cases as well as rectal toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Focal treatment by brachytherapy is easily feasible with little acute toxicity. Further investigation is needed to assess the results in terms of tumor control and long-term toxicity.

Does local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occur at the site of primary tumor? Results of a longitudinal MRI and MRSI study

PURPOSE

To determine if local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occurs at the same site as the primary tumor before treatment, using longitudinal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to assess dominant tumor location.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective study was HIPAA compliant and approved by our Committee on Human Research. We identified all patients in our institutional prostate cancer database (1996 onward) who underwent endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before radiotherapy for biopsy-proven prostate cancer and again at least 2 years after radiotherapy (n = 124). Two radiologists recorded the presence, location, and size of unequivocal dominant tumor on pre- and postradiotherapy scans. Recurrent tumor was considered to be at the same location as the baseline tumor if at least 50% of the tumor location overlapped. Clinical and biopsy data were collected from all patients.

RESULTS

Nine patients had unequivocal dominant tumor on both pre- and postradiotherapy imaging, with mean pre- and postradiotherapy dominant tumor diameters of 1.8 cm (range, 1-2.2) and 1.9 cm (range, 1.4-2.6), respectively. The median follow-up interval was 7.3 years (range, 2.7-10.8). Dominant recurrent tumor was at the same location as dominant baseline tumor in 8 of 9 patients (89%).

CONCLUSIONS

Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation usually occurs at the same site as the dominant primary tumor at baseline, suggesting supplementary focal therapy aimed at enhancing local tumor control would be a rational addition to management.

Prostatic cancer surveillance following whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound: comparison of MRI and prostate-specific antigen for detection of residual or recurrent disease

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study compares dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI with the serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement for detection of residual disease following whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy of prostate cancer.

METHODS

Patients in whom post-HIFU DCE-MRI was followed within 3 months by ultrasound-guided transrectal biopsy were selected from a local database. 26 patients met the study inclusion criteria. Serial PSA levels following HIFU and post-HIFU follow-up MRI were retrieved for each patient. Three radiologists unaware of other investigative results independently assessed post-HIFU MRI studies for the presence of cancer, scoring on a four-point scale (1, no disease; 2, probably no disease; 3, probably residual disease; and 4, residual disease). Sensitivity, specificity and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed for each reader, post-HIFU PSA nadir and pre-biopsy PSA level thresholds of >0.2 and >0.5 ng ml(-1).

RESULTS

The sensitivity of DCE-MRI for detection of residual disease for the three readers ranged between 73% and 87%, and the specificity between 73% and 82%. There was good agreement between readers (κ = 0.69-0.77). The sensitivity and specificity of PSA thresholds was 60-87% and 73-100%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was greatest for pre-biopsy PSA (0.95).

CONCLUSION

DCE-MRI performed following whole-gland HIFU has similar sensitivity and specificity and ROC performance to serial PSA measurements for detection of residual or recurrent disease.

Pros and cons of focal therapy for localised prostate cancer

In prostate cancer, an interesting and intriguing option to overcome the risks of whole-gland treatment is focal therapy, with the aim of eradicating known cancer foci and reducing collateral damages to the structures essential for maintaining normal urinary and sexual function. Ablation of all known lesions would favorably alter the natural history of the cancer without impacting health-related quality of life and allows for safe retreatment with repeated focal therapy or whole-gland approaches if necessary. Our objective is to reassess the possibilities and criticisms of such procedure: the rationale for focal therapy and the enthusiasm come from the success of conservative approaches in treating other malignancies and in the high incidence of overtreatment introduced by prostate cancer screening programs. One of the challenges in applying such an approach to the treatment of prostate cancer is the multifocal nature of the disease and current difficulties in accurate tumor mapmaking.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: fact or fiction?

Prostate cancer is the commonest male cancer diagnosed in men in the UK, and the treatment of organ confined prostate cancer is a subject of much debate. Focal therapy for prostate cancer intends to treat the cancer within the prostate, whilst sparing the majority of the benign prostate tissue. In addition, the intention is to avoid treatment effects in the surrounding structures, the damage of which leads to the side effects commonly associated with radical whole gland therapies. This relies on accurate localization of the prostate cancer by biopsy and imaging followed by treatment using a modality capable of delivery to a focal area within the prostate. Focal therapy lies between the current extremes of radical whole gland treatment and active surveillance. There have been many articles reviewing the concept of focal therapy for organ confined prostate cancer, but with a paucity of data available for analysis. This is being addressed with an increase in the published data on focal therapy, using a number of different modalities. In this review, we address the question of whether the data currently published does in fact support the further development of the focal therapy approach, or whether it is a concept best relegated to the realms of fiction.

Multifocal prostate cancer: biologic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications

Prostatic adenocarcinoma is the most common cancer diagnosed in men and is often multifocal. Ongoing controversy exists about the most appropriate system of tumor classification and grading and the optimal curative treatment approaches. This review examines recent progress in the pathogenesis of multifocal prostatic adenocarcinoma and its biologic, pathologic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications. Prostatic cancer multifocality makes accurate clinical staging difficult, and repeated revisions have been undertaken in an effort to optimize prognostic accuracy. Although the 2010 revision represents an improvement over the previous systems, the clinical significance of the T2 substaging is questionable. Also discussed is the potential impact of tumor multifocality and clonal heterogeneity on the oncologic efficacy of novel focal ablative approaches. The clinical significance of smaller secondary tumors and the relationship between extent of chromosomal abnormalities and the metastatic potential of an individual tumor focus were reviewed.

Small Volume (<0.5 cc) Prostate Cancer: Characteristics and Clinical Implications

Introduction

It is not well known how many Small Volume Prostate Cancers (SVPC) may host high grade (Gleason pattern 4/5) or have extraprostatic extension in particular in the national setting. Features of SVPC are very interesting since they raise controversies in diagnosis and have important clinical implications in treatment strategies. The diagnosis may be difficult and the treatment ranges from active surveillance to radical surgery. AIM. We evaluate clinical and pathological features of SVPC in surgical specimens of patients who underwent biopsy and radical prostatectomy.

Methods

We analysed a consecutive series of 849 radical prostatectomies performed between 2005 and 2008. Inclusion criteria were: biopsy specimen available, pathological tumor volume analysis according to standard criteria, whole-mount section 3 mm step analysis according to Stanford protocol, clinical parameters (PSA, DRE, number of core biopsy taken). Exclusion criteria: any hormonal manipulation before surgery and cT1A/B stage. Data were analysed using SPSS for statistical comparison.

Results

238 patients were evaluated. SVPC<0.5 cc was observed in 58 (24.3%). Overall in 17/58 (29.3%) a clinical/pathological relevant disease was observed. In 16/58 (27.5%) pathological Gleason Score (GS) was 7–8, in 5/58 (9%) pathological stage was T3. The number of tumor foci was >1 in 78.3%, tumor-involving in both lobes in 55%. Unifocal disease was observed in 22%. Clinically relevant disease is significantly associated with total cancer volume (0.20 versus 0.31, p 0.007), but not to tumor foci (2.5 versus 2.0). PSA, age, no. of positive cores, DRE were not predictive of clinical relevant disease. Six of 17 (35%) cases with SVPC - who were in the low risk category (PSA <10, biopsy Gleason score <7 and negative DRE), had clinical relevant disease.

Conclusion

SVPC are clinically relevant in 29.3% since they have a Gleason pattern 4 (27.5%) or have only pathological T3 (9%). Early diagnosis techniques and treatments have to consider that SVPC prostate cancer may contain high risk disease in 1/4 of cases. Clinical parameters are not useful to accurately detect high risk SVPC.