1
|
Deivasigamani S, Kotamarti S, Rastinehad AR, Salas RS, de la Rosette JJMCH, Lepor H, Pinto P, Ahmed HU, Gill I, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Emberton M, Lawrentschuk N, Wysock J, Feller JF, Crouzet S, Kumar M P, Seguier D, Adams ES, Michael Z, Abreu A, Jack Tay K, Ward JF, Shinohara K, Katz AE, Villers A, Chin JL, Stricker PD, Baco E, Macek P, Ahmad AE, Chiu PKF, Crawford ED, Rogers CG, Futterer JJ, Rais-Bahrami S, Robertson CN, Hadaschik B, Marra G, Valerio M, Chong KT, Kasivisvanathan V, Tan WP, Lomas D, Walz J, Guimaraes GC, Mertziotis NI, Becher E, Finelli A, Kasraeian A, Lebastchi AH, Vora A, Rosen MA, Bakir B, Arcot R, Yee S, Netsch C, Meng X, de Reijke TM, Tan YG, Regusci S, Benjamin TGR, Olivares R, Noureldin M, Bianco FJ, Sivaraman A, Kim FJ, Given RW, Dason S, Sheetz TJ, Shoji S, Schulman A, Royce P, Shah TT, Scionti S, Salomon G, Laguna P, Tourinho-Barbosa R, Aminsharifi A, Cathelineau X, Gontero P, Stabile A, Grummet J, Ledbetter L, Graton M, Stephen Jones J, Polascik TJ. Primary Whole-gland Ablation for the Treatment of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Focal Therapy Society Best Practice Statement. Eur Urol 2023; 84:547-560. [PMID: 37419773 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2023] [Revised: 05/25/2023] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/09/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Whole-gland ablation is a feasible and effective minimally invasive treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previous systematic reviews supported evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but oncological outcomes were inconclusive owing to limited follow-up. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the real-world data on the mid- to long-term oncological and functional outcomes of whole-gland cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in patients with clinically localized PCa, and to provide expert recommendations and commentary on these findings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We performed a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library publications through February 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. As endpoints, baseline clinical characteristics, and oncological and functional outcomes were assessed. To estimate the pooled prevalence of oncological, functional, and toxicity outcomes, and to quantify and explain the heterogeneity, random-effect meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Twenty-nine studies were identified, including 14 on cryoablation and 15 on HIFU with a median follow-up of 72 mo. Most of the studies were retrospective (n = 23), with IDEAL (idea, development, exploration, assessment, and long-term study) stage 2b (n = 20) being most common. Biochemical recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and metastasis-free survival rates at 10 yr were 58%, 96%, 63%, 71-79%, and 84%, respectively. Erectile function was preserved in 37% of cases, and overall pad-free continence was achieved in 96% of cases, with a 1-yr rate of 97.4-98.8%. The rates of stricture, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, rectourethral fistula, and sepsis were observed to be 11%, 9.5%, 8%, 0.7%, and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The mid- to long-term real-world data, and the safety profiles of cryoablation and HIFU are sound to support and be offered as primary treatment for appropriate patients with localized PCa. When compared with other existing treatment modalities for PCa, these ablative therapies provide nearly equivalent intermediate- to long-term oncological and toxicity outcomes, as well as excellent pad-free continence rates in the primary setting. This real-world clinical evidence provides long-term oncological and functional outcomes that enhance shared decision-making when balancing risks and expected outcomes that reflect patient preferences and values. PATIENT SUMMARY Cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound are minimally invasive treatments available to selectively treat localized prostate cancer, considering their nearly comparable intermediate- to long term cancer control and preservation of urinary continence to other radical treatments in the primary setting. However, a well-informed decision should be made based on one's values and preferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Srinath Kotamarti
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | | | | | - Herbert Lepor
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Division of Urology, Imperial College London & Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Inderbir Gill
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Laurence Klotz
- Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Samir S Taneja
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nathan Lawrentschuk
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - James Wysock
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | - Denis Seguier
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Urology, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France
| | - Eric S Adams
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Zoe Michael
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Andre Abreu
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Kae Jack Tay
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - John F Ward
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Katsuto Shinohara
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Aaron E Katz
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Arnauld Villers
- Department of Urology, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France
| | - Joseph L Chin
- Department of Urology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Eduard Baco
- Department of Urology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Petr Macek
- Department of Urology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Ardalan E Ahmad
- Department of Urology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Peter K F Chiu
- Department of Surgery, SH Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - E David Crawford
- Department of Urology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Craig G Rogers
- Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Jurgen J Futterer
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Cary N Robertson
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Boris Hadaschik
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Giancarlo Marra
- Department of Urology, The University Hospital of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Massimo Valerio
- Service of Urology, University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Wei Phin Tan
- Department of Urology, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Derek Lomas
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jochen Walz
- Department of Urology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute Cancer Center, Marseille, France
| | | | | | | | - Antonio Finelli
- Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Amir H Lebastchi
- Institute of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Anup Vora
- Chesapeake Urology, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Mark A Rosen
- Department of Urology, Sutter Health, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Baris Bakir
- Department of Radiology, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Rohit Arcot
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Urology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Samuel Yee
- Department of Surgery, SH Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | | | - Xiaosong Meng
- Department of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Theo M de Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Yu Guang Tan
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Stefano Regusci
- Department of Interventional Oncology, Swiss International Prostate Centelenor, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Ruben Olivares
- Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - Fernando J Bianco
- Urological Research Network, Urologist Specialist Group, Miami Lakes, FL, USA
| | - Arjun Sivaraman
- Division of Urology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
| | - Fernando J Kim
- Division of Urology, Denver Health Medical Center and University of Colorado Hospital, Denver, CO, USA
| | | | - Shawn Dason
- Department of Urology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Tyler J Sheetz
- Department of Urology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Sunao Shoji
- Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ariel Schulman
- Department of Urology, Maimonides Health Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Peter Royce
- Division of Urology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Taimur T Shah
- Division of Urology, Imperial College London & Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Georg Salomon
- Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center, University Clinic Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Pilar Laguna
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | - Alireza Aminsharifi
- Department of Urology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA
| | | | - Paolo Gontero
- Department of Urology, The University Hospital of Turin, Turin, Italy
| | - Armando Stabile
- Unit of Urology/Division of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Jeremy Grummet
- Division of Urology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Leila Ledbetter
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Margaret Graton
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Thomas J Polascik
- Duke Cancer Institute and Duke University Medical Centre, Durham, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Selvaggio O, Finati M, Falagario UG, Silecchia G, Recchia M, Checchia AA, Milillo P, Sanguedolce F, Cindolo L, Busetto GM, Bettocchi C, Cormio L, Carrieri G. Treatment of localized prostate cancer in elderly patients: the role of partial cryoablation. Int Urol Nephrol 2023; 55:1125-1132. [PMID: 36809642 PMCID: PMC10105669 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-023-03519-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2022] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/23/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate oncological outcomes of partial gland cryoablation (PGC) for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in a cohort of elderly patients who required an active treatment. METHODS Data from 110 consecutive patients treated with PGC for localized PCa were collected. All patients underwent the same standardized follow-up with serum-PSA level and digital rectal examination. Prostate MRI and eventual re-biopsy were performed at twelve months after cryotherapy or in case of suspicion of recurrence. Biochemical recurrence was defined according to Phoenix criteria (PSA nadir + 2 ng/ml). Kaplan-Meier curves and Multivariable Cox Regression analyses were used to predict disease progression, biochemical recurrence- (BCS) and additional treatment-free survival (TFS). RESULTS Median age was 75 years (IQR 70-79). PGC was performed in 54 (49.1%) patients with low-risk PCa, 42 (38.1%) with intermediate risk and 14 (12.8%) high risk. At a median follow-up of 36 months, we recorded a BCS and TFS of 75 and 81%, respectively. At 5 years, BCS was 68.5% and CRS 71.5%. High-risk prostate cancer was associated with lower TFS and BCS curves when compared with low-risk group (all p values < .03). A PSA reduction < 50% between preoperative level and nadir resulted as an independent failure predictor for all outcomes evaluated (all p values < .01). Age was not associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS PGC could be a valid treatment for low- to intermediate PCa in elderly patients, when a curative approach is suitable in terms of life expectancy and quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oscar Selvaggio
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Marco Finati
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy. .,Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, University of Foggia, Viale Pinto 1, 71110, Foggia, Italy.
| | | | - Giovanni Silecchia
- Department of Urology, Bonomo Teaching Hospital, Andria (BAT), Andria, Italy
| | - Marco Recchia
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | | | - Paola Milillo
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | | | - Luca Cindolo
- Department of Urology, "Villa Stuart" Private Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Gian Maria Busetto
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Carlo Bettocchi
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Luigi Cormio
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.,Department of Urology, Bonomo Teaching Hospital, Andria (BAT), Andria, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Carrieri
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Selvaggio O, Falagario UG, Finati M, Bruno SM, Recchia M, Milillo P, Sanguedolce F, Silecchia G, Macarini L, Cormio L, Carrieri G. Oncological outcomes of whole-gland cryoablation in patients with prostate cancer and high risk of lymph node invasion. Urol Ann 2023; 15:48-53. [PMID: 37006224 PMCID: PMC10062521 DOI: 10.4103/ua.ua_171_21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2021] [Accepted: 04/26/2022] [Indexed: 04/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Prostate cryoablation has been proposed as an alternative to radical prostatectomy for men with localized prostate cancer (PCa); however, it is limited by the lack of data regarding oncological outcomes and the impossibility of performing a lymph node dissection. The aim of this study was to assess if whole-gland cryoablation is oncologically safe, especially for patients in whom pelvic lymph node dissection would be necessary. Materials and Methods After institutional review board approval, we identified 102 patients who underwent whole-gland prostate cryoablation between 2013 and April 2019. Lymph node invasion (LNI) probability was computed using Briganti nomogram, and a 5% cutoff probability was used to stratify the population in two groups. Biochemical recurrence after procedure was assessed using Phoenix criteria. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, (CT), and bone scan or choline positron-emission tomography/CT were performed for the detection of distant metastases. Results Seventeen (17%) patients were treated for a low-risk PCa, 48 (47%) patients were at intermediate-risk PCa, and 37 (36%) patients were at high-risk PCa. Patients with a probability of LNI >5% (n = 46) exhibited higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, ISUP Grade Group, CT stage, and european association of urology (EAU) risk. Recurrence-free survival rates at 3 years' follow-up were 93%, 82%, and 72%, respectively for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients. At a median follow-up of 37 months (17-62), additional treatment and metastasis-free survival were 84% and 97%, respectively. No differences in oncological outcomes were found in patients with a probability of LNI above and below 5%. Conclusions Prostate whole-gland cryoablation can be considered a safe procedure with acceptable outcomes in low- and intermediate-risk patients. A high preoperative risk of nodal involvement could not be considered an exclusion criterion to perform cryoablation. Further studies are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oscar Selvaggio
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | | | - Marco Finati
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | | | - Marco Recchia
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Paola Milillo
- Department of Radiology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | | | | | - Luca Macarini
- Department of Radiology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - Luigi Cormio
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
- Department of Urology, Bonomo Teaching Hospital, Andria (BAT), Italy
| | - Giuseppe Carrieri
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Li Y, Wang N, Zhao D, Wang J, Jiang L, Wang Y, Chen D, Wu Z, Zhou F, Yang Z. Cytoreductive prostate cryoablation and metronomic cyclophosphamide for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Future Oncol 2022; 18:2373-2380. [PMID: 35440168 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2021-1424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: This study reports the outcomes of cytoreductive prostate cryoablation and metronomic cyclophosphamide for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Methods: Patients with mHSPC from the authors' prostate cancer database who had received cytoreductive prostate cryoablation and metronomic cyclophosphamide were identified retrospectively. Results: Eight consecutive patients were enrolled in the study. All the patients tolerated combination therapy. The median metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival was 62.5 months. Seven patients (87.5%) had a prostate-specific antigen nadir <0.1 ng/ml. Dysuria and hematuria before prostate cryoablation disappeared within 1 month after cryosurgery, and no incontinence was seen after prostate cryoablation. No local therapy was needed during follow-up. Conclusion: Cytoreductive prostate cryoablation and metronomic cyclophosphamide prove an effective and safe combination therapy for mHSPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yonghong Li
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Ning Wang
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Diwei Zhao
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Jun Wang
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Lijuan Jiang
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Yanjun Wang
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Dong Chen
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Zhiming Wu
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Fangjian Zhou
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| | - Zhenyu Yang
- Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Flegar L, Buerk B, Proschmann R, Propping S, Groeben C, Baunacke M, Herout R, Huber J, Thomas C, Borkowetz A. 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. Eur Urol Focus 2021; 8:121-127. [PMID: 33602642 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.01.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Revised: 12/27/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luka Flegar
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Björn Buerk
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Rick Proschmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan Propping
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christer Groeben
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Martin Baunacke
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Roman Herout
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Johannes Huber
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Thomas
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Angelika Borkowetz
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|