Patient selection for prostate focal therapy in the era of active surveillance: an International Delphi Consensus Project

BACKGROUND

Whole-gland extirpation or irradiation is considered the gold standard for curative oncological treatment for localized prostate cancer, but is often associated with sexual and urinary impairment that adversely affects quality of life. This has led to increased interest in developing therapies with effective cancer control but less morbidity. We aimed to provide details of physician consensus on patient selection for prostate focal therapy (FT) in the era of contemporary prostate cancer management.

METHODS

We undertook a four-stage Delphi consensus project among a panel of 47 international experts in prostate FT. Data on three main domains (role of biopsy/imaging, disease and patient factors) were collected in three iterative rounds of online questionnaires and feedback. Consensus was defined as agreement in ⩾80% of physicians. Finally, an in-person meeting was attended by a core group of 16 experts to review the data and formulate the consensus statement.

RESULTS

Consensus was obtained in 16 of 18 subdomains. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is a standard imaging tool for patient selection for FT. In the presence of an mpMRI-suspicious lesion, histological confirmation is necessary prior to FT. In addition, systematic biopsy remains necessary to assess mpMRI-negative areas. However, adequate criteria for systematic biopsy remains indeterminate. FT can be recommended in D'Amico low-/intermediate-risk cancer including Gleason 4+3. Gleason 3+4 cancer, where localized, discrete and of favorable size represents the ideal case for FT. Tumor foci <1.5 ml on mpMRI or <20% of the prostate are suitable for FT, or up to 3 ml or 25% if localized to one hemi-gland. Gleason 3+3 at one core 1mm is acceptable in the untreated area. Preservation of sexual function is an important goal, but lack of erectile function should not exclude a patient from FT.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus provides a contemporary insight into expert opinion of patient selection for FT of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Utilization of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice and focal therapy: report from a Delphi consensus project

Purpose

To codify the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the interrogation of prostate neoplasia (PCa) in clinical practice and focal therapy (FT).

Methods

An international collaborative consensus project was undertaken using the Delphi method among experts in the field of PCa. An online questionnaire was presented in three consecutive rounds and modified each round based on the comments provided by the experts. Subsequently, a face-to-face meeting was held to discuss and finalize the consensus results.

Results

mpMRI should be performed in patients with prior negative biopsies if clinical suspicion remains, but not instead of the PSA test, nor as a stand-alone diagnostic tool or mpMRI-targeted biopsies only. It is not recommended to use a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner without an endorectal or pelvic phased-array coil. mpMRI should be performed following standard biopsy-based PCa diagnosis in both the planning and follow-up of FT. If a lesion is seen, MRI-TRUS fusion biopsies should be performed for FT planning. Systematic biopsies are still required for FT planning in biopsy-naïve patients and for patients with residual PCa after FT. Standard repeat biopsies should be taken during the follow-up of FT. The final decision to perform FT should be based on histopathology. However, these consensus statements may differ for expert centers versus non-expert centers.

Conclusions

The mpMRI is an important tool for characterizing and targeting PCa in clinical practice and FT. Standardization of acquisition and reading should be the main priority to guarantee consistent mpMRI quality throughout the urological community.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00345-016-1932-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effect of chenodeoxycholic acid and the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam on glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion

AIM

To evaluate the effects of the primary human bile acid, chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA), and the bile acid sequestrant (BAS) colesevelam, instilled into the stomach, on plasma levels of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, cholecystokinin and gastrin, as well as on gastric emptying, gallbladder volume, appetite and food intake.

METHODS

On four separate days, nine patients with type 2 diabetes, and 10 matched healthy control subjects received bolus instillations of (i) CDCA, (ii) colesevelam, (iii) CDCA + colesevelam or (iv) placebo. At baseline and for 180 min after instillation, blood was sampled.

RESULTS

In both the type 2 diabetes group and the healthy control group, CDCA elicited an increase in GLP-1 levels compared with colesevelam, CDCA + colesevelam and placebo, respectively (p < 0.05). The interventions did not affect plasma glucose, insulin or C-peptide concentrations in any of the groups. CDCA elicited a small increase in plasma insulin : glucose ratio compared with colesevelam, CDCA + colesevelam and placebo in both groups. Compared with colesevelam, CDCA + colesevelam and placebo, respectively, CDCA increased glucagon and delayed gastric emptying in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

CDCA increased GLP-1 and glucagon secretion, and delayed gastric emptying. We speculate that bile acid-induced activation of TGR5 on L cells increases GLP-1 secretion, which, in turn, may result in amplification of glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Furthermore our data suggest that colesevelam does not have an acute effect on GLP-1 secretion in humans.