Clinical and histological predictive factors of reclassification of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Active surveillance (AS) has been established as a therapeutic strategy in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Demographic and anatomopathological factors that increase the probability of reclassifying patients have been identified.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Laboratory and histopathological data were collected from 116 patients included on AS since 2014. Univariate analysis was performed with Chi-square, t-student and Kendall's Tau, multivariate analysis according to logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 116 patients in AS, the median age at diagnosis was 66 years and the median follow-up was 13 months (2-72). Of these, 61 (52.6%) are still on surveillance, while 55 (47.4%) have left the program, mostly due to histological progression (52 patients (45.2%)); radical prostatectomy was performed in 27 (49.1%). Prostate volume (PV)≤60cc and the number of positive cylinders >1 in diagnostic biopsy (P=.05) were associated with higher reclassification rate in univariate analysis (P<.05). Multivariate analysis showed that these two variables significantly correlated with higher reclassification rate (PV 60 cc: OR 4.39, P=.04; >1 positive cylinder at diagnostic biopsy: OR 2.48, P=.03).

CONCLUSIONS

It has been shown that initial ultrasound volume and the number of positive cylinders in the diagnostic biopsy are independent risk factors for reclassification. Initial PSA, laterality of the affected cylinders and PSA density were not predictive factors of progression in our series.

[Radiofrequency ablation as an alternative treatment for organ confined renal tumor]

INTRODUCTION

We report our early clinical experience associated with radiofrequency (RF) ablation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective review of patients treated in our hospital with kidney ecoguide RF. All of them diagnosed with renal tumor and not candidates for surgery because of bilateral tumor, significant comorbidity or refusal to surgical treatment. We use an Amitech® 220 Watts generator with an electrode tip 3 cm. Straight knitting needles and hooks. Controls were performed with axial tomography at 24h, 7 days, 1, 3 and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter.

RESULTS

11 tumors, 9 patients. The mean age was 76 years (63-85 years). The average tumor size was 3.5 cm (2.2-5.8 cm). In 2 tumors was needed prior chemoembolization. In other two new RF session was needed. 9 tumors with treatment considered effective. Mean follow-up was 17.5 months (3-52 months). One patient had local recurrence at 14 months and needed a laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and two patients developed lung metastases 41.5 months after RF. There were no clinically relevant complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, we believe that RF is considered an alternative treatment for renal tumors with clinical stage T1 or T2 very symptomatic in patients in whom surgery is not possible, with acceptable results in the medium term, a good tolerance, reduced consumption of hospital resources and low complication rate.