Dataset Information

The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: The incidence of localised prostate cancer is increasing worldwide. In light of recent evidence, current, radical, whole-gland treatments for organ-confined disease have being questioned with respect to their side effects, cancer control, and cost. Focal therapy may be an effective alternative strategy.To systematically review the existing literature on baseline characteristics of the target population; preoperative evaluation to localise disease; and perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes following focal therapy.Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Review databases were searched from inception to 31 October 2012. In addition, registered but not yet published trials were retrieved. Studies evaluating tissue-preserving therapies in men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer in the primary or salvage setting were included.A total of 2350 cases were treated to date across 30 studies. Most studies were retrospective with variable standards of reporting, although there was an increasing number of prospective registered trials. Focal therapy was mainly delivered to men with low and intermediate disease, although some high-risk cases were treated that had known, unilateral, significant cancer. In most of the cases, biopsy findings were correlated to specific preoperative imaging, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging or Doppler ultrasound to determine eligibility. Follow-up varied between 0 and 11.1 yr. In treatment-naïve prostates, pad-free continence ranged from 95% to 100%, erectile function ranged from 54% to 100%, and absence of clinically significant cancer ranged from 83% to 100%. In focal salvage cases for radiotherapy failure, the same outcomes were achieved in 87.2-100%, 29-40%, and 92% of cases, respectively. Biochemical disease-free survival was reported using a number of definitions that were not validated in the focal-therapy setting.Our systematic review highlights that, when focal therapy is delivered with intention to treat, the perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes are encouraging within a short- to medium-term follow-up. Focal therapy is a strategy by which the overtreatment burden of the current prostate cancer pathway could be reduced, but robust comparative effectiveness studies are now required.

SUBMITTER: Valerio M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4179888 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Valerio Massimo M Ahmed Hashim U HU Emberton Mark M Lawrentschuk Nathan N Lazzeri Massimo M Montironi Rodolfo R Nguyen Paul L PL Trachtenberg John J Polascik Thomas J TJ

European urology 20130606 4

<h4>Context</h4>The incidence of localised prostate cancer is increasing worldwide. In light of recent evidence, current, radical, whole-gland treatments for organ-confined disease have being questioned with respect to their side effects, cancer control, and cost. Focal therapy may be an effective alternative strategy.<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically review the existing literature on baseline characteristics of the target population; preoperative evaluation to localise disease; and perioperat ...[more]

PMID: 23769825

Similar Datasets

Project description:Although radiotherapy to the prostate for cancer is effective, recurrence occurs in 10-15% within 5 years. Traditional salvage treatments for men with radiorecurrent prostate cancer comprise of watchful waiting (WW) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Neither strategy provides ideal therapeutic ratios. Salvage focal ablation is an emerging option. We performed a systematic review of the Medline and Embase databases for studies reporting outcomes of focal salvage brachytherapy (sBT), cryotherapy (sCT) or high-intensity focused ultrasound (sHIFU) for radiorecurrent prostate cancer (conception to April 2019). Results were screened for inclusion against predetermined eligibility criteria. Certain data were extracted, including rates of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), metastasis, conversion to second-line therapies and adverse events. Of a total 134 articles returned from the search, 15 studies (14 case series and 1 comparative study) reported outcomes after focal sBT [5], sCT [7] and sHIFU [3]. Cohort size varied depending on intervention, with eligible studies of sBT being small case series. Median follow-up ranged from 10 to 56 months. Although pre-salvage demographics were similar [median age range, 61-75 years; prostate-specific antigen (PSA) range, 2.8-5.5 ng/mL], there was heterogeneity in patient selection, individual treatment protocols and outcome reporting. At 3 years, BDFS ranged from 61% to 71.4% after sBT, 48.1-72.4% after sCT and 48% after sHIFU. Only studies of sCT reported 5-year BDFS, which ranged from 46.5% to 54.4%. Rates of metastasis were low after all salvage modalities, as were conversion to second-line therapies (although this was poorly reported). Grade 3 adverse events were rare. This systematic review indicates that salvage focal ablation of radiorecurrent prostate cancer provides acceptable oncological outcomes and is well tolerated. Unfortunately, there is heterogeneity in the study design of existing evidence. Level 1 research comparing salvage focal therapies to existing whole-gland strategies is needed to further establish the role of these promising treatments.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Radical whole-gland therapy can lead to significant genitourinary and rectal side-effects for men with localised prostate cancer. We report on whether selective focal ablation of unifocal and multifocal cancer lesions can reduce this treatment burden. METHODS:Men aged 45-80 years were eligible for this prospective development study if they had low-risk to high-risk localised prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen [PSA] ?15 ng/mL, Gleason score ?4?+?3, stage ?T2), with no previous androgen deprivation or treatment for prostate cancer, and who could safely undergo multiparametric MRI and have a general anaesthetic. Patients received focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound, delivered to all known cancer lesions, with a margin of normal tissue, identified on multiparametric MRI, template prostate-mapping biopsies, or both. Primary endpoints were adverse events (serious and otherwise) and urinary symptoms and erectile function assessed using patient questionnaires. Analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00561314. FINDINGS:42 men were recruited between June 27, 2007, and June 30, 2010; one man died from an unrelated cause (pneumonia) 3 months after treatment and was excluded from analyses. After treatment, one man was admitted to hospital for acute urinary retention, and another had stricture interventions requiring hospital admission. Nine men (22%, 95% CI 11-38) had self-resolving, mild to moderate, intermittent dysuria (median duration 5·0 days [IQR 2·5-18·5]). Urinary debris occurred in 14 men (34%, 95% CI 20-51), with a median duration of 14·5 days (IQR 6·0-16·5). Urinary tract infection was noted in seven men (17%, 95% CI 7-32). Median overall International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) scores were similar at baseline and at 12 months (p=0·060), as were median IIEF-15 scores for intercourse satisfaction (p=0·454), sexual desire (p=0·644), and overall satisfaction (p=0·257). Significant deteriorations between baseline and 12 months were noted for IIEF-15 erectile (p=0·042) and orgasmic function (p=0·003). Of 35 men with good baseline function, 31 (89%, 95% CI 73-97) had erections sufficient for penetration 12 months after focal therapy. Median UCLA Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary incontinence scores were similar at baseline as and 12 months (p=0·045). There was an improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms, assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), between baseline and 12 months (p=0·026), but the IPSS-quality of life score showed no difference between baseline and 12 months (p=0·655). All 38 men with no baseline urinary incontinence were leak-free and pad-free by 9 months. All 40 men pad-free at baseline were pad-free by 3 months and maintained pad-free continence at 12 months. No significant difference was reported in median Trial Outcomes Index scores between baseline and 12 months (p=0·113) but significant improvement was shown in median Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Prostate (p=0·045) and median FACT-General scores (p=0·041). No histological evidence of cancer was identified in 30 of 39 men biopsied at 6 months (77%, 95% CI 61-89); 36 (92%, 79-98) were free of clinically significant cancer. After retreatment in four men, 39 of 41 (95%, 95% CI 83-99) had no evidence of disease on multiparametric MRI at 12 months. INTERPRETATION:Focal therapy of individual prostate cancer lesions, whether multifocal or unifocal, leads to a low rate of genitourinary side-effects and an encouraging rate of early absence of clinically significant prostate cancer. FUNDING:Medical Research Council (UK), Pelican Cancer Foundation, and St Peters Trust.

Project description:ObjectivesReview and assess cost-effectiveness studies of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer compared with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).DesignSystematic review.SettingPubMed, Embase, Scopus, International HTA database, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database and various HTA websites were searched (January 2005 to March 2021) to identify the eligible cost-effectiveness studies.ParticipantsCost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization analyses examining RARP versus ORP or LRP were included in this systematic review.InterventionsDifferent surgical approaches to treat localized prostate cancer: RARP compared with ORP and LRP.Primary and secondary outcome measuresA structured narrative synthesis was developed to summarize results of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness results (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Extended checklist. Application of medical device features were evaluated.ResultsTwelve studies met inclusion criteria, 11 of which were cost-utility analyses. Higher quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs were observed with RARP compared with ORP or LRP in 11 studies (91%). Among four studies comparing RARP with LRP, three reported RARP was dominant or cost-effective. Among ten studies comparing RARP with ORP, RARP was more cost-effective in five, not cost-effective in two, and inconclusive in three studies. Studies with longer time horizons tended to report favorable cost-effectiveness results for RARP. Nine studies (75%) were rated of moderate or good quality. Recommended medical device features were addressed to varying degrees within the literature as follows: capital investment included in most studies, dynamic pricing considered in about half, and learning curve and incremental innovation were poorly addressed.ConclusionsDespite study heterogeneity, RARP was more costly and effective compared with ORP and LRP in most studies and likely to be more cost-effective, particularly over a multiple year or lifetime time horizon. Further cost-effectiveness analyses for RARP that more thoroughly consider medical device features and use an appropriate time horizon are needed.Prospero registration numberCRD42021246811.

Project description:IntroductionFocal therapy has emerged as a promising treatment option for men with localised prostate cancer. However, most of the evaluation of postoperative function has taken place at a relatively high, non-granular level. Most of the data we use to provide informed consent for our patients is obtained from retrospective series, or derived from prospective studies whose primary outcome was oncological. Finally, most studies have focused on erectile function and overlooked other, presumably important, elements of male sexual function. The present study aims at studying in-depth the sexual consequences of focal therapy with various energy sources.Methods and analysisThis will be a mixed-methods research study based on a retrospective and prospective cohort, recruited in parallel. The retrospective cohort will consist of patients treated with focal irreversible electroporation, and the prospective cohort of patients treated with three focal therapy energies. Participants will be recruited from two UK urology centres, one National Health Service and one private. On consent, patients will fill in self-administered validated questionnaires (International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15), Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF)) and semistructured interviews will be organised to collect patients' expectations and postoperative changes in domains such as erection, ejaculation, orgasm, libido/sexual desire, masculinity/virility, penile morphology, pain or discomfort, regret, shame, cancer-related stress, overall impact and partner satisfaction. An exploratory thematic analysis will be performed to detail recurring themes that will be grouped into clusters of experiences. We will then be able to find clusters of agreement and disagreement that will be illustrated using exemplar patient quotations.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained (Regional Ethics Committee reference 20/NW/0335), as well as Health Research Authority approval. Results will be published in open-access peer-reviewed journals. Findings will also be translated into patient information resources (leaflets, online information sheets).Trial registration numberISRCTN11634296; Pre-results.

Dataset Information

The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Publications

The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets