Prostate cancer treatment with Irreversible Electroporation (IRE): Safety, efficacy and clinical experience in 471 treatments.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
17
12
2018
accepted:
26
03
2019
entrez:
16
4
2019
pubmed:
16
4
2019
medline:
7
1
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) is a novel image-guided tissue ablation technology that induces cell death via very short but strong pulsed electric fields. IRE has been shown to have preserving properties towards vessels and nerves and the extracellular matrix. This makes IRE an ideal candidate to treat prostate cancer (PCa) where other treatment modalities frequently unselectively destroy surrounding structures inducing severe side effects like incontinence or impotence. We report the retrospective assessment of 471 IRE treatments in 429 patients of all grades and stages of PCa with 6-year maximum follow-up time. The patient cohort consisted of low (25), intermediate (88) and high-risk cancers (312). All had multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging, and 199 men had additional 3D-mapping biopsy for diagnostic work-up prior to IRE. Patients were treated either focally (123), sub-whole-gland (154), whole-gland (134) or for recurrent disease (63) after previous radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, etc. Adverse effects were mild (19.7%), moderate (3.7%) and severe (1.4%), never life-threatening. Urinary continence was preserved in all cases. IRE-induced erectile dysfunction persisted in 3% of the evaluated cases 12 months post treatment. Mean transient IIEF-5-Score reduction was 33% within 12-month post IRE follow-up and 15% after 12 months. Recurrences within the follow-up period occurred in 10% of the treated men, 23 in or adjacent to the treatment field and 18 outside the treatment field (residuals). Including residuals for worst case analysis, Kaplan Maier estimation on recurrence rate at 5 years resulted in 5.6% (CI95: 1.8-16.93) for Gleason 6, 14.6% (CI95: 8.8-23.7) for Gleason 7 and 39.5% (CI95: 23.5-61.4) for Gleason 8-10. The results indicate comparable efficacy of IRE to standard radical prostatectomy in terms of 5-year recurrence rates and better preservation of urogenital function, proving the safety and suitability of IRE for PCa treatment. The data also shows that IRE, besides focal therapy of early PCa, can also be used for whole-gland ablations, in patients with recurrent PCa, and as a problem-solver for local tumor control in T4-cancers not amenable to surgery and radiation therapy anymore.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) is a novel image-guided tissue ablation technology that induces cell death via very short but strong pulsed electric fields. IRE has been shown to have preserving properties towards vessels and nerves and the extracellular matrix. This makes IRE an ideal candidate to treat prostate cancer (PCa) where other treatment modalities frequently unselectively destroy surrounding structures inducing severe side effects like incontinence or impotence. We report the retrospective assessment of 471 IRE treatments in 429 patients of all grades and stages of PCa with 6-year maximum follow-up time.
MATERIAL AND FINDINGS
The patient cohort consisted of low (25), intermediate (88) and high-risk cancers (312). All had multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging, and 199 men had additional 3D-mapping biopsy for diagnostic work-up prior to IRE. Patients were treated either focally (123), sub-whole-gland (154), whole-gland (134) or for recurrent disease (63) after previous radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, etc. Adverse effects were mild (19.7%), moderate (3.7%) and severe (1.4%), never life-threatening. Urinary continence was preserved in all cases. IRE-induced erectile dysfunction persisted in 3% of the evaluated cases 12 months post treatment. Mean transient IIEF-5-Score reduction was 33% within 12-month post IRE follow-up and 15% after 12 months. Recurrences within the follow-up period occurred in 10% of the treated men, 23 in or adjacent to the treatment field and 18 outside the treatment field (residuals). Including residuals for worst case analysis, Kaplan Maier estimation on recurrence rate at 5 years resulted in 5.6% (CI95: 1.8-16.93) for Gleason 6, 14.6% (CI95: 8.8-23.7) for Gleason 7 and 39.5% (CI95: 23.5-61.4) for Gleason 8-10.
CONCLUSION
The results indicate comparable efficacy of IRE to standard radical prostatectomy in terms of 5-year recurrence rates and better preservation of urogenital function, proving the safety and suitability of IRE for PCa treatment. The data also shows that IRE, besides focal therapy of early PCa, can also be used for whole-gland ablations, in patients with recurrent PCa, and as a problem-solver for local tumor control in T4-cancers not amenable to surgery and radiation therapy anymore.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30986263
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215093
pii: PONE-D-18-36080
pmc: PMC6464181
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0215093Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Eur Urol Focus. 2019 Jul;5(4):585-591
pubmed: 29102671
N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 6;370(10):932-42
pubmed: 24597866
J Urol. 2016 Aug;196(2):552-9
pubmed: 27004693
Eur Urol. 2014 Oct;66(4):732-51
pubmed: 23769825
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Sep 10;27(26):4321-6
pubmed: 19652073
Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 Aug;6(8):603-12
pubmed: 16862191
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777
pubmed: 29552975
Int J Cancer. 1993 Dec 2;55(6):891-903
pubmed: 8253525
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2016 Mar;19(1):46-52
pubmed: 26458959
World J Urol. 2017 May;35(5):695-701
pubmed: 27637908
J Urol. 2005 Mar;173(3):797-802
pubmed: 15711272
Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86
pubmed: 25220842
Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):41-9
pubmed: 26361169
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Nov;13(11):e509-17
pubmed: 23117005
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014 Dec;17(4):343-7
pubmed: 25179590
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Feb;6(1):37-48
pubmed: 17241099
Psychosom Med. 2011 Sep;73(7):598-603
pubmed: 21862825
Eur Urol. 2018 Oct;74(4):422-429
pubmed: 29960750
Eur Urol. 2015 Apr;67(4):771-7
pubmed: 25281389
N Engl J Med. 2009 Oct 22;361(17):1704-6
pubmed: 19846858
BJU Int. 2018 May;121(5):716-724
pubmed: 28796935
Nat Med. 2009 May;15(5):559-65
pubmed: 19363497
Eur Urol. 2019 Feb;75(2):208-214
pubmed: 30274702
J Urol. 2003 Feb;169(2):517-23
pubmed: 12544300
BJU Int. 2011 Oct;108(7):1074-85
pubmed: 21489116