Association between Lesion Location and Oncologic Outcomes after Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer Using Either High Intensity Focused Ultrasound or Cryotherapy.
Aged
Biopsy, Large-Core Needle
Cryosurgery
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Kallikreins
/ blood
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Staging
Prostate
/ diagnostic imaging
Prostate-Specific Antigen
/ blood
Prostatic Neoplasms
/ blood
Retrospective Studies
Survival Rate
Treatment Outcome
Ultrasound, High-Intensity Focused, Transrectal
HIFU
cryotherapy
focal therapy
outcome
prostate cancer
Journal
The Journal of urology
ISSN: 1527-3792
Titre abrégé: J Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376374
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
24
4
2021
medline:
31
8
2021
entrez:
23
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We assessed whether prostate cancer (PCa) location might affect oncologic outcomes after focal therapy (FT) for PCa. We identified 274 men receiving FT for PCa using either high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or cryotherapy at a high volume center between 2009 and 2018. Survival analyses using Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess any additional treatment and radical treatment rates according to PCa location. Propensity-score match analysis was used to compare oncologic outcomes of HIFU vs cryotherapy according to PCa location. Covariates were prostate specific antigen, clinical stage, prostate volume, Gleason score, maximum cancer core length, percentage of positive cores and treatment modality. A total of 166 and 108 men received FT with HIFU and cryotherapy, respectively. Overall, 39% (106) and 31% (85) received at least an additional treatment and a radical treatment after FT, respectively, with a median followup of 51 months. At 36 months' followup, the rates of any additional treatment-free survival were 71%, 75%, and 69% for patients with basal, mid-prostate and apical disease, respectively (p=0.7). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, PCa location was not significantly associated with higher risk of either any additional treatment or radical treatment (all p >0.4). After matching, there was no difference between HIFU vs cryotherapy in terms of any additional treatment rates according to PCa location. The PCa location does not significantly affect the rate of failure after FT. The presence of an apical lesion should not be considered an exclusion criteria for FT. Both HIFU and cryotherapy likely achieve similar medium-term oncologic results regardless of PCa location.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33890485
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001787
doi:
Substances chimiques
KLK3 protein, human
EC 3.4.21.-
Kallikreins
EC 3.4.21.-
Prostate-Specific Antigen
EC 3.4.21.77
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
638-645Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn