Focal High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound vs. Active Surveillance for ISUP Grade 1 Prostate Cancer: Medium-Term Results of a Matched-Pair Comparison.


Journal

Clinical genitourinary cancer
ISSN: 1938-0682
Titre abrégé: Clin Genitourin Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101260955

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2022
Historique:
received: 07 03 2022
revised: 05 06 2022
accepted: 06 06 2022
pubmed: 3 8 2022
medline: 6 12 2022
entrez: 2 8 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Only 1 randomized controlled trial has compared focal therapy and active surveillance (AS) for the low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We investigated whether focal HIFU (fHIFU) yields oncologic advantages over AS for low-risk PCa. We included 2 non-randomized prospective series of 132 (fHIFU) and 421 (AS) consecutive patients diagnosed with ISUP 1 PCa between 2008 and 2018. A matched pair analysis was performed to decrease potential bias. Study main outcomes were freedom from radical treatment (RT) or androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), treatment-free survival (TFS), time to metastasis, and overall survival (OS). Median fHIFU follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range, 29-84 months). Among matched variables, no major differences were recorded except for AS having more suspicious digital rectal examination findings (P = .0074) and recent enrollment year (P = .0005). Five-year intervention-free survival from RT or ADT was higher for the fHIFU cohort (67.4% vs. 53.8%; P = .0158). Time to treatment was approximately 10 months shorter for AS than for fHIFU (time to RT, P = .0363; time to RT or ADT, P = .0156; time to any treatment, P = .0319). No differences were found in any-TFS (fHIFU, 61.4% vs. AS, 53.8%; P = .2635), OS (fHIFU, 97% vs. AS, 97%; P = .9237), or metastasis (n = 0 in fHIFU and n = 2 in AS; P = .4981). Major complications (≥ Clavien 3) were rare (n = 4), although 36.4% of men experienced complications. No relevant changes were noted in continence (P = .3949). At a 4-year median follow-up, fHIFU for mainly low-risk PCa (ISUP grade 1) is safe, may decrease the need for radical treatment or ADT and may allow longer time to treatment compared to AS. Nonetheless, no advantages are seen in PCa progression and/or death (OS).

Sections du résumé

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
Only 1 randomized controlled trial has compared focal therapy and active surveillance (AS) for the low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We investigated whether focal HIFU (fHIFU) yields oncologic advantages over AS for low-risk PCa.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We included 2 non-randomized prospective series of 132 (fHIFU) and 421 (AS) consecutive patients diagnosed with ISUP 1 PCa between 2008 and 2018. A matched pair analysis was performed to decrease potential bias. Study main outcomes were freedom from radical treatment (RT) or androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), treatment-free survival (TFS), time to metastasis, and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Median fHIFU follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range, 29-84 months). Among matched variables, no major differences were recorded except for AS having more suspicious digital rectal examination findings (P = .0074) and recent enrollment year (P = .0005). Five-year intervention-free survival from RT or ADT was higher for the fHIFU cohort (67.4% vs. 53.8%; P = .0158). Time to treatment was approximately 10 months shorter for AS than for fHIFU (time to RT, P = .0363; time to RT or ADT, P = .0156; time to any treatment, P = .0319). No differences were found in any-TFS (fHIFU, 61.4% vs. AS, 53.8%; P = .2635), OS (fHIFU, 97% vs. AS, 97%; P = .9237), or metastasis (n = 0 in fHIFU and n = 2 in AS; P = .4981). Major complications (≥ Clavien 3) were rare (n = 4), although 36.4% of men experienced complications. No relevant changes were noted in continence (P = .3949).
CONCLUSION
At a 4-year median follow-up, fHIFU for mainly low-risk PCa (ISUP grade 1) is safe, may decrease the need for radical treatment or ADT and may allow longer time to treatment compared to AS. Nonetheless, no advantages are seen in PCa progression and/or death (OS).

Identifiants

pubmed: 35918262
pii: S1558-7673(22)00134-3
doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2022.06.009
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Androgen Antagonists 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

592-604

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Giancarlo Marra (G)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France; Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin Italy; Department of Urology and Clinical Research Group on predictive onco-urology, APHP. Sorbonne University, Paris, France. Electronic address: drgiancarlomarra@gmail.com.

Timo Soeterik (T)

Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Davide Oreggia (D)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Rafael Tourinho-Barbosa (R)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Marco Moschini (M)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Armando Stabile (A)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Claudia Filippini (C)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin Italy.

Harm He van Melick (HH)

Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Roderick Cn van den Bergh (RC)

Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Paolo Gontero (P)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin and Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin Italy.

Caio Pasquali (C)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Petr Macek (P)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Nathalie Cathala (N)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Rafael Sanchez-Salas (R)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Xavier Cathelineau (X)

Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH