Focal irreversible electroporation as primary treatment for localized prostate cancer
OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety, quality of life (QoL) and short-term oncological outcomes of primary focal irreversible electroporation (IRE) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa), and to identify potential risk factors for oncological failure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who met the consensus guidelines on patient criteria and selection methods for primary focal therapy were eligible for analysis. Focal IRE was performed for organ-confined clinically significant PCa, defined as high-volume disease with Gleason sum score 6 (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade 1) or any Gleason sum score of 7 (ISUP grades 2-3). Oncological, adverse event (AE) and QoL outcome data, with a minimum of 6 months' follow-up, were analysed. Patient characteristics and peri-operative treatment variables were compared between patients with and without oncological failure on follow-up biopsy. Wilcoxon's signed rank test, Wilcoxon's rank sum test and the chi-squared test were used to assess statistically significant differences in paired continuous, unpaired continuous and categorical variables respectively. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients met all eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. No high-grade AEs occurred. QoL questionnaire analysis demonstrated no significant change from baseline in physical (P = 0.81), mental (P = 0.48), bowel (P = 0.25) or urinary QoL domains (P = 0.41 and P = 0.25), but there was a mild decrease in the sexual QoL domain (median score 66 at baseline vs 54 at 6 months; P < 0.001). Compared with baseline, a decline of 70% in prostate-specific antigen level (1.8 ng/mL, interquartile range 0.96-4.8 ng/mL) was seen at 6-12 months. A narrow safety margin (P = 0.047) and system errors (P = 0.010) were identified as potential early risk factors for in-field oncological failure. In-field and whole-gland oncological control on follow-up biopsies was 84% (38/45 patients) and 76% (34/45 patients); this increased to 97% (38/39 patients) and 87% (34/39 patients) when patients treated with a narrow safety margin and system errors were excluded. CONCLUSION: Our data support the safety and feasibility of focal IRE as a primary treatment for localized PCa with effective short-term oncological control in carefully selected men.
|ISBN||1464-410X (Electronic) 1464-4096 (Linking)|
|Authors||van den Bos, W.; Scheltema, M. J.; Siriwardana, A. R.; Kalsbeek, A. M. F.; Thompson, J. E.; Ting, F.; Bohm, M.; Haynes, A. M.; Shnier, R.; Delprado, W.; Stricker, P. D.|
|Responsible Garvan Author|
|Publisher Name||BJU International|
|URL link to publisher's version||https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28796935|