Single-session primary high-intensity focused ultrasonography treatment for localized prostate cancer: Biochemical outcomes using third generation-based technology

Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto Scarborough General Hospital, Scarborough, ON, Canada.
BJU International (Impact Factor: 3.53). 02/2012; 110(8):1142-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10945.x
Source: PubMed


Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?
The experience with HIFU as a minimally invasive treatment for localized prostate cancer is relatively new and most reports are from European centres.
Our study is unique in five regards: 1. Data was collected prospectively. 2. All patients were treated with contemporary technology. 3. Outcomes are reported after a single HIFU session using two definitions of biochemical failure that have the ability to predict longer-term clinical failure after primary ablative therapies for prostate cancer (Stuttgart definition for HIFU and Horwitz definition for radiation). 4. All patients were treated in a single centre. 5. No patients underwent peri-HIFU TURP. The present study represents the largest North American prospective cohort of primary HIFU for prostate cancer with mid-term oncological outcome data.

Download full-text


Available from: Forough Farrokhyar, Jun 08, 2015
  • Source
    • "Thus, it is clinically meaningful to evaluate the single-session HIFU treatment outcome. Recently, several reports that assessed treatment outcome for the single-session HIFU using the Ablatherm® have been reported [8, 9]; however, there is no available reports using the Sonablate® device. In this report, we first focused on the treatment outcome of single-session HIFU using the Sonablate® and clarified predictor for treatment failure after single-session HIFU treatment. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the treatment outcomes of a single-session high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) using the Sonablate(®) for patients with localized prostate cancer. Biochemical failure was defined according to the Stuttgart definition [a rise of 1.2 ng/ml or more above the nadir prostate-specific antigen (PSA)] and the Phoenix definition (a rise of 2 ng/ml or more above the nadir PSA). Disease-free survival rate was defined using the Phoenix criteria and positive follow-up biopsy. A total of 171 patients were identified. Fifty-two (30.4 %) patients were identified to be with D'Amico low risk, 47 (27.5 %) with intermediate risk, and 72 (42.1 %) with high risk. In the median follow-up time of 43 months, there was 44 (25.7 %) and 36 (21.1 %) patients experienced biochemical failure for Stuttgart and Phoenix definition with mean (±SD) time to failure of 17.8 ± 2.1 and 19.4 ± 2.3 months, respectively. A total of 44 (25.7 %) patients were diagnosed as disease failure. Cox multivariate analysis revealed PSA nadir level (PSA cutoff = 0.2 ng/ml; HR = 9.472, 95 % CI 4.527-19.820, p < 0.001) and D'amico risk groups [HR = 3.132 (95 % CI 1.251-6.389), p = 0.033] were the predictor for failure in single-session HIFU. Single-session HIFU treatment using the Sonablate(®) seems to be potentially curative approach. When treated carefully with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy or preoperative transurethral resection of the prostate, higher-risk disease might be able to choose this minimally invasive procedure as primary therapy.
    World Journal of Urology 11/2013; 32(5). DOI:10.1007/s00345-013-1215-z · 2.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: In patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) the standard therapies carry a risk of overtreatment with potentially preventable side effects whereas restrained therapeutic strategies pose a risk of underestimation of the individual cancer risk. Alternative treatment options include thermal ablation strategies such as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Patients and methods: 96 patients with low-risk PCa (D'Amico) were treated at 2 HIFU centres with different expertise (n=48, experienced centre Lyon/France; n=48 inexperienced centre Charité Berlin/Germany). Matched pairs were formed and analysed with regard to biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) as well as postoperative functional parameters (micturition, erectile function). The matched pairs were discriminated as to whether they had received HIFU treatment alone or a combination of HIFU with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Patients of the Lyon group were retrospectively matched through the @-registry database whereas patients of the Berlin group were prospectively evaluated. In the latter patients quality of life assessment was additionally inquired. Results: Postoperative PSA-Nadir was lower in the Berlin group for patients with HIFU only (0.007 vs. Lyon 0.34 ng/ml; p=0.037) and HIFU+TURP (0.25 vs. Lyon 0.42 ng/ml; p=0.003). BDFS was comparable in both groups for HIFU only (Berlin 4.77, Lyon 5.23 years; p=0.741) but patients with combined HIFU+TURP in the Berlin group showed an unfavourable BDFS as compared to the Lyon group (Berlin 3.02, Lyon 4.59 years; p=0.05). In an analysis of Berlin subgroups especially patients who had received HIFU and TURP (n=4) within the same narcosis had an unfavourable BDFS (p=0.009). Median follow-up was 3.36 years for HIFU only and 2.26 years for HIFU+TURP. Neither HIFU only (p=0.117) nor HIFU+TURP (p=0.131) showed an impact on postoperative micturition. Erectile function was negatively influenced (HIFU: p=0.04; HIFU+TURP: p=0.036). There was no measurable change in quality of life after the treatment. Conclusion: The 4-year BDFS after HIFU and HIFU+TURP is comparable to that of the standard therapies. The erectile function is sustainably negatively influenced whereas postoperative micturition and quality of life were not affected by HIFU or HIFU+TURP. These results are strongly limited by the low patient count and the short follow-up period and require validation in prospective multicentre studies with higher number of cases.
    Aktuelle Urologie 07/2013; 44(4):285-92. DOI:10.1055/s-0033-1348253 · 0.16 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of prostate cancer has long been plagued by the absence of an imaging tool that reliably detects and localises significant tumours. Recent evidence suggests that multi-parametric MRI could improve the accuracy of diagnostic assessment in prostate cancer. This review serves as a background to a recent USANZ position statement. It aims to provide an overview of MRI techniques and to critically review the published literature on the clinical application of MRI in prostate cancer. TECHNICAL ASPECTS: The combination of anatomical (T2-weighted) MRI with at least two of the three functional MRI parameters - which include diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging and spectroscopy - will detect greater than 90% of significant (moderate to high risk) tumours; however MRI is less reliable at detecting tumours that are small (<0.5 cc), low grade (Gleason score 6) or in the transitional zone. The higher anatomical resolution provided by 3-Tesla magnets and endorectal coils may improve the accuracy, particularly in primary tumour staging. SCREENING: The use of mpMRI to determine which men with an elevated PSA should undergo biopsy is currently the subject of two large clinical trials in Australia. MRI should be used with caution in this setting and then only in centres with established uro-radiological expertise and quality control mechanisms in place. There is sufficient evidence to justify using MRI to determine the need for repeat biopsy and to guide areas in which to focus repeat biopsy. IMAGE-DIRECTED BIOPSY: MRI-directed biopsy is an exciting concept supported by promising early results, but none of the three proposed techniques have so far been proven superior to standard biopsy protocols. Further evidence of superior accuracy and core-efficiency over standard biopsy is required, before their costs and complexities in use can be justified. TREATMENT SELECTION AND PLANNING: When used for primary-tumour staging (T-staging), MRI has limited sensitivity for T3 disease, but its specificity of greater than 95% may be useful in men with intermediate-high risk disease to identify those with advanced T3 disease not suitable for nerve sparing or for surgery at all. MRI appears to be of value in planning dosimetry in men undergoing radiotherapy, and in guiding selection for and monitoring on active surveillance.
    BJU International 11/2013; 112 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):6-20. DOI:10.1111/bju.12381 · 3.53 Impact Factor
Show more