100
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          Radical whole-gland therapy can lead to significant genitourinary and rectal side-effects for men with localised prostate cancer. We report on whether selective focal ablation of unifocal and multifocal cancer lesions can reduce this treatment burden.

          Methods

          Men aged 45–80 years were eligible for this prospective development study if they had low-risk to high-risk localised prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen [PSA] ≤15 ng/mL, Gleason score ≤4 + 3, stage ≤T2), with no previous androgen deprivation or treatment for prostate cancer, and who could safely undergo multiparametric MRI and have a general anaesthetic. Patients received focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound, delivered to all known cancer lesions, with a margin of normal tissue, identified on multiparametric MRI, template prostate-mapping biopsies, or both. Primary endpoints were adverse events (serious and otherwise) and urinary symptoms and erectile function assessed using patient questionnaires. Analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00561314.

          Findings

          42 men were recruited between June 27, 2007, and June 30, 2010; one man died from an unrelated cause (pneumonia) 3 months after treatment and was excluded from analyses. After treatment, one man was admitted to hospital for acute urinary retention, and another had stricture interventions requiring hospital admission. Nine men (22%, 95% CI 11–38) had self-resolving, mild to moderate, intermittent dysuria (median duration 5·0 days [IQR 2·5–18·5]). Urinary debris occurred in 14 men (34%, 95% CI 20–51), with a median duration of 14·5 days (IQR 6·0–16·5). Urinary tract infection was noted in seven men (17%, 95% CI 7–32). Median overall International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) scores were similar at baseline and at 12 months (p=0·060), as were median IIEF-15 scores for intercourse satisfaction (p=0·454), sexual desire (p=0·644), and overall satisfaction (p=0·257). Significant deteriorations between baseline and 12 months were noted for IIEF-15 erectile (p=0·042) and orgasmic function (p=0·003). Of 35 men with good baseline function, 31 (89%, 95% CI 73–97) had erections sufficient for penetration 12 months after focal therapy. Median UCLA Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary incontinence scores were similar at baseline as and 12 months (p=0·045). There was an improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms, assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), between baseline and 12 months (p=0·026), but the IPSS-quality of life score showed no difference between baseline and 12 months (p=0·655). All 38 men with no baseline urinary incontinence were leak-free and pad-free by 9 months. All 40 men pad-free at baseline were pad-free by 3 months and maintained pad-free continence at 12 months. No significant difference was reported in median Trial Outcomes Index scores between baseline and 12 months (p=0·113) but significant improvement was shown in median Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Prostate (p=0·045) and median FACT-General scores (p=0·041). No histological evidence of cancer was identified in 30 of 39 men biopsied at 6 months (77%, 95% CI 61–89); 36 (92%, 79–98) were free of clinically significant cancer. After retreatment in four men, 39 of 41 (95%, 95% CI 83–99) had no evidence of disease on multiparametric MRI at 12 months.

          Interpretation

          Focal therapy of individual prostate cancer lesions, whether multifocal or unifocal, leads to a low rate of genitourinary side-effects and an encouraging rate of early absence of clinically significant prostate cancer.

          Funding

          Medical Research Council (UK), Pelican Cancer Foundation, and St Peters Trust.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction.

          To develop a brief, reliable, self-administered measure of erectile function that is cross-culturally valid and psychometrically sound, with the sensitivity and specificity for detecting treatment-related changes in patients with erectile dysfunction. Relevant domains of sexual function across various cultures were identified via a literature search of existing questionnaires and interviews of male patients with erectile dysfunction and of their partners. An initial questionnaire was administered to patients with erectile dysfunction, with results reviewed by an international panel of experts. Following linguistic validation in 10 languages, the final 15-item questionnaire, the international index of Erectile Function (IIEF), was examined for sensitivity, specificity, reliability (internal consistency and test-retest repeatability), and construct (concurrent, convergent, and discriminant) validity. A principal components analysis identified five factors (that is, erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction) with eigenvalues greater than 1.0. A high degree of internal consistency was observed for each of the five domains and for the total scale (Cronbach's alpha values of 0.73 and higher and 0.91 and higher, respectively) in the populations studied. Test-retest repeatability correlation coefficients for the five domain scores were highly significant. The IIEF demonstrated adequate construct validity, and all five domains showed a high degree of sensitivity and specificity to the effects of treatment. Significant (P values = 0.0001) changes between baseline and post-treatment scores were observed across all five domains in the treatment responder cohort, but not in the treatment nonresponder cohort. The IIEF addresses the relevant domains of male sexual function (that is, erectile function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction), is psychometrically sound, and has been linguistically validated in 10 languages. This questionnaire is readily self-administered in research or clinical settings. The IIEF demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity for detecting treatment-related changes in patients with erectile dysfunction.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development and evaluation of an abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction.

            An abridged five-item version of the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) was developed (IIEF-5) to diagnose the presence and severity of erectile dysfunction (ED). The five items selected were based on ability to identify the presence or absence of ED and on adherence to the National Institute of Health's definition of ED. These items focused on erectile function and intercourse satisfaction. For 1152 men (1036 with ED, 116 controls) analyzed, a receiver operating characteristic curve indicated that the IIEF-5 is an excellent diagnostic test. Based on equal misclassification rates of ED and no ED, a cutoff score of 21 (range of scores, 5-25) discriminated best (sensitivity=0.98, specificity=0. 88). ED was classified into five severity levels, ranging from none (22-25) through severe (5-7). Substantial agreement existed between the predicted and 'true' ED classes (weighted kappa=0.82). These data suggest that the IIEF-5 possesses favorable properties for detecting the presence and severity of ED.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations.

              Surgery and other invasive therapies are complex interventions, the assessment of which is challenged by factors that depend on operator, team, and setting, such as learning curves, quality variations, and perception of equipoise. We propose recommendations for the assessment of surgery based on a five-stage description of the surgical development process. We also encourage the widespread use of prospective databases and registries. Reports of new techniques should be registered as a professional duty, anonymously if necessary when outcomes are adverse. Case series studies should be replaced by prospective development studies for early technical modifications and by prospective research databases for later pre-trial evaluation. Protocols for these studies should be registered publicly. Statistical process control techniques can be useful in both early and late assessment. Randomised trials should be used whenever possible to investigate efficacy, but adequate pre-trial data are essential to allow power calculations, clarify the definition and indications of the intervention, and develop quality measures. Difficulties in doing randomised clinical trials should be addressed by measures to evaluate learning curves and alleviate equipoise problems. Alternative prospective designs, such as interrupted time series studies, should be used when randomised trials are not feasible. Established procedures should be monitored with prospective databases to analyse outcome variations and to identify late and rare events. Achievement of improved design, conduct, and reporting of surgical research will need concerted action by editors, funders of health care and research, regulatory bodies, and professional societies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Lancet Oncol
                Lancet Oncol
                The Lancet Oncology
                Lancet Pub. Group
                1470-2045
                1474-5488
                June 2012
                June 2012
                : 13
                : 6
                : 622-632
                Affiliations
                [a ]Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
                [b ]Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
                [c ]Department of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
                [d ]Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
                [e ]Department of Urology, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Basingstoke, UK
                [f ]Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
                [g ]Health Services Research Unit, The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Dr Hashim Uddin Ahmed, Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, 67 Riding House Street, London, W1P 7NN, UK hashim.ahmed@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Article
                LANONC70121
                10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70121-3
                3366323
                22512844
                fda6aa4d-6f5c-43b8-a004-e0fad15ba2d0
                © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                This document may be redistributed and reused, subject to certain conditions.

                History
                Categories
                Articles

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content126

                Cited by112

                Most referenced authors844