High-intensity focussed ultrasound in low-risk prostate cancer - Oncological outcome and postinterventional quality of life of an inexperienced therapy centre in comparison with an experienced therapy centre - Abstract

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).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 pa-tients of the Berlin group were prospectively evaluated. In the latter patients quality of life assessment was additionally inquired.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.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 pa-tient count and the short follow-up period and require valida-tion in prospective multicentre studies with higher number of cases.

Written by:
Baumunk D, Andersen C, Heile U, Ebbing J, Cash H, Porsch M, Liehr UB, Janitzky A, Wendler JJ, Schindele D, Blaschke S, Miller K, Schostak M.   Are you the author?
Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A. ö. R., Magdeburg.

Reference: Aktuelle Urol. 2013 Jul;44(4):285-92.
doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1348253


PubMed Abstract
PMID: 23888408

Article in German.

UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section