Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-09-2018 | Original Article

Pair-matched patient-reported quality of life and early oncological control following focal irreversible electroporation versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Authors: Matthijs J. Scheltema, John I. Chang, Maret Böhm, Willemien van den Bos, Alexandar Blazevski, Ilan Gielchinsky, Anton M. F. Kalsbeek, Pim J. van Leeuwen, Tuan V. Nguyen, Theo M. de Reijke, Amila R. Siriwardana, James E. Thompson, Jean J. de la Rosette, Phillip D. Stricker

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 9/2018

Abstract

Purpose

The design, conduct and completion of randomized trials for curative prostate cancer (PCa) treatments are challenging. To evaluate the effect of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus focal irreversible electroporation (IRE) on patient-reported quality of life (QoL) and early oncological control using propensity-scored matching.

Methods

Patients with T1c–cT2b significant PCa (high-volume ISUP 1 or any 2/3) who received unifocal IRE were pair-matched to patients who received nerve-sparing RARP. Patient-reported outcomes were prospectively assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), AUA symptom score and Short Form of Health Survey (SF-12) physical and mental components. Oncological failure was defined as biochemical recurrence (RARP) or positive follow-up biopsies (IRE). Generalized mixed-effect models were used to compare IRE and RARP.

Results

50 IRE patients were matched to 50 RARP patients by propensity score. IRE was significantly superior to RARP in preserving pad-free continence (UC) and erections sufficient for intercourse (ESI). The absolute differences were 44, 21, 13, 14% for UC and 32, 46, 27, 22% for ESI at 1.5, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. The EPIC summary scores showed no statistically significant differences. Urinary symptoms were reduced for IRE and RARP patients at 12 months, although IRE patient initially had more complaints. IRE patients experienced more early oncological failure than RARP patients.

Conclusions

These data demonstrated the superior preservation of UC and ESI with IRE compared to RARP up to 12 months after treatment. Long-term oncological data are warranted to provide ultimate proof for or against focal therapy.

Available only for authorised users

Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606220 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71:618–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003 CrossRefPubMed

Ahmed HU, Berge V, Bottomley D et al (2014) Can we deliver randomized trials of focal therapy in prostate cancer? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 11:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.44 CrossRef

Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA et al (2016) Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1425–1437. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606221 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Thompson JE, Egger S, Böhm M et al (2014) Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 65:521–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.030 CrossRefPubMed

Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:418–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.046 CrossRefPubMed

Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045 CrossRefPubMed

Chen RC, Basak R, Meyer A et al (2017) Association between choice of radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, or active surveillance and patient-reported quality of life among men with localized prostate cancer. JAMA 317:1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.1652 CrossRefPubMed

Valerio M, Cerantola Y, Eggener SE et al (2017) New and established technology in focal ablation of the prostate: a systematic review. Eur Urol 44:17–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.044 CrossRef

10.

Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D et al (2014) Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes: a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 67–73:771–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.018 CrossRef

11.

Tay KJ, Scheltema MJ, Ahmed HU et al (2017) Patient selection for prostate focal therapy in the era of active surveillance: an International Delphi Consensus Project. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 3:294–299. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2017.8 CrossRef

12.

Davalos RV, Mir LM, Rubinsky B (2005) Tissue ablation with irreversible electroporation. Ann Biomed Eng 33:223–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-005-8981-8 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Ting F, Tran M, Böhm M et al (2016) Focal irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer: functional outcomes and short-term oncological control. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 1:46–52. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.47 CrossRef

14.

Patel VR, Palmer KJ, Coughlin G, Samavedi S (2008) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: perioperative outcomes of 1500 cases. J Endourol 22:2299–2305. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.9711 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Rocco B, Gregori A, Stener S et al (2007) Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal videolaparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 51:996–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.014 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F et al (2012) Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol 61:480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.044 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 240:205–213. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS et al (2000) Prostate Cancer Index Composite (Epic) for comprehensive assessment of health-related. Urology 56:899–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00858-X CrossRefPubMed

19.

Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, O’Leary MP et al (1992) The American Urological Association Symptom Index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 148:1549–1557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.071 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK et al (1998) Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 health survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA project. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1171–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00109-7 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Resnick MJ, Koyama T, Fan K-H et al (2013) Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 368:436–445. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1209978 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Bates D, Machler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 CrossRef

23.

R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

24.

Lee JK, Assel M, Thong AE et al (2015) Unexpected long-term improvements in urinary and erectile function in a large cohort of men with self-reported outcomes following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 68:899–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.074 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

van den Bos W, Jurhill RR, de Bruin DM et al (2016) Histopathological outcomes after irreversible electroporation in prostate cancer; results of an ablate-and-resect study. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2977 CrossRefPubMed

26.

van den Bos W, Scheltema MJ, Siriwardana AR et al (2017) Focal irreversible electroporation as primary treatment for localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13983 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Scheltema MJ, Tay KJ, Postema AW et al (2017) Utilization of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice and focal therapy: report from a Delphi consensus project. World J Urol 35:695–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1932-1 CrossRefPubMed

28.

World Health Organisation (2013) Declaration of Helsinki World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J Am Med Assoc 310:2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053 CrossRef

Title: Pair-matched patient-reported quality of life and early oncological control following focal irreversible electroporation versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
Authors: Matthijs J. Scheltema
John I. Chang
Maret Böhm
Willemien van den Bos
Alexandar Blazevski
Ilan Gielchinsky
Anton M. F. Kalsbeek
Pim J. van Leeuwen
Tuan V. Nguyen
Theo M. de Reijke
Amila R. Siriwardana
James E. Thompson
Jean J. de la Rosette
Phillip D. Stricker
Publication date: 01-09-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2281-z

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Pair-matched patient-reported quality of life and early oncological control following focal irreversible electroporation versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence

Survival after radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for locally advanced (cT3) prostate cancer

Comparison of cell cycle progression score with two immunohistochemical markers (PTEN and Ki-67) for predicting outcome in prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

Transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation: 2 years follow-up outcomes in the management of anticholinergic refractory overactive bladder

Diagnostic value of urinary survivin as a biomarker for bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies

Suprapubic versus urethral catheter drainage in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: advancing systematic review quality