Department of Urology, Asklepios Hospital Bad Tölz, Bad Tölz, Germany.
Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018 Jun;21(2):175-186. doi: 10.1038/s41391-018-0042-0. Epub 2018 May 9.
With growing interest in focal therapy (FT) of prostate cancer (PCa) there is an increasing armamentarium of treatment modalities including high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, focal laser ablation (FLA), irreversible electroporation (IRE), vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP), focal brachytherapy (FBT) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Currently there are no clear recommendations as to which of these technologies are appropriate for individual patient characteristics. Our intention was to review the literature for special aspects of the different technologies that might be of advantage depending on individual patient and tumour characteristics.
The current literature on FT was screened for the following factors: morbidity, repeatability, tumour risk category, tumour location, tumour size and prostate volume and anatomical issues. The ESUT expert panel arrived at consensus regarding a position statement on a structured pathway for available FT technologies based on a combination of the literature and expert opinion.
Side effects were low across different studies and FT modalities with urinary continence rates of 90-100% and erectile dysfunction between 5 and 52%. Short to medium cancer control based on post-treatment biopsies were variable between ablative modalities. Expert consensus suggested that posterior lesions are better amenable to FT using HIFU. Cryotherapy provides best possible outcomes for anterior tumours. Apical lesions, when treated with FBT, may yield the least urethral morbidity.
Further prospective trials are required to assess medium to long term disease control of different ablative modalities for FT. Amongst different available FT modalities our ESUT expert consensus suggests that some may be better for diffe`rent tumour locations. Tumour risk, tumour size, tumour location, and prostate volume are all important factors to consider and might aid in designing future FT trials.
随着对前列腺癌(PCa)局灶性治疗(FT)兴趣的增加,治疗方式的选择也越来越多,包括高强度聚焦超声(HIFU)、冷冻疗法、局灶性激光消融(FLA)、不可逆电穿孔(IRE)、血管靶向光动力疗法(VTP)、局灶性近距离放射治疗(FBT)和立体定向消融放射治疗(SABR)。目前,对于这些技术中哪种技术适合个体患者的特点,尚无明确的建议。我们的目的是回顾文献,了解不同技术的特殊方面,这些方面可能会因个体患者和肿瘤特点而具有优势。
对 FT 的现有文献进行筛选,以了解以下因素:发病率、可重复性、肿瘤风险类别、肿瘤位置、肿瘤大小和前列腺体积以及解剖问题。ESUT 专家小组根据文献和专家意见,就现有的 FT 技术的结构化途径达成了一致的立场声明。
不同研究和 FT 方式的副作用都很低,尿控率为 90-100%,勃起功能障碍率为 5-52%。基于治疗后活检的短期至中期癌症控制结果在消融方式之间有所不同。专家共识认为,后部病变更适合使用 HIFU 进行 FT。冷冻疗法为前侧肿瘤提供了最佳的治疗效果。对于用 FBT 治疗的前尖部病变,尿道并发症发生率最低。
需要进一步的前瞻性试验来评估不同消融方式用于 FT 的中至长期疾病控制效果。在现有的不同 FT 方式中,我们的 ESUT 专家共识认为,对于不同的肿瘤位置,某些方式可能更有优势。肿瘤风险、肿瘤大小、肿瘤位置和前列腺体积都是重要的考虑因素,可能有助于设计未来的 FT 试验。