Giancarlo Marra1, Massimo Valerio2, Mark Emberton3, Axel Heidenreich4, Juanita M Crook5, Alberto Bossi6, Louis L Pisters7. 1. Department of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, Città della Salute e della Scienza and University of Turin, Turin, Italy. Electronic address: drgiancarlomarra@gmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK. 4. Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Reconstructive Urologic Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 5. Department of Surgery, Division of Radiation and Developmental Radiotherapeutics, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Center for the Southern Interior, Kelowna, Canada. 6. Department of Urology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Institute, Villejuif, France. 7. Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Whether focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PC) jeopardizes outcomes from salvage treatments is a matter of debate still to be resolved. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on oncological and functional outcomes and complications for available treatment options for recurrent or residual PC after primary FT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a nonsystematic search of PubMed for articles assessing relevant outcomes for salvage local treatment after FT failure using a manual search. When no evidence could be extracted for the FT domain, records dealing with recurrence after whole-gland ablation were considered. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Four retrospective series assessed salvage treatments after FT failure evaluating cases of radical prostatectomy (RP) and repeat ablation (sample size from 12 to 22 patients). The quality of the studies was low, with a high risk of bias. Other options are radiation therapy (RT) and whole-gland or focal repeat ablations, although these have only been described after whole-gland ablation. With some exceptions, including sexual function for RP, overall complications and oncological and functional outcomes do seem to be acceptable and are not much worse than those in the primary setting. Important limitations include the low level of the evidence and the absence of standardized criteria for FT, salvage treatment, and FT failure. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence shows acceptable outcomes for post-FT salvage options, although this is based on retrospective data. While it seems that FT has a minimal impact on salvage treatment results, prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these preliminary data. PATIENT SUMMARY: We performed a literature search to determine the treatment options available for prostate cancer after failure of focal therapy and their outcomes. Options include radical prostatectomy, repeat whole-gland ablation, focal ablation, and radiotherapy. Overall cancer control, impacts on urinary and sexual function, and complications seem slightly worse but not markedly different compared to primary treatments, but high-quality studies are awaited to confirm these findings.
CONTEXT: Whether focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PC) jeopardizes outcomes from salvage treatments is a matter of debate still to be resolved. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on oncological and functional outcomes and complications for available treatment options for recurrent or residual PC after primary FT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a nonsystematic search of PubMed for articles assessing relevant outcomes for salvage local treatment after FT failure using a manual search. When no evidence could be extracted for the FT domain, records dealing with recurrence after whole-gland ablation were considered. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Four retrospective series assessed salvage treatments after FT failure evaluating cases of radical prostatectomy (RP) and repeat ablation (sample size from 12 to 22 patients). The quality of the studies was low, with a high risk of bias. Other options are radiation therapy (RT) and whole-gland or focal repeat ablations, although these have only been described after whole-gland ablation. With some exceptions, including sexual function for RP, overall complications and oncological and functional outcomes do seem to be acceptable and are not much worse than those in the primary setting. Important limitations include the low level of the evidence and the absence of standardized criteria for FT, salvage treatment, and FT failure. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence shows acceptable outcomes for post-FT salvage options, although this is based on retrospective data. While it seems that FT has a minimal impact on salvage treatment results, prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these preliminary data. PATIENT SUMMARY: We performed a literature search to determine the treatment options available for prostate cancer after failure of focal therapy and their outcomes. Options include radical prostatectomy, repeat whole-gland ablation, focal ablation, and radiotherapy. Overall cancer control, impacts on urinary and sexual function, and complications seem slightly worse but not markedly different compared to primary treatments, but high-quality studies are awaited to confirm these findings.
Authors: Rafael R Tourinho-Barbosa; Lucas Teixeira Batista; Xavier Cathelineau; Javier Sanchez-Macias; Rafael Sanchez-Salas Journal: Turk J Urol Date: 2020-10-09
Authors: Giancarlo Marra; Taimur T Shah; Daniele D'Agate; Alessandro Marquis; Giorgio Calleris; Luca Lunelli; Claudia Filippini; Marco Oderda; Marco Gatti; Massimo Valerio; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Alberto Bossi; Juan Gomez-Rivas; Francesca Conte; Desiree Deandreis; Olivier Cussenot; Umberto Ricardi; Paolo Gontero Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-06-07
Authors: Łukasz Nyk; Wojciech Michalak; Stanisław Szempliński; Rafał Woźniak; Bartłomiej Zagożdżon; Wojciech Krajewski; Piotr Kryst; Hubert Kamecki; Sławomir Poletajew Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-02-09
Authors: Niklas Westhoff; Ramona Ernst; Karl Friedrich Kowalewski; Laura Schmidt; Thomas Stefan Worst; Maurice Stephan Michel; Jost von Hardenberg Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Spyridon P Basourakos; Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Fernando J Bianco; Neal A Patel; Aaron Laviana; Daniel J Margolis; Juan M Mosquera; Timothy D McClure; Miko Yu; Jim C Hu Journal: BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol Date: 2020-11-18