Justin R Gregg1, Leonardo D Borregales2, Haesun Choi3, Marisa Lozano2, Stephen E McRae4, Aradhana M Venkatesan3, John W Davis2, Graciela M Nogueras-Gonzalez5, Louis L Pisters2, John F Ward2. 1. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Av. Unit 1373, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. JRGregg@mdanderson.org. 2. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Av. Unit 1373, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 3. Division of Diagnostic Imaging, Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 4. Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 5. Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report long-term follow-up of the efficacy of subtotal prostate ablation using a "hockey-stick" template, including oncologic control and quality of life (QoL) impact. METHODS: We performed a prospective controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of subtotal prostate ablation in selected men with baseline and confirmatory biopsy showing grade group (GG) 1-2 prostate cancer. "Hockey-stick" cryoablation that included the ipsilateral hemi-gland and contralateral anterior prostate was performed. Prostate biopsies and QOL queries were performed at 6, 18 and 36 months following regional ablation, and follow-up was updated to include subsequent clinic visits. RESULTS: Between August 2009 and January 2012, 72 men were screened for eligibility and 47 opted to undergo confirmatory biopsy. Of these, 23 were deemed eligible and treated with regional cryoablation. Median age was 64 years. Median follow-up was 74 months. A single patient had < 1 mm of in-field viable tumor with therapy effect on 36-month biopsy. At time of last follow-up, a total of 12/23 (52%) patients did not have evidence of disease, all patients had preserved urinary control with no patients requiring pads for urinary incontinence. Sexual decline was significant at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.01 for both), though improvement was seen at subsequent time points. CONCLUSION: Subtotal (hockey-stick template) cryoablation of the prostate provides oncologic control to targeted tissue in a generally low-risk group with minimal impact on sexual and urinary function. Further studies are needed to evaluate this ablation template in the MRI-targeted era and higher risk populations.
PURPOSE: To report long-term follow-up of the efficacy of subtotal prostate ablation using a "hockey-stick" template, including oncologic control and quality of life (QoL) impact. METHODS: We performed a prospective controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of subtotal prostate ablation in selected men with baseline and confirmatory biopsy showing grade group (GG) 1-2 prostate cancer. "Hockey-stick" cryoablation that included the ipsilateral hemi-gland and contralateral anterior prostate was performed. Prostate biopsies and QOL queries were performed at 6, 18 and 36 months following regional ablation, and follow-up was updated to include subsequent clinic visits. RESULTS: Between August 2009 and January 2012, 72 men were screened for eligibility and 47 opted to undergo confirmatory biopsy. Of these, 23 were deemed eligible and treated with regional cryoablation. Median age was 64 years. Median follow-up was 74 months. A single patient had < 1 mm of in-field viable tumor with therapy effect on 36-month biopsy. At time of last follow-up, a total of 12/23 (52%) patients did not have evidence of disease, all patients had preserved urinary control with no patients requiring pads for urinary incontinence. Sexual decline was significant at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.01 for both), though improvement was seen at subsequent time points. CONCLUSION: Subtotal (hockey-stick template) cryoablation of the prostate provides oncologic control to targeted tissue in a generally low-risk group with minimal impact on sexual and urinary function. Further studies are needed to evaluate this ablation template in the MRI-targeted era and higher risk populations.
Authors: Theo H van der Kwast; Mahul B Amin; Athanase Billis; Jonathan I Epstein; David Griffiths; Peter A Humphrey; Rodolfo Montironi; Thomas M Wheeler; John R Srigley; Lars Egevad; Brett Delahunt Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2010-09-03 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: J L Donovan; F C Hamdy; J A Lane; D E Neal; M Mason; C Metcalfe; E Walsh; J M Blazeby; T J Peters; P Holding; S Bonnington; T Lennon; L Bradshaw; D Cooper; P Herbert; J Howson; A Jones; N Lyons; E Salter; P Thompson; S Tidball; J Blaikie; C Gray; P Bollina; J Catto; A Doble; A Doherty; D Gillatt; R Kockelbergh; H Kynaston; A Paul; P Powell; S Prescott; D J Rosario; E Rowe; M Davis; E L Turner; R M Martin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan; J Athene Lane; Malcolm Mason; Chris Metcalfe; Peter Holding; Michael Davis; Tim J Peters; Emma L Turner; Richard M Martin; Jon Oxley; Mary Robinson; John Staffurth; Eleanor Walsh; Prasad Bollina; James Catto; Andrew Doble; Alan Doherty; David Gillatt; Roger Kockelbergh; Howard Kynaston; Alan Paul; Philip Powell; Stephen Prescott; Derek J Rosario; Edward Rowe; David E Neal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew J Stephenson; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham; Fernando J Bianco; Ofer Yossepowitch; Andrew J Vickers; Eric A Klein; David P Wood; Peter T Scardino Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-07-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David M Latini; Stacey L Hart; Sara J Knight; Janet E Cowan; Phillip L Ross; Janeen Duchane; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-07-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Catherine E Lovegrove; Max Peters; Stephanie Guillaumier; Manit Arya; Naveed Afzal; Tim Dudderidge; Feargus Hosking-Jervis; Richard G Hindley; Henry Lewi; Neil McCartan; Caroline M Moore; Raj Nigam; Chris Ogden; Raj Persad; Jaspal Virdi; Mathias Winkler; Mark Emberton; Hashim U Ahmed; Taimur T Shah; Suks Minhas Journal: BJU Int Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 5.969