Surveillance after prostate focal therapy

  • Kae Jack Tay
  • , Mahul B. Amin
  • , Sangeet Ghai
  • , Rafael E. Jimenez
  • , James G. Kench
  • , Laurence Klotz
  • , Rodolfo Montironi
  • , Satoru Muto
  • , Ardeshir R. Rastinehad
  • , Baris Turkbey
  • , Arnauld Villers
  • , Thomas J. Polascik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

85 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction: Long-term outcomes from large cohorts are not yet available upon which to base recommended follow-up protocols after prostate focal therapy. This is an updated summary of a 2015 SIU-ICUD review of the best available current evidence and expert consensus on guidelines for surveillance after prostate focal therapy. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases to identify studies where primary prostate focal therapy was performed to treat prostate cancer. Results: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) should be performed at 3–6 months, 12–24 months and at 5 years after focal therapy. Targeted biopsy of the treated zone should be performed at 3–6 months and fusion biopsy of any suspicious lesion seen on mpMRI. Additionally, a systematic biopsy should be performed at 12–24 months and again at 5 years. In histological diagnosis, characteristic changes of each treatment modality should be noted and in indeterminate situations various immunohistochemical molecular markers can be helpful. Small volume 3 + 3 (Prognostic grade group [PGG] 1) or very small volume (< 0.2 cc or < 7 mm diameter) 3 + 4 (PGG 2) are acceptable in the treated zone at longitudinal follow-up. Significant volumes of 3 + 4 (PGG 2) or more within the treated zone should be treated. Any clinically significant cancer subsequently arising within the non-treated zone should be treated and handled in the same way as any de novo prostate cancer. Patients should be counseled regarding whole-gland and focal approaches to treating these new foci where appropriate. One or two well-delineated foci of significant cancer can be ablated to keep the patient in the ‘active surveillance pool’. More extensive disease should be treated with traditional whole-gland techniques. Conclusion: Focal therapy remains a nascent field largely comprising single center cohorts with little long-term data. Our current post-focal therapy surveillance consensus recommendations represent the synthesis of the best available evidence as well as expert opinion. Further work is necessary to define the most oncologically safe and cost-effective way of following patients after focal therapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)397-407
Number of pages11
JournalWorld Journal of Urology
Volume37
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 12 Mar 2019

Keywords

  • Brachytherapy
  • Cryotherapy
  • Focal therapy
  • Fusion biopsy
  • HIFU
  • Irreversible electroporation
  • Laser ablation
  • Prostate cancer
  • Prostatectomy
  • Radiation therapy
  • Surveillance
  • VTP
  • mpMRI

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Surveillance after prostate focal therapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this