Patient selection for focal therapy of localized prostate cancer

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 268-273

  Jayram, Gautam ^a   Eggener, Scott E ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b Mail Code 6038 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Cryotherapy; Focal therapy; High intensity focused ultrasound; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

CANCER CONTROL; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RISK; CRYOABLATION; HIGH INTENSITY FOCUSED ULTRASOUND; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT SELECTION; PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW; SPECTROSCOPY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; ULTRASOUND; BIOPSY; CRYOSURGERY; ECHOGRAPHY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE TUMOR;

BIOPSY; CRYOSURGERY; HUMANS; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SELECTION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 67649742297     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e328329eb3c     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Klotz L. Active surveillance versus radical treatment for favorable-risk localized prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2008; 9:211-216. An excellent review of the rationale and outcomes of active surveillance for prostate cancer.
2. Jani AB, Johnstone PA, Liauw SL, et al. Age and grade trends in prostate cancer (1974-2003): a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results, registry analysis. Am J Clin Oncol 2008; 31:375-378. An overview of epidemiologic longitudinal trends of prostate cancer diagnosis in the USA.
3. Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:1250-1261. A comprehensive analysis of quality of life outcomes in men treated with radiation and surgery for prostate cancer.
4. Carter HB, Sauvageot J, Walsh PC, Epstein JI. Prospective evaluation of men with stage T1C adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997; 157:2206-2209. (Pubitemid 27208672)
5. Bastian PJ, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Partin AW. Characteristics of insignificant clinical T1c prostate tumors. A contemporary analysis. Cancer 2004; 101:1923-1925.
6. Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Kattan MW, et al. Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 2007; 177:107-112. (Pubitemid 44879468)
7. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:868-878. (Pubitemid 36833878)
8. Stephenson AJ, KattanMW, EasthamJA, et al. Prostate cancer- specificmortality after radical prostatectomy in the prostate-specific antigen era [abstract no. 9]. ASCO GU Proceedings; 15 February 2008; San Francisco; 2008. A highly accurate nomogram predicting death from prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy.
9. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005; 293:2095-2101. (Pubitemid 40617061)
10. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Litwin MS, et al. The contemporary management of prostate cancer in the United States: lessons from the cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor (CapSURE), a national disease registry. J Urol 2004; 171:1393-1401.
11. Hu JC, Hevelone ND, Ferreira MD, et al. Patterns of care for radical prostatectomy in the United States from 2003-2005. J Urol 2008; 180:1969-1974. A review of recent radical prostatectomy practice patterns in the USA.
12. Meiers I, Waters DJ, Bostwick DG. Preoperative prediction of multifocal prostate cancer and application of focal therapy: review 2007. Urology 2007; 70 (Suppl 6):3-8.
13. Mouraviev V, Mayes JM, Sun L, et al. Prostate cancer laterality as a rationale of focal ablative therapy for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Cancer 2007; 110:906-910. (Pubitemid 47257670)
14. Ohori M, Eastham JA, Koh H, et al. Is focal therapy reasonable in patients with early stage prostate cancer (CaP): an analysis of radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. J Urol 2006; 175 (Suppl):507; abstract 1574.
15. Muezzinoglu B, Frolov A, Ohori M. Clinicopathologic significance of multifocal prostate cancer [abstract]. Lab Invest 2006; 86:151A.
16. Iczkowski KA, Hossain D, Torkko KC, et al. Preoperative prediction of unifocal, unilateral, margin-negative, and small volume prostate cancer. Urology 2008; 71:1166-1171. Evaluation of 393 radical prostatectomy specimens showing that biopsy criteria may be useful to predict unifocal low-risk cancers.
17. Djavan B, Susani M, Bursa B, et al. Predictability and signficance of multifocal prostate cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen. Tech Urol 1999; 5:139-142. (Pubitemid 29501407)
18. Tareen B, Sankin A, Godoy G, et al. Appropriate candidates for hemiablative focal therapy are infrequently encountered among men selected for radical prostatectomy in contemporary cohort. Urology 2009; 73:351-354. A contemporary radical prostatectomy series with 21% unifocal cancer specimens and 11% unifocal with low-risk features.
19. Nelson BA, Shappell SB, Chang SS, et al. Tumor volume is an independent predictor of PSA recurrence in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2006; 97:1169-1172. (Pubitemid 43907315)
20. Villers A, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, et al. Multiple cancers in the prostate: morphologic features of clinically recognized vs. incidental tumors. Cancer 1992; 70:2313-2318.
21. Arora R, Koch MO, Eble JN, et al. Heterogeneity of Gleason grade in multifocal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 2004; 100:2362-2367. (Pubitemid 38657883)
22. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Carroll PR, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 2007; 178:2260-2267. A review of the rationale, modalities, and limitations of focal therapy.
23. Vollmer RT. Tumor length in prostate cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 2008; 130:77-82. Evaluaton of biopsy tumor length in 529 patients.
24. Vollmer RT. Percentage of tumor and tumor length in prostate biopsy specimens: a study of American veterans. Am J Clin Pathol 2008; 130:940-943. Biopsy tumor length and percentage tumor involvement are highly correlated and may not independently provide prognostic information.
25. Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Bostwick DG, et al. Proximity of prostate cancer to the urethra: implications for minimally invasive ablative therapies. Urology 2000; 56:726-729.
26. Scales CD, Presti JC, Kane CJ, Terris MK, et al. Predicting unilateral prostate cancer based on biopsy features: implications for focal ablative therapy - results from the SEARCH database. J Urol 2007; 178 (4 Pt 1):1249-1252.
27. Schulte RT, Wood DP, Daignault S, et al. Utility of extended pattern prostate biopsies for tumor localization: pathologic correlations after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2008; 113:1559-1565. This study demonstrates inadequacy of standard TRUS-guided biopsy techniques at localizing prostate cancer.
28. Crawford ED, Wilson SS, Torkko KC, et al. Clinical staging of prostate cancer: a computer-simulated study of transperineal prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2005; 96:999-1004. (Pubitemid 41531402)
29. Onik G, Barzell W. Transperineal 3D mapping biopsy of the prostate: an essential tool in selecting patients for focal prostate cancer therapy. Urol Oncol 2008; 26:506-510. Informative study documenting clinical superiority of 3D mapping biopsies to traditional techniques.
30. Andriole GL, Bullock TL, Belani JS, et al. Is there a better way to biopsy the prostate? Prospects for a novel transrectal systematic biopsy approach. Urology 2007; 70 (Suppl 6):22-26.
31. Hricak H. MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in the pretreatment evaluation of prostate cancer. Br J Radiol 2005; 78:S103-S111. (Pubitemid 43019918)
32. Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate. Eur Urol 2006; 50:1163-1174. (Pubitemid 44692933)
33. Umbehr M, Bachmann LM, Held U, et al. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2008. [Epub ahead of print] Excellent review of MRSI/MRI in the detection and characterization of prostate cancer.
34. Zakian KL, Sircar K, Hricak H, et al. Correlation of proton MR spectrosocpic imaging with gleason score grade based on step-section pathology after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 2005; 234:804-814. (Pubitemid 40250824)
35. Darnel AD, Lafarque CJ, Vollmer RT, et al. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion is frequently observed in Gleason pattern 3 prostate cancer in a Canadian cohort. Cancer Biol Ther 2009; 8:1-6. Cohort analysis of a newly identified gene fusion that appears to be prevalent and predictive of a poor prognosis.
36. Shappell SB, Fulmer J, Arquello D, et al. PCA3 urine mRNA for prostate carcinoma: patterns of use by community urologists and assay performance in reference laboratory setting. Urology 2009; 73:363-368. Early data on urine-based mRNA biomarker for prostate cancer.
37. Rebillard X, Soulie M, Chartier-Kastler E, et al. High-intensity of focused ultrasound in prostate cancer; a systematic literature review of the French Association of Urology. BJU Int 2008; 101:1205-1213. A meta-analysis of HIFU for prostate cancer. (Pubitemid 351549628)
38. Lambert EH, Bolte K, Masson P, Katz AE. Focal cryosurgery: encouraging health outcomes for unifocal prostate cancer. Urology 2007; 69:1117-1120. (Pubitemid 46891597)
39. Onik G, Vaughan D, Lotenfoe R, et al. The 'male lumpectomy': focal therapy for prostate cancer using cryoablation in 48 patients with at least 2 year follow up. Urol Oncol 2008; 26:500-505. A single-center experience with focal cryoablation for localized prostate cancer.