Advertisement

World Journal of Urology

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 403–409 | Cite as

Patterns of outcome and toxicity after salvage prostatectomy, salvage cryosurgery and salvage brachytherapy for prostate cancer recurrences after radiation therapy: a multi-center experience and literature review

  • Max Peters
  • Maaike R. Moman
  • Henk G. van der Poel
  • Henk Vergunst
  • Igle Jan de Jong
  • Peter L. M. Vijverberg
  • Jan J. Battermann
  • Simon Horenblas
  • Marco van Vulpen
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Current salvage treatments for recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiation therapy include radical prostatectomy, cryosurgery and brachytherapy. Because toxicity and failure rates are considerable, salvage treatments are not commonly performed. As most centers perform only one preferred salvage technique, the literature only describes single-center outcomes from a single salvage technique with a limited number of patients. In this overview, five high-volume Dutch centers describe their toxicity and outcome data using different salvage techniques. This provides a view on how salvage is performed in clinical practice in the Netherlands.

Methods

A total of 129 patients from five different centers in the Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined as PSA >0.1 ng/ml for the salvage prostatectomy group (n = 44) and PSA nadir + 2.0 ng/ml (Phoenix definition) for the salvage cryosurgery (n = 54) and salvage brachytherapy group (n = 31). Toxicity was scored according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse events (CTCAE v3.0).

Results

BF occurred in 25 (81 %) patients in the brachytherapy group (mean follow-up 29 ± 24 months), 29 (66 %) patients in the prostatectomy group (mean follow-up 22 ± 25 months) and 33 (61 %) patients in the cryosurgery group (mean follow-up 14 ± 11 months). Severe (grade >3) genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in up to 30 % of patients in all three groups.

Conclusion

This overview shows clinical practice of prostate cancer salvage. Significant failure and toxicity rates are observed, regardless of salvage technique. Patients should be selected with great care before offering these salvage treatment strategies.

Keywords

Salvage Prostatectomy Cryosurgery Brachytherapy Toxicity Outcome Prostate cancer 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal PK, Sadetsky N, Konety BR, Resnick MI, Carroll PR (2008) Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urological Research Endeavor (CaPSURE). Treatment failure after primary and salvage therapy for prostate cancer: likelihood, patterns of care, and outcomes. Cancer 112(2):307–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M, Joniau S, Matveev VB, Schmid HP et al (2008) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 53(1):68–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hinnen KA, Battermann JJ, van Roermund JG, Moerland MA, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IM, Frank SJ et al (2010) Long-term biochemical and survival outcome of 921 patients treated with I-125 permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76(5):1433–1438PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuban DA, Thames HD, Levy LB, Horwitz EM, Kupelian PA, Martinez AA et al (2003) Long-term multi-institutional analysis of stage T1–T2 prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy in the PSA era. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57(4):915–928PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pound CR, Brawer MK, Partin AW (2001) Evaluation and treatment of men with biochemical prostate-specific antigen recurrence following definitive therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Rev Urol 3(2):72–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahmed HU, Pendse D, Illing R, Allen C, van der Meulen JH, Emberton M (2007) Will focal therapy become a standard of care for men with localized prostate cancer? Nat Clin Pract Oncol 4(11):632–642PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pucar D, Hricak H, Shukla-Dave A, Kuroiwa K, Drobnjak M, Eastham J et al (2007) Clinically significant prostate cancer local recurrence after radiation therapy occurs at the site of primary tumor: magnetic resonance imaging and step-section pathology evidence. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69(1):62–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kimura M, Mouraviev V, Tsivian M, Mayes JM, Satoh T, Polascik TJ (2010) Current salvage methods for recurrent prostate cancer after failure of primary radiotherapy. BJU Int 105(2):191–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nguyen PL, D’Amico AV, Lee AK, Suh WW (2007) Patient selection, cancer control, and complications after salvage local therapy for postradiation prostate-specific antigen failure: a systematic review of the literature. Cancer 110(7):1417–1428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abuzallouf S, Dayes I, Lukka H (2004) Baseline staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a summary of the literature. J Urol 171:2122–2127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van der Poel HG, Beetsma DB, van Boven H, Horenblas S (2007) Perineal salvage prostatectomy for radiation resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 51(6):1565–1571 (discussion 1572)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moman MR, van der Poel HG, Battermann JJ, Moerland MA, van Vulpen M (2010) Treatment outcome and toxicity after salvage 125-I implantation for prostate cancer recurrences after primary 125-I implantation and external beam radiotherapy. Brachytherapy 9(2):119–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ash D, Flynn A, Battermann J, de Reijke T, Lavagnini P, Blank L et al (2000) ESTRO/EAU/EORTC recommendations on permanent seed implantation for localized prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 57(3):315–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Battermann JJ (2000) I-125 implantation for localized prostate cancer: the Utrecht University experience. Radiother Oncol 57(3):269–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roach M III, Hanks H Jr, Thames G, Schellhammer P, Shipley WU, Sokol GH et al (2006) Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 65(4):965–974PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A, Rusch V, Jaques D, Budach V et al (2003) CTCAE, v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol 13(3):176–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buyyounouski MK, Hanlon AL, Eisenberg DF, Horwitz EM, Feigenberg SJ, Uzzo RG et al (2005) Defining biochemical failure after radiotherapy with and without androgen deprivation for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 63(5):1455–1462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moman MR, van den Berg CA, Boeken Kruger AE, Battermann JJ, Moerland MA, van den Heide UA et al (2010) Focal salvage guided by T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer recurrences. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76(3):741–746PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Haider MA, Chung P, Sweet J, Toi A, Jhaveri K, Menard C et al (2008) Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for localization of recurrent prostate cancer after external beam radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70(2):425–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ward JF, Sebo TJ, Blute ML, Zincke H (2005) Salvage surgery for radiorecurrent prostate cancer: contemporary outcomes. J Urol 173(4):1156–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Stephenson AJ, Diblasio CJ, Fearn PA, Eastham JA (2005) Long-term oncologic results of salvage radical prostatectomy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62(2):448–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sanderson KM, Penson DF, Cai J, Groshen S, Stein JP, Lieskovsky G et al (2006) Salvage radical prostatectomy: quality of life outcomes and long-term oncological control of radiorecurrent prostate cancer. J Urol 176(5):2025–2031 (discussion 2031–2032)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Beyer DC (1999) Permanent brachytherapy as salvage treatment for recurrent prostate cancer. Urology 54(5):880–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grado GL, Collins JM, Kriegshauser JS, Balch CS, Grado MM, Swanson GP et al (1999) Salvage brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer after radiotherapy failure. Urology 53(1):2–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pisters LL, Rewcastle JC, Donnelly BJ, Lugnani FM, Katz AE, Jones JS (2008) Salvage prostate cryoablation: initial results from the cryo on-line data registry. J Urol 180(2):559–563 (discussion 563–564)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ng CK, Moussa M, Downey DB, Chin JL (2007) Salvage cryoablation of the prostate: follow-up and analysis of predictive factors for outcome. J Urol 178(4 Pt 1):1253–1257 (discussion 1257)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Bianco FJ Jr, DiBlasio CJ, Fearn PA, Eastham JA (2004) Morbidity and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy. J Urol 172(6 Pt 1):2239–2243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Han KR, Cohen JK, Miller RJ, Pantuck AJ, Freitas DG, Cuevas CA et al (2003) Treatment of organ confined prostate cancer with third generation cryosurgery: preliminary multicenter experience. J Urol 170(4 Pt 1):1126–1130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Long JP, Fallick ML, LaRock DR, Rand W (1998) Preliminary outcomes following cryosurgical ablation of the prostate in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma. J Urol 159(2):477–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bahn DK, Lee F, Silverman P, Bahn E, Badalament R, Kumar A et al (2003) Salvage cryosurgery for recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy: a seven-year follow-up. Clin Prostate Cancer 2(2):111–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chin JL, Pautler SE, Mouraviev V, Touma N, Moore K, Downey DB (2001) Results of salvage cryoablation of the prostate after radiation: identifying predictors of treatment failure and complications. J Urol 165(6 Pt 1):1937–1941 (discussion 1941–1942)PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Max Peters
    • 1
  • Maaike R. Moman
    • 1
  • Henk G. van der Poel
    • 2
  • Henk Vergunst
    • 3
  • Igle Jan de Jong
    • 4
  • Peter L. M. Vijverberg
    • 5
  • Jan J. Battermann
    • 1
  • Simon Horenblas
    • 2
  • Marco van Vulpen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity Medical Center UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of UrologyNetherlands Cancer InstituteAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of UrologyCanisius-Wilhelmina HospitalNijmegenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of UrologyUniversity Medical Center GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of UrologySt. Antonius HospitalNieuwegeinThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations