Complications, oncological and functional outcomes of salvage treatment options following focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and a comprehensive narrative review
- 31 Downloads
Whether focal therapy (FT) jeopardizes subsequent prostate cancer (PCa) salvage treatments, when needed, remains a major concern and is largely unknown.
To describe and report safety, oncological and functional outcomes of salvage treatments following PCa recurrence and/or persistence after FT.
Materials and methods
A systematic review on salvage treatments for PCa recurrence/persistence after FT was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines using an ‘a priori protocol’. A comprehensive literature review was also performed to investigate options to treat FT PCa recurrence/persistence that have not yet been reported after FT.
Four retrospective series were included (n = 67 men); overall quality of the studies was low. Salvage treatments yielded 32.8% (n = 22 of 67) biochemical recurrence rate (BCR) after a 7–62-months mean follow-up. No cancer-related deaths occurred. Patients experienced acceptable complications (n = 12 patients; n = 8 Clavien 3) and rare severe incontinence (4.5% using > 2 pads/day). Erectile function (EF) was rarely assessed (62.8% no information available), being overall poor. Other salvage options have been reported following whole-gland ablation and include: (1) re-do ablation yielding worst BCR and EF but similar complications and continence compared to first line ablation; (2) salvage radiotherapy yielding 16.6–38.8% BCR and acceptable toxicity profile with urinary and EF being poorly assessed.
Current evidence is weak and limited to a few retrospective series. Oncological control is acceptable although it seems lower compared to a primary treatment setting. Functional outcomes are comparable to primary treatment with the exception of EF; overall, suggesting FT has little impact on subsequent salvage treatments. Future studies are needed to confirm the current findings.
KeywordsFocal therapy Prostate cancer Recurrence Salvage treatment Radiotherapy Radical prostatectomy
Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer
Primary radical prostatectomy
Salvage radical prostatectomy
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
High-intensity focused ultrasound
GM: protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis and manuscript writing. PG: data collection and management, manuscript editing, and manuscript review for important intellectual contents. JCW: manuscript editing and manuscript review for important intellectual contents. AS: manuscript editing and manuscript review for important intellectual contents. RT-B: manuscript editing and manuscript review for important intellectual contents. XC: manuscript editing and manuscript review for important intellectual contents. RS-S: protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript editing and manuscript review for important intellectual contents.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
None to declare.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
Not required (review article).
- 1.Marra G, Gontero P, Valerio M (2016) Changing the prostate cancer management pathway: why Focal Therapy is a step forward. Arch Esp Urol 69:271–280Google Scholar
- 3.NICE Guidelines—Prostate Cancer. https://www.niceorguk/guidance/conditions-and-diseases/cancer/prostate-cancer. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
- 7.Yap T, Ahmed HU, Hindley RG (2016) Reply from Authors re: Giorgio Gandaglia, Alberto Briganti, Andrea Salonia, Francesco Montorsi. Excellent erectile function recovery after focal therapy: is this enough? Eur Urol 69:852–853 (Focal therapy preserves erectile function in men with prostate cancer. European urology. 69:853–854) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Leslie TE, Elliott D, Le Conte S, Brewster S, Sooriakumaran P, Bryant P, Dudderidge T, Rosario D, Catto J, Hindley R, Emberton R, Ahmed H, Donovan J, Hamdy F (2017) A phase III study comparing partial prostate ablation versus radical prostatectomy (PART) in intermediate risk prostate cancer—initial data from the feasibility study. Eur Urol Suppl 16(3):e1316–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Marra G, Ploussard G, Ost P et al (2018) Focal therapy in localised prostate cancer: real-world urological perspective explored in a cross-sectional European survey. Urol Oncol 36(12):529.e11–529.e22Google Scholar
- 29.Hamid S, Guillaumier S, Shah T, Arya M, Ahmed HU (2016) Prostate cancer recurrence after focal therapy: treatment options. Arch Esp Urol 69:375–383Google Scholar
- 31.Murray KS, Akin O, Coleman JA (2017) Irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer as salvage treatment following prior radiation and cryotherapy. Rev Urol 19:268–272Google Scholar
- 39.Zargar H, Lamb AD, Rocco B et al (2017) Salvage robotic prostatectomy for radio recurrent prostate cancer: technical challenges and outcome analysis. Minerva urologica e nefrologica Ital J Urol Nephrol 69:26–37Google Scholar