Abstract
Background:
Current data on the use of irreversible electroporation (IRE) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) is limited. We aim to evaluate the safety, short-term functional and oncological outcomes of focal IRE in low-intermediate risk PCa.
Methods:
Between February 2013 and May 2014, 32 consecutive men underwent IRE at a single centre. Patients with low-intermediate risk PCa who had not received previous PCa treatment were included for analysis. The tumour was ablated using 3–6 electrodes, ensuring a minimum 5-mm safety margin around the visible magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesion. Follow-up included recording Clavien complications, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaires (baseline, 1.5, 3, 6 months), 6-month multi-parametric MRI (mp-MRI) and 7-month biopsy. Findings on mp-MRI and biopsy were sub-divided into infield, adjacent or outfield of the treatment zone.
Results:
Twenty-five men were included for final analysis. Safety follow-up revealed one Clavien Grade 3 complication and five Grade 1 complications. Functional follow-up confirmed no significant change in American Urological Association urinary symptom score, sexual or bowel function. Infield, there were no suspicious findings on mp-MRI (n=24) or biopsy (n=21) in all patients. Adjacent to the treatment zone, five (21%) had suspicious findings on mp-MRI with four (19%) proving to be significant on biopsy. Outfield, there were two (8%) with suspicious findings on mp-MRI and one (5%) significant finding on biopsy. For the five patients with significant findings on follow-up biopsy, one is awaiting repeat IRE, one had radical prostatectomy and three remained on active surveillance.
Conclusions:
In selected patients with low-intermediate risk PCa, focal IRE appears to be safe with minimal morbidity. There were no infield recurrences and 76% of patients were histologically free of significant cancer at 8 months. Almost all recurrences were adjacent to the treatment zone, and this was addressed by widening the treatment margins.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A . Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64: 9.
Loeb S, Bjurlin MA, Nicholson J, Tammela TL, Penson DF, Carter HB et al. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 1046.
Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320.
Master VA, Chi T, Simko JP, Weinberg V, Carroll PR . The independent impact of extended pattern biopsy on prostate cancer stage migration. J Urol 2005; 174: 1789.
Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 418.
Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 405.
Sheets NC, Goldin GH, Meyer AM, Wu Y, Chang Y, Sturmer T et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2012; 307: 1611.
Valerio M, Ahmed HU, Emberton M, Lawrentschuk N, Lazzeri M, Montironi R et al. The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 732.
Onik G, Mikus P, Rubinsky B . Irreversible electroporation: implications for prostate ablation. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6: 295.
Lee EW, Wong D, Prikhodko SV, Perez A, Tran C, Loh CT et al. Electronmicroscopic demonstration and evaluation of irreversible electroporation-induced nanopores on hepatocyte membranes. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23: 107.
Valerio M, Stricker PD, Ahmed HU, Dickinson L, Ponsky L, Shnier R et al. Initial assessment of safety and clinical feasibility of irreversible electroporation in the focal treatment of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014; 17: 343.
Neal RE 2nd, Millar JL, Kavnoudias H, Royce P, Rosenfeldt F, Pham A et al. In vivo characterization and numerical simulation of prostate properties for non-thermal irreversible electroporation ablation. Prostate 2014; 74: 458.
van den Bos W, Muller BG, de la Rosette JJ . Arandomized controlled trial on focal therapy for localized prostate carcinoma: hemiablation versus complete ablation with irreversible electroporation. J Endourol 2013; 27: 262.
van den Bos W, de Bruin DM, Muller BG, Varkarakis IM, Karagiannis AA, Zondervan PJ et al. Thesafety and efficacy of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer: a multicentre prospective human in vivo pilot study protocol. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e006382.
Rosette Jd . Registry of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer with use of nanoknife device. Clinical Trials.gov: Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society 2014.
Valerio M, Dickinson L, Ali A, Ramachandran N, Donaldson I, Freeman A et al. A prospective development study investigating focal irreversible electroporation in men with localised prostate cancer: nanoknife electroporation ablation trial (neat). Contemp Clin Trials 2014; 39: 57.
Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G et al. Esur prostate Mr guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746.
Rubinsky J, Onik G, Mikus P, Rubinsky B . Optimal parameters for the destruction of prostate cancer using irreversible electroporation. J Urol 2008; 180: 2668.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA . Classificationof surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205.
Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, Sandler HM, Sanda MG . Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (epic) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 2000; 56: 899.
Barzell WWIW, Andriole G . Transperineal template guided saturation biopsy of the prostate: rationale, indications and technique. Urology Times 2003; 31: 41.
Kirkwood B . Essential Medical Statistics, 2nd edn. Blackwell Science: Mass Malden, 2003.
Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D, Barret E, Berge V, Bott S et al. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes-a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 771.
Ahmed HU, Dickinson L, Charman S, Weir S, McCartan N, Hindley RG et al. Focal ablation targeted to the index lesion in multifocal localised prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Eur Urol 2015.
Julien, Le N, Andrew BR, Arnauld V, Clément O, Fang-Ming D, Jonathan M et al. Image guided focal therapy of mri-visible prostate cancer: defining a 3d treatment margin based on MRI-histology co-registration analysis. J Urol 2015; 194: 364–370.
Edd JF, Horowitz L, Davalos RV, Mir LM, Rubinsky B . In vivo results of a new focal tissue ablation technique: irreversible electroporation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2006; 53: 1409.
Maor E, Ivorra A, Leor J, Rubinsky B . The effect of irreversible electroporation on blood vessels. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6: 307.
Tsivian M, Polascik TJ . Bilateralfocal ablation of prostate tissue using low-energy direct current (ledc): a preclinical canine study. BJU Int 2013; 112: 526.
McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC et al. No surgical innovation without evaluation: the ideal recommendations. Lancet 2009; 374: 1105.
McCulloch P, Cook JA, Altman DG, Heneghan C, Diener MK . Ideal framework for surgical innovation 1: the idea and development stages. BMJ 2013; 346: f3012.
Thompson JE, Moses D, Shnier R, Brenner P, Delprado W, Ponsky L et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. J Urol 2014; 192: 67.
Acknowledgements
Quoc Nguyen and Sarita Tiwari from Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre-NSW (APCRC-NSW), IT applications group and CANSTO Database. This research is supported by The Department of Health and Ageing for its funding of the Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre-NSW, The National Health and Medical Research Council, St Vincent’s Prostate Cancer Centre and the RT Hall Trust.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases website
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ting, F., Tran, M., Böhm, M. et al. Focal irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer: functional outcomes and short-term oncological control. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19, 46–52 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.47
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.47
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
Real-Time and Delayed Imaging of Tissue and Effects of Prostate Tissue Ablation
Current Urology Reports (2023)
-
A Review of Energy Modalities Used for Focal Therapy of Prostate Cancer
Current Surgery Reports (2023)
-
Cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound, irreversible electroporation, and vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis
International Journal of Clinical Oncology (2021)
-
Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer in the era of routine multi-parametric MRI
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2020)
-
Ablation energies for focal treatment of prostate cancer
World Journal of Urology (2019)