Development and internal validation of prediction models for biochemical failure and composite failure after focal salvage high intensity focused ultrasound for local radiorecurrent prostate cancer: Presentation of risk scores for individual patient prognoses

Peters, Max; Kanthabalan, Abi; Shah, Taimur T.; McCartan, Neil; Moore, Caroline M.; Arya, Manit; Zyp, Jochem R. van der Voort van; Moerland, Marinus A.; Hindley, Richard G.; Emberton, Mark; Ahmed, Hashim U.

doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.08.022

Cited by 12 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That risk group required extensive genomic data, restricting its applicability. Peters et al [ 18 ] developed a prediction model for recurrent disease with three categories, which showed 60% biochemical disease-free survival and 40% composite end-point-free survival at 4 years for a low-risk group, while the corresponding figures for a high-risk group were 7% and 0%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and Validation

Neupane

Nevalainen

Raitanen

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed and validated a prognostic index to predict survival from prostate cancer (PCa) based on the Finnish randomized screening trial (FinRSPC). Men diagnosed with localized PCa (N = 7042) were included. European Association of Urology risk groups were defined. The follow-up was divided into three periods (0–3, 3–9 and 9–20 years) for development and two corresponding validation periods (3–6 and 9–15 years). A multivariable complementary log–log regression model was used to calculate the full prognostic index. Predicted cause-specific survival at 10 years from diagnosis was calculated for the control arm using a simplified risk score at diagnosis. The full prognostic index discriminates well men with PCa with different survival. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.83 for both the 3–6 year and 9–15 year validation periods. In the simplified risk score, patients with a low risk score at diagnosis had the most favorable survival, while the outcome was poorest for the patients with high risk scores. The prognostic index was able to distinguish well between men with higher and lower survival, and the simplified risk score can be used as a basis for decision making.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and Validation

Neupane

Nevalainen

Raitanen

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, there was not an underlying protocol, so we could not mandate biopsy in all men, particularly if the PSA was stable. Third, we lack long term evaluation of metastases and mortality and therefore used a composite endpoint [ 7 ]. Last, we were not able to evaluate whether apical versus mid-gland or base locations had impact on the failure rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Focal HIFU therapy for anterior compared to posterior prostate cancer lesions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare cancer control in anterior compared to posterior prostate cancer lesions treated with a focal HIFU therapy approach. Materials and methods In a prospectively maintained national database, 598 patients underwent focal HIFU (Sonablate ® 500) (March/2007-November/2016). Follow-up occurred with 3-monthly clinic visits and PSA testing in the first year with PSA, every 6-12 months with mpMRI with biopsy for MRI-suspicion of recurrence. Treatment failure was any secondary treatment (ADT/chemotherapy, cryotherapy, EBRT, RRP, or re-HIFU), tumour recurrence with Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 on prostate biopsy without further treatment or metastases/prostate cancer-related mortality. Cases with anterior cancer were compared to those with posterior disease. Results 267 patients were analysed following eligibility criteria. 45 had an anterior focal-HIFU and 222 had a posterior focal-HIFU. Median age was 64 years and 66 years, respectively, with similar PSA level of 7.5 ng/ml and 6.92 ng/ml. 84% and 82%, respectively, had Gleason 3 + 4, 16% in both groups had Gleason 4 + 3, 0% and 2% had Gleason 4 + 4. Prostate volume was similar (33 ml vs. 36 ml, p = 0.315); median number of positive cores in biopsies was different in anterior and posterior tumours (7 vs. 5, p = 0.009), while medium cancer core length, and maximal cancer percentage of core were comparable. 17/45 (37.8%) anterior focal-HIFU patients compared to 45/222 (20.3%) posterior focal-HIFU patients required further treatment (p = 0.019). Conclusion Treating anterior prostate cancer lesions with focal HIFU may be less effective compared to posterior tumours.

show abstract

“…To estimate the risk of toxicity, it is essential to establish any pre-existing urinary or bowel symptoms. Time from treatment to biochemical relapse and PSA kinetics, such as PSADT, have prognostic relevance with respect to salvage oncologic outcomes [ 10 ]. Appropriate imaging modalities should be deployed for accurate tumor staging and the detection of disseminated disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-salvage MRI-guided Focal High-dose-rate Brachytherapy for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Son

Peters

Moerland

et al. 2018

Cureus

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostate cancer recurrences are common, even with twenty-first-century primary prostate cancer treatment modalities. The most common salvage treatment is (delayed) hormonal therapy, which is often associated with serious side-effects. Due to the risk of significant toxicity, whole-gland targeted salvage treatments remain unpopular. Consequently, developments in focal therapies have arisen. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided focal salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is a novel treatment aiming for minimal toxicity in recurrent prostate cancer patients. Repeating focal treatment could, therefore, be possible in case of post-salvage recurrence. We report the case of a 77-year-old man who underwent repeat focal HDR-BT.

show abstract

Development and internal validation of prediction models for biochemical failure and composite failure after focal salvage high intensity focused ultrasound for local radiorecurrent prostate cancer: Presentation of risk scores for individual patient prognoses

Abstract: Our model, once externally validated, could allow for better selection of patients for focal salvage HIFU.

Cited by 12 publications

References 37 publications

Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and Validation

Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and Validation

Focal HIFU therapy for anterior compared to posterior prostate cancer lesions

Re-salvage MRI-guided Focal High-dose-rate Brachytherapy for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About