Clinical Study
British Journal of Cancer (2009) 101, 19–26. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605116 www.bjcancer.com
Published online 9 June 2009
High-intensity-focused ultrasound in the treatment of primary prostate cancer: the first UK series
H U Ahmed1, E Zacharakis1, T Dudderidge1, J N Armitage2, R Scott1, J Calleary1, R Illing2,3, A Kirkham3, A Freeman4, C Ogden5, C Allen3 and M Emberton1,2
- 1Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College London, 67 Riding House Street, London W1P 7PN, UK
- 2Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 35-43 Lincoln Inn Fields, London, UK
- 3The Academic Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, 235 Euston Road, London NW1 2BU, UK
- 4The Department of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
- 5The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
Correspondence: Dr HU Ahmed, E-mail: hashim.ahmed@ucl.ac.uk
Received 29 January 2009; Revised 28 April 2009; Accepted 6 May 2009; Published online 9 June 2009.
Abstract
Background:
The use of minimally invasive ablative therapies in localised prostate cancer offer potential for a middle ground between active surveillance and radical therapy.
Methods:
An analysis of men with organ-confined prostate cancer treated with transrectal whole-gland HIFU (Sonablate 500) between 1 February 2005 and 15 May 2007 was carried out in two centres. Outcome data (side-effects using validated patient questionnaires, biochemical, histology) were evaluated.
Results:
A total of 172 men were treated under general anaesthetic as day-case procedures with 78% discharged a mean 5 h after treatment. Mean follow-up was 346 days (range 135–759 days). Urethral stricture was significantly lower in those with suprapubic catheter compared with urethral catheters (19.4 vs 40.4%, P=0.005). Antibiotics were given to 23.8% of patients for presumed urinary tract infection and the rate of epididymitis was 7.6%. Potency was maintained in 70% by 12 months, whereas mild stress urinary incontinence (no pads) was reported in 7.0% (12 out of 172) with a further 0.6% (1 out of 172) requiring pads. There was no rectal toxicity and no recto-urethral fistulae. In all, 78.3% achieved a PSA nadir
0.5
g ml-1 at 12 months, with 57.8% achieving
0.2
g ml-1. Then, 8 out of 13 were retreated with HIFU, one had salvage external beam radiotherapy and four chose active surveillance for small-volume low-risk disease. Overall, there was no evidence of disease (PSA <0.5
g ml-1 or negative biopsy if nadir not achieved) after one HIFU session in 92.4% (159 out of 172) of patients.
Conclusion:
HIFU is a minimally invasive, day-case ablative technique that can achieve good biochemical outcomes in the short term with minimal urinary incontinence and acceptable levels of erectile dysfunction. Long-term outcome needs further evaluation and the inception of an international registry for cases treated using HIFU will significantly aid this health technology assessment.
Keywords:
HIFU, high-intensity-focused ultrasound, transrectal, prostate cancer, Sonablate500
