Abi Kanthabalan
University College London
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Abi Kanthabalan.
British Journal of Cancer | 2017
Lucy Simmons; Abi Kanthabalan; Manit Arya; T. Briggs; Dean C. Barratt; Susan Charman; Alex Freeman; James Gelister; David J. Hawkes; Yipeng Hu; Charles Jameson; Neil McCartan; Caroline M. Moore; Shonit Punwani; Jan van der Meulen; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Background:Transrectal prostate biopsy has limited diagnostic accuracy. Prostate Imaging Compared to Transperineal Ultrasound-guided biopsy for significant prostate cancer Risk Evaluation (PICTURE) was a paired-cohort confirmatory study designed to assess diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in men requiring a repeat biopsy.Methods:All underwent 3 T mpMRI and transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies (TTPM biopsies). Multiparametric MRI was reported using Likert scores and radiologists were blinded to initial biopsies. Men were blinded to mpMRI results. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as Gleason ⩾4+3 and/or cancer core length ⩾6 mm.Results:Two hundred and forty-nine had both tests with mean (s.d.) age was 62 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 6.8 ng ml (4.98–9.50), median (IQR) number of previous biopsies 1 (1–2) and mean (s.d.) gland size 37 ml (15.5). On TTPM biopsies, 103 (41%) had clinically significant prostate cancer. Two hundred and fourteen (86%) had a positive prostate mpMRI using Likert score ⩾3; sensitivity was 97.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 92–99), specificity 21.9% (15.5–29.5), negative predictive value (NPV) 91.4% (76.9–98.1) and positive predictive value (PPV) 46.7% (35.2–47.8). One hundred and twenty-nine (51.8%) had a positive mpMRI using Likert score ⩾4; sensitivity was 80.6% (71.6–87.7), specificity 68.5% (60.3–75.9), NPV 83.3% (75.4–89.5) and PPV 64.3% (55.4–72.6).Conclusions:In men advised to have a repeat prostate biopsy, prostate mpMRI could be used to safely avoid a repeat biopsy with high sensitivity for clinically significant cancers. However, such a strategy can miss some significant cancers and overdiagnose insignificant cancers depending on the mpMRI score threshold used to define which men should be biopsied.
World Journal of Urology | 2013
Abi Kanthabalan; M. Arya; Shonit Punwani; Alex Freeman; A. Haroon; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Abstract Up to one-third of men can fail radical external beam radiotherapy for primary prostate cancer. Most of these men have expectant management with delayed hormones. However, around half of these men have localised recurrence. Challenges remain in identifying such men accurately, in order to enable them to undergo local salvage therapy which is potentially curative. Currently, this includes radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy and ablative whole-gland therapies, such as cryotherapy and high intensity focused ultrasound, all of which can carry significant morbidity. New approaches may involve targeting the area of recurrence alone—focal salvage therapy—in order to reduce tissue damage and thus reduce morbidity. This requires accurate localisation of intraprostatic recurrent disease and precision targeted ablation.
Contemporary Clinical Trials | 2015
Abi Kanthabalan; T. Shah; Manit Arya; Shonit Punwani; J. Bomanji; A. Haroon; R.O. Illing; A. Latifoltojar; Alex Freeman; Charles Jameson; J van der Meulen; Susan Charman; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
BACKGROUND One-third of men may experience biochemical failure by 8years following radical radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer. Over 90% of men are started on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) which is non-curative and confers systemic side-effects. Focal salvage therapy (FST) limits collateral tissue damage and may improve therapeutic ratios. In order to deliver FST, distant disease must be ruled-out and intra-prostatic disease must be accurately detected, localised and characterised. AIM FORECAST - Focal Recurrent Assessment and Salvage Treatment - is a study designed to evaluate a novel imaging-based diagnostic and therapeutic complex intervention pathway for men who fail radiotherapy. METHODS Men with biochemical failure following radical prostate radiotherapy, prior to salvage therapy will be recruited. They will undergo whole-body multi-parametric MRI (WB-MRI), choline PET/CT, bone-scan and pelvic-mpMRI and then MRI transperineal-targeted biopsies (MRI-TB) and Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping Biopsy (TPM). Those suitable for FST will undergo either high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or cryotherapy. RESULTS Primary outcome measures: a) the accuracy of WB-MRI to detect distant metastatic disease; b) accuracy of prostate mpMRI in local detection of radiorecurrent prostate cancer; c) detection accuracy of MRI-TB; and d) rate of urinary incontinence following FST. CONCLUSION Focal salvage therapy may confer lower rates of morbidity whilst retaining disease control. In order to deliver FST, intra- and extra-prostatic disease must be detected early and localised accurately. Novel diagnostic techniques including WB-MRI and MRI-TB may improve the detection of distant and local disease whilst reducing healthcare burdens compared with current imaging and biopsy strategies.
Current Opinion in Urology | 2014
Abi Kanthabalan; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Purpose of review Focal therapy for localised prostate cancer requires accurate disease localization and characterization. Standard trans-rectal ultrasound biopsy can miss significant cancer and cannot accurately localize prostate cancer to guide focal therapy. This article examines various biopsy and imaging strategies to determine which is the most useful in diagnosing prostate cancer suitable for treatment with focal therapy. Recent findings Advances in MRI and ultrasound have been combined with different biopsy techniques such as transperineal and targeted biopsy versus transrectal and whole-gland sampling to see which method detects and localizes cancer while reducing the burden of biopsy on patients. Summary Studies tended to report on overall cancer detection rates as opposed to clinically significant cancer detection rates. A standard definition of clinically significant cancer must first be defined and validated against an accurate sampling strategy such as radical prostatectomy or transperineal prostate mapping biopsy. Image-guided targeted biopsy has increased detection rates of clinically significant cancer rate with fewer number of cores compared with whole-gland sampling. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to identify a combined image and biopsy technique that detects and localizes the highest rate of clinically significant cancer while decreasing the risk to patients, in order to guide focal therapy.
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases | 2016
Taimur T. Shah; Max Peters; Abi Kanthabalan; Neil McCartan; Y Fatola; J.R.N. Van der Voort van Zyp; M. van Vulpen; A Freeman; Caroline M. Moore; Manit Arya; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Background:Treatment options for radio-recurrent prostate cancer are either androgen-deprivation therapy or salvage prostatectomy. Whole-gland high-intensity focussed ultrasound (HIFU) might have a role in this setting.Methods:An independent HIFU registry collated consecutive cases of HIFU. Between 2005 and 2012, we identified 50 men who underwent whole-gland HIFU following histological confirmation of localised disease following prior external beam radiotherapy (2005–2012). No upper threshold was applied for risk category, PSA or Gleason grade either at presentation or at the time of failure. Progression was defined as a composite with biochemical failure (Phoenix criteria (PSA>nadir+2 ng ml−1)), start of systemic therapies or metastases.Results:Median age (interquartile range (IQR)), pretreatment PSA (IQR) and Gleason score (range) were 68 years (64–72), 5.9 ng ml−1 (2.2–11.3) and 7 (6–9), respectively. Median follow-up was 64 months (49–84). In all, 24/50 (48%) avoided androgen-deprivation therapies. Also, a total of 28/50 (56%) achieved a PSA nadir <0.5 ng ml−1, 15/50 (30%) had a nadir ⩾0.5 ng ml−1 and 7/50 (14%) did not nadir (PSA non-responders). Actuarial 1, 3 and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 72, 40 and 31%, respectively. Actuarial 1, 3 and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 100, 94 and 87%, respectively. When comparing patients with PSA nadir <0.5 ng ml−1, nadir ⩾0.5 and non-responders, a statistically significant difference in PFS was seen (P<0.0001). Three-year PFS in each group was 57, 20 and 0%, respectively. Five-year OS was 96, 100 and 38%, respectively. Early in the learning curve, between 2005 and 2007, 3/50 (6%) developed a fistula. Intervention for bladder outlet obstruction was needed in 27/50 (54%). Patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires showed incontinence (any pad-use) as 8/26 (31%).Conclusions:In our series of high-risk patients, in whom 30–50% may have micro-metastases, disease control rates were promising in PSA responders, however, with significant morbidity. Additionally, post-HIFU PSA nadir appears to be an important predictor for both progression and survival. Further research on focal salvage ablation in order to reduce toxicity while retaining disease control rates is required.
Urologe A | 2015
Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Taimur T. Shah; Ian Donaldson; Abi Kanthabalan; Caroline M. Moore; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Focal therapy is a treatment strategy for men with localized prostate cancer that may serve as an alternative option to radical therapy. A number of minimally invasive ablative technologies are available to deliver treatment, and the energies most commonly used include high-intensity focused ultrasound and cryotherapy. The benefit of a tissue-preserving approach is the limitation of damage to key structures such as the neurovascular bundles, external urinary sphincter, rectal mucosa and bladder neck. This in turn minimizes side effects typically associated with radical therapies whilst also aiming to maintain oncological control. Over 30 single-centre studies of focal therapy have been published to date reporting excellent continence rates, good potency rates and acceptable short-term oncological outcomes. However, there are a number of controversial aspects associated with focal therapy including the index lesion hypothesis, patient selection criteria, assessment of treatment effect and the lack of medium- and long-term oncological outcomes. In the process of the adoption of new technology, there is a limited window of opportunity to provide this evidence in well-designed prospective trials. Men should be allowed to benefit from the potential advantages of this novel treatment whilst under close surveillance. An English version of this article is available under dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3734-7.
Urologe A | 2015
Kasivisvanathan; Taimur T. Shah; Ian Donaldson; Abi Kanthabalan; Caroline M. Moore; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Focal therapy is a treatment strategy for men with localized prostate cancer that may serve as an alternative option to radical therapy. A number of minimally invasive ablative technologies are available to deliver treatment, and the energies most commonly used include high-intensity focused ultrasound and cryotherapy. The benefit of a tissue-preserving approach is the limitation of damage to key structures such as the neurovascular bundles, external urinary sphincter, rectal mucosa and bladder neck. This in turn minimizes side effects typically associated with radical therapies whilst also aiming to maintain oncological control. Over 30 single-centre studies of focal therapy have been published to date reporting excellent continence rates, good potency rates and acceptable short-term oncological outcomes. However, there are a number of controversial aspects associated with focal therapy including the index lesion hypothesis, patient selection criteria, assessment of treatment effect and the lack of medium- and long-term oncological outcomes. In the process of the adoption of new technology, there is a limited window of opportunity to provide this evidence in well-designed prospective trials. Men should be allowed to benefit from the potential advantages of this novel treatment whilst under close surveillance. An English version of this article is available under dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3734-7.
Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations | 2018
Max Peters; Abi Kanthabalan; Taimur T. Shah; Neil McCartan; Caroline M. Moore; Manit Arya; Jochem R.N. van der Voort van Zyp; Marinus A. Moerland; Richard G. Hindley; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
PURPOSE Patient selection for focal salvage remains difficult. Therefore, we developed and internally validated prediction models for biochemical failure (BF) and a composite endpoint (CE) following focal salvage high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for radiorecurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective HIFU registry identified 150 cases (November 2006-August 2015). Recurrence was assessed with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with template prostate mapping biopsies, targeted biopsies, or systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies. Metastatic disease was ruled out with a positron emission tomography-computed tomography and a bone scan. Focal salvage HIFU consisted of quadrant-ablation, hemi-ablation, or index-lesion ablation. Cox-regression was used for BF (Phoenix-definition) and CE (BF/MRI+/biopsies+/local or systemic treatment/metastases+/prostate cancer specific mortality+). Internal validation was performed using bootstrap resampling (500 datasets) after which C-statistic and hazard ratios were adjusted. Models were calibrated and risk scores created. RESULTS Median follow-up was 35 months (interquartile range: 22-52). Median biochemical disease-free survival (DFS) was 33 months (95% CI: 23-45). Median CE-free survival was 24 months (95% CI: 21-35). After multivariable analysis, DFS interval after primary radiotherapy, presalvage prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA-doubling time, prostatic volume, and T-stage (both MRI based) predicted BF. For the CE, PSA-doubling time was not predictive but additionally, primary Gleason score was. The adjusted C-statistics were 0.68 and 0.64 for BF and CE, respectively. Calibration was accurate until 48 months. The risk scores showed 3 groups, with biochemical DFS of 60%, 35%, and 7% and CE-free survival of 40%, 24%, and 0% at 4 years. CONCLUSION Our model, once externally validated, could allow for better selection of patients for focal salvage HIFU.
The Prostate | 2018
Jonathan Olivier; Vasilis Stavrinides; Jonathan Kay; Alex Freeman; Hayley Pye; Zeba Ahmed; Lina Maria Carmona Echeverria; Susan Heavey; Lucy Simmons; Abi Kanthabalan; Manit Arya; T. Briggs; Dean C. Barratt; Susan Charman; James Gelister; David J. Hawkes; Yipeng Hu; Charles Jameson; Neil McCartan; Shonit Punwani; Jan van der Muelen; Caroline M. Moore; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed; Hayley C. Whitaker
Diagnosing prostate cancer routinely involves tissue biopsy and increasingly image guided biopsy using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Excess tissue after diagnosis can be used for research to improve the diagnostic pathway and the vertical assembly of prostate needle biopsy cores into tissue microarrays (TMAs) allows the parallel immunohistochemical (IHC) validation of cancer biomarkers in routine diagnostic specimens. However, tissue within a biopsy core is often heterogeneous and cancer is not uniformly present, resulting in needle biopsy TMAs that suffer from highly variable cancer detection rates that complicate parallel biomarker validation.
The Journal of Urology | 2018
Lucy Simmons; Abi Kanthabalan; Manit Arya; T. Briggs; Dean C. Barratt; Susan Charman; Alex Freeman; David J. Hawkes; Yipeng Hu; Charles Jameson; Neil McCartan; Caroline M. Moore; Shonit Punwani; Jan van der Muelen; Mark Emberton; Hashim U. Ahmed
Purpose: We evaluated the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies and compared visual estimation to image fusion targeting in patients requiring repeat prostate biopsies. Materials and Methods: The prospective, ethics committee approved PICTURE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01492270) enrolled 249 consecutive patients from January 11, 2012 to January 29, 2014. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and were blinded to the results. All underwent transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies. In 200 men with a lesion this was preceded by visual estimation and image fusion targeted biopsies. As the primary study end point clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as Gleason 4 + 3 or greater and/or any grade of cancer with a length of 6 mm or greater. Other definitions of clinically significant prostate cancer were also evaluated. Results: Mean ± SD patient age was 62.6 ± 7 years, median prostate specific antigen was 7.17 ng/ml (IQR 5.25–10.09), mean primary lesion size was 0.37 ± 1.52 cc with a mean of 4.3 ± 2.3 targeted cores per lesion on visual estimation and image fusion combined, and a mean of 48.7 ± 12.3 transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy cores. Transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies detected 97 clinically significant prostate cancers (48.5%) and 85 insignificant cancers (42.5%). Overall multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies detected 81 clinically significant prostate cancers (40.5%) and 63 insignificant cancers (31.5%). In the 18 cases (9%) of clinically significant prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies were benign or clinically insignificant on transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy. Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 34 cases (17%) on transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy but not on magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies and approximately half was present in nontargeted areas. Clinically significant prostate cancer was found on visual estimation and image fusion in 53 (31.3%) and 48 (28.4%) of the 169 patients (McNemar test p = 0.5322). Visual estimation missed 23 clinically significant prostate cancers (13.6%) detected by image fusion. Image fusion missed 18 clinically significant prostate cancers (10.8%) detected by visual estimation. Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies are accurate for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer and reducing the over diagnosis of insignificant cancers. To maximize detection visual estimation as well as image fusion targeted biopsies are required.