Mark Emberton

EAU Guidelines on the Treatment and Follow-up of Non-neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Including Benign Prostatic Obstruction

OBJECTIVE To present a summary of the 2013 version of the European Association of Urology guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We conducted a literature search in computer databases for relevant articles published between 1966 and 31 October 2012. The Oxford classification system (2001) was used to determine the level of evidence for each article and to assign the grade of recommendation for each treatment modality. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Men with mild symptoms are suitable for watchful waiting. All men with bothersome LUTS should be offered lifestyle advice prior to or concurrent with any treatment. Men with bothersome moderate-to-severe LUTS quickly benefit from α1-blockers. Men with enlarged prostates, especially those >40ml, profit from 5α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) that slowly reduce LUTS and the probability of urinary retention or the need for surgery. Antimuscarinics might be considered for patients who have predominant bladder storage symptoms. The phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor tadalafil can quickly reduce LUTS to a similar extent as α1-blockers, and it also improves erectile dysfunction. Desmopressin can be used in men with nocturia due to nocturnal polyuria. Treatment with an α1-blocker and 5-ARI (in men with enlarged prostates) or antimuscarinics (with persistent storage symptoms) combines the positive effects of either drug class to achieve greater efficacy. Prostate surgery is indicated in men with absolute indications or drug treatment-resistant LUTS due to benign prostatic obstruction. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the current standard operation for men with prostates 30-80ml, whereas open surgery or transurethral holmium laser enucleation is appropriate for men with prostates >80ml. Alternatives for monopolar TURP include bipolar TURP and transurethral incision of the prostate (for glands <30ml) and laser treatments. Transurethral microwave therapy and transurethral needle ablation are effective minimally invasive treatments with higher retreatment rates compared with TURP. Prostate stents are an alternative to catheterisation for men unfit for surgery. Ethanol or botulinum toxin injections into the prostate are still experimental. CONCLUSIONS These symptom-oriented guidelines provide practical guidance for the management of men experiencing LUTS. The full version is available online (www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/12_Male_LUTS.pdf).

Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study.

BACKGROUND Men with high serum prostate specific antigen usually undergo transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-biopsy). TRUS-biopsy can cause side-effects including bleeding, pain, and infection. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) used as a triage test might allow men to avoid unnecessary TRUS-biopsy and improve diagnostic accuracy. METHODS We did this multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study to test diagnostic accuracy of MP-MRI and TRUS-biopsy against a reference test (template prostate mapping biopsy [TPM-biopsy]). Men with prostate-specific antigen concentrations up to 15 ng/mL, with no previous biopsy, underwent 1·5 Tesla MP-MRI followed by both TRUS-biopsy and TPM-biopsy. The conduct and reporting of each test was done blind to other test results. Clinically significant cancer was defined as Gleason score ≥4 + 3 or a maximum cancer core length 6 mm or longer. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01292291. FINDINGS Between May 17, 2012, and November 9, 2015, we enrolled 740 men, 576 of whom underwent 1·5 Tesla MP-MRI followed by both TRUS-biopsy and TPM-biopsy. On TPM-biopsy, 408 (71%) of 576 men had cancer with 230 (40%) of 576 patients clinically significant. For clinically significant cancer, MP-MRI was more sensitive (93%, 95% CI 88-96%) than TRUS-biopsy (48%, 42-55%; p<0·0001) and less specific (41%, 36-46% for MP-MRI vs 96%, 94-98% for TRUS-biopsy; p<0·0001). 44 (5·9%) of 740 patients reported serious adverse events, including 8 cases of sepsis. INTERPRETATION Using MP-MRI to triage men might allow 27% of patients avoid a primary biopsy and diagnosis of 5% fewer clinically insignificant cancers. If subsequent TRUS-biopsies were directed by MP-MRI findings, up to 18% more cases of clinically significant cancer might be detected compared with the standard pathway of TRUS-biopsy for all. MP-MRI, used as a triage test before first prostate biopsy, could reduce unnecessary biopsies by a quarter. MP-MRI can also reduce over-diagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer and improve detection of clinically significant cancer. FUNDING PROMIS is funded by the UK Government Department of Health, National Institute of Health Research-Health Technology Assessment Programme, (Project number 09/22/67). This project is also supported and partly funded by UCLH/UCL Biomedical Research Centre and The Royal Marsden and Institute for Cancer Research Biomedical Research Centre and is coordinated by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU) at UCL. It is sponsored by University College London (UCL).

Systematic Review of Complications of Prostate Biopsy

CONTEXT Prostate biopsy is commonly performed for cancer detection and management. The benefits and risks of prostate biopsy are germane to ongoing debates about prostate cancer screening and treatment. OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review of complications from prostate biopsy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase, supplemented with additional references. Articles were reviewed for data on the following complications: hematuria, rectal bleeding, hematospermia, infection, pain, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), urinary retention, erectile dysfunction, and mortality. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS After biopsy, hematuria and hematospermia are common but typically mild and self-limiting. Severe rectal bleeding is uncommon. Despite antimicrobial prophylaxis, infectious complications are increasing over time and are the most common reason for hospitalization after biopsy. Pain may occur at several stages of prostate biopsy and can be mitigated by anesthetic agents and anxiety-reduction techniques. Up to 25% of men have transient LUTS after biopsy, and <2% have frank urinary retention, with slightly higher rates reported after transperineal template biopsy. Biopsy-related mortality is rare. CONCLUSIONS Preparation for biopsy should include antimicrobial prophylaxis and pain management. Prostate biopsy is frequently associated with minor bleeding and urinary symptoms that usually do not require intervention. Infectious complications can be serious, requiring prompt management and continued work into preventative strategies.

Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study

Summary Background Radical whole-gland therapy can lead to significant genitourinary and rectal side-effects for men with localised prostate cancer. We report on whether selective focal ablation of unifocal and multifocal cancer lesions can reduce this treatment burden. Methods Men aged 45–80 years were eligible for this prospective development study if they had low-risk to high-risk localised prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen [PSA] ≤15 ng/mL, Gleason score ≤4 + 3, stage ≤T2), with no previous androgen deprivation or treatment for prostate cancer, and who could safely undergo multiparametric MRI and have a general anaesthetic. Patients received focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound, delivered to all known cancer lesions, with a margin of normal tissue, identified on multiparametric MRI, template prostate-mapping biopsies, or both. Primary endpoints were adverse events (serious and otherwise) and urinary symptoms and erectile function assessed using patient questionnaires. Analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00561314. Findings 42 men were recruited between June 27, 2007, and June 30, 2010; one man died from an unrelated cause (pneumonia) 3 months after treatment and was excluded from analyses. After treatment, one man was admitted to hospital for acute urinary retention, and another had stricture interventions requiring hospital admission. Nine men (22%, 95% CI 11–38) had self-resolving, mild to moderate, intermittent dysuria (median duration 5·0 days [IQR 2·5–18·5]). Urinary debris occurred in 14 men (34%, 95% CI 20–51), with a median duration of 14·5 days (IQR 6·0–16·5). Urinary tract infection was noted in seven men (17%, 95% CI 7–32). Median overall International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) scores were similar at baseline and at 12 months (p=0·060), as were median IIEF-15 scores for intercourse satisfaction (p=0·454), sexual desire (p=0·644), and overall satisfaction (p=0·257). Significant deteriorations between baseline and 12 months were noted for IIEF-15 erectile (p=0·042) and orgasmic function (p=0·003). Of 35 men with good baseline function, 31 (89%, 95% CI 73–97) had erections sufficient for penetration 12 months after focal therapy. Median UCLA Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary incontinence scores were similar at baseline as and 12 months (p=0·045). There was an improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms, assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), between baseline and 12 months (p=0·026), but the IPSS-quality of life score showed no difference between baseline and 12 months (p=0·655). All 38 men with no baseline urinary incontinence were leak-free and pad-free by 9 months. All 40 men pad-free at baseline were pad-free by 3 months and maintained pad-free continence at 12 months. No significant difference was reported in median Trial Outcomes Index scores between baseline and 12 months (p=0·113) but significant improvement was shown in median Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Prostate (p=0·045) and median FACT-General scores (p=0·041). No histological evidence of cancer was identified in 30 of 39 men biopsied at 6 months (77%, 95% CI 61–89); 36 (92%, 79–98) were free of clinically significant cancer. After retreatment in four men, 39 of 41 (95%, 95% CI 83–99) had no evidence of disease on multiparametric MRI at 12 months. Interpretation Focal therapy of individual prostate cancer lesions, whether multifocal or unifocal, leads to a low rate of genitourinary side-effects and an encouraging rate of early absence of clinically significant prostate cancer. Funding Medical Research Council (UK), Pelican Cancer Foundation, and St Peters Trust.

Standards of Reporting for MRI-targeted Biopsy Studies (START) of the Prostate: Recommendations from an International Working Group.

BACKGROUND A systematic literature review of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy demonstrates poor adherence to the Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) recommendations for the full and transparent reporting of diagnostic studies. OBJECTIVE To define and recommend Standards of Reporting for MRI-targeted Biopsy Studies (START). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Each member of a panel of 23 experts in urology, radiology, histopathology, and methodology used the RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology to score a 258-statement premeeting questionnaire. The collated responses were presented at a face-to-face meeting, and each statement was rescored after group discussion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Measures of agreement and consensus were calculated for each statement. The most important statements, based on group median score, the degree of group consensus, and the content of the group discussion, were used to create a checklist of reporting criteria (the START checklist). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The strongest recommendations were to report histologic results of standard and targeted cores separately using Gleason score and maximum cancer core length. A table comparing detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant disease by targeted and standard approaches should also be used. It was recommended to report the recruitment criteria for MRI-targeted biopsy, prior biopsy status of the population, a brief description of the MRI sequences, MRI reporting method, radiologist experience, and image registration technique. There was uncertainty about which histologic criteria constitute clinically significant cancer when the prostate is sampled using MRI-targeted biopsy, and it was agreed that a new definition of clinical significance in this setting needed to be derived in future studies. CONCLUSIONS Use of the START checklist would improve the quality of reporting in MRI-targeted biopsy studies and facilitate a comparison between standard and MRI-targeted approaches.

Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy

The use of MRI in prostate cancer management is controversial and current guidelines underplay its role. Technological advances over the past 5 years, however, demand a re-evaluation of this position. In this article, we propose an increased use of MRI, not only in those with a diagnosis of prostate cancer but also for men before a prostate biopsy. The use of MRI before a biopsy can serve as a triage test in men with raised serum prostate-specific antigen levels, in order to select those for biopsy with significant cancer that requires treatment. This strategy could avoid biopsy, and hence unnecessary treatment, in those with no disease or insignificant cancer. In addition, avoidance of postbiopsy artifact caused by hemorrhage will lead to better local staging accuracy, while determining more accurately the disease burden. This approach could improve risk stratification by selecting those who require adjuvant therapy or dose escalation. Furthermore, MRI evaluation of cancer burden could be important in active surveillance regimens to select those needing intervention.

Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT The current standard for diagnosing prostate cancer in men at risk relies on a transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy test that is blind to the location of the cancer. To increase the accuracy of this diagnostic pathway, a software-based magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion targeted biopsy approach has been proposed. OBJECTIVE Our main objective was to compare the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer with software-based MRI-US fusion targeted biopsy against standard biopsy. The two strategies were also compared in terms of detection of all cancers, sampling utility and efficiency, and rate of serious adverse events. The outcomes of different targeted approaches were also compared. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We performed a systematic review of PubMed/Medline, Embase (via Ovid), and Cochrane Review databases in December 2013 following the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis statement. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Fourteen papers reporting the outcomes of 15 studies (n=2293; range: 13-582) were included. We found that MRI-US fusion targeted biopsies detect more clinically significant cancers (median: 33.3% vs 23.6%; range: 13.2-50% vs 4.8-52%) using fewer cores (median: 9.2 vs 37.1) compared with standard biopsy techniques, respectively. Some studies showed a lower detection rate of all cancer (median: 50.5% vs 43.4%; range: 23.7-82.1% vs 14.3-59%). MRI-US fusion targeted biopsy was able to detect some clinically significant cancers that would have been missed by using only standard biopsy (median: 9.1%; range: 5-16.2%). It was not possible to determine which of the two biopsy approaches led most to serious adverse events because standard and targeted biopsies were performed in the same session. Software-based MRI-US fusion targeted biopsy detected more clinically significant disease than visual targeted biopsy in the only study reporting on this outcome (20.3% vs 15.1%). CONCLUSIONS Software-based MRI-US fusion targeted biopsy seems to detect more clinically significant cancers deploying fewer cores than standard biopsy. Because there was significant study heterogeneity in patient inclusion, definition of significant cancer, and the protocol used to conduct the standard biopsy, these findings need to be confirmed by further large multicentre validating studies. PATIENT SUMMARY We compared the ability of standard biopsy to diagnose prostate cancer against a novel approach using software to overlay the images from magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound to guide biopsies towards the suspicious areas of the prostate. We found consistent findings showing the superiority of this novel targeted approach, although further high-quality evidence is needed to change current practice.

The Role of Focal Therapy in the Management of Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

Context The incidence of localised prostate cancer is increasing worldwide. In light of recent evidence, current, radical, whole-gland treatments for organ-confined disease have being questioned with respect to their side effects, cancer control, and cost. Focal therapy may be an effective alternative strategy. Objective To systematically review the existing literature on baseline characteristics of the target population; preoperative evaluation to localise disease; and perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes following focal therapy. Evidence acquisition Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Review databases were searched from inception to 31 October 2012. In addition, registered but not yet published trials were retrieved. Studies evaluating tissue-preserving therapies in men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer in the primary or salvage setting were included. Evidence synthesis A total of 2350 cases were treated to date across 30 studies. Most studies were retrospective with variable standards of reporting, although there was an increasing number of prospective registered trials. Focal therapy was mainly delivered to men with low and intermediate disease, although some high-risk cases were treated that had known, unilateral, significant cancer. In most of the cases, biopsy findings were correlated to specific preoperative imaging, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging or Doppler ultrasound to determine eligibility. Follow-up varied between 0 and 11.1 yr. In treatment-naïve prostates, pad-free continence ranged from 95% to 100%, erectile function ranged from 54% to 100%, and absence of clinically significant cancer ranged from 83% to 100%. In focal salvage cases for radiotherapy failure, the same outcomes were achieved in 87.2–100%, 29–40%, and 92% of cases, respectively. Biochemical disease-free survival was reported using a number of definitions that were not validated in the focal-therapy setting. Conclusions Our systematic review highlights that, when focal therapy is delivered with intention to treat, the perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes are encouraging within a short- to medium-term follow-up. Focal therapy is a strategy by which the overtreatment burden of the current prostate cancer pathway could be reduced, but robust comparative effectiveness studies are now required.

Characterizing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Template Prostate Mapping Biopsy

PURPOSE Definitions of prostate cancer risk are limited since accurate attribution of the cancer grade and burden is not possible due to the random and systematic errors associated with transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. Transperineal prostate mapping biopsy may have a role in accurate risk stratification. We defined the transperineal prostate mapping biopsy characteristics of clinically significant disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS A 3-dimensional model of each gland and individual cancer was reconstructed using 107 radical whole mount specimens. We performed 500 transperineal prostate mapping simulations per case by varying needle targeting errors to calculate sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive value to detect lesions 0.2 ml or greater, or 0.5 ml or greater. Definitions of clinically significant cancer based on a combination of Gleason grade and cancer burden (cancer core length) were derived. RESULTS Mean±SD patient age was 61±6.4 years (range 44 to 74) and mean prostate specific antigen was 9.7±5.9 ng/ml (range 0.8 to 36.2). We reconstructed 665 foci. The total cancer core length from all positive biopsies for a particular lesion that detected more than 95% of lesions 0.5 ml or greater and 0.2 ml or greater was 10 mm or greater and 6 mm or greater, respectively. The maximum cancer core length that detected more than 95% of lesions 0.5 ml or greater and 0.2 ml or greater was 6 mm or greater and 4 mm or greater, respectively. We combined these cancer burden thresholds with dominant and nondominant Gleason pattern 4 to derive 2 definitions of clinically significant disease. CONCLUSIONS Transperineal prostate mapping may provide an effective method to risk stratify men with localized prostate cancer. The definitions that we present require prospective validation.

Photodynamic therapy for prostate cancer—a review of current status and future promise

Debate is ongoing about the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer, particularly in men who have low-risk disease detected by PSA screening. A balance is needed between the harms and benefits of treatment. New techniques are being developed that aim to offer similar treatment effects to current radical therapies, while reducing the associated harmful effects of these treatments. In this Review, we explore the potential of one such technique, photodynamic therapy (PDT), for the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. PDT uses a photosensitizing drug that is activated in the prostate by low-power laser light, delivered using optical fibers. The fibers are placed within needles in the prostate, guided by transrectal ultrasound and a perineal template. Following the activation of the photosensitizer by light, and the formation of reactive oxygen species, necrosis occurs at the site of interaction between the photosensitizer, light and oxygen. Clinical studies are underway to investigate the use of PDT for primary and salvage treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. We review these studies, the potential strategies for enhanced photodynamic effects, and the current limitations of PDT for prostate cancer.