Matthijs J. Scheltema

Effect of chenodeoxycholic acid and the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam on glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion.

To evaluate the effects of the primary human bile acid, chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA), and the bile acid sequestrant (BAS) colesevelam, instilled into the stomach, on plasma levels of glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1), glucose‐dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucose, insulin, C‐peptide, glucagon, cholecystokinin and gastrin, as well as on gastric emptying, gallbladder volume, appetite and food intake.

Clinical relevance of the bile acid receptor TGR5 in metabolism

The bile acid receptor TGR5 (also known as GPBAR1) is a promising target for the development of pharmacological interventions in metabolic diseases, including type 2 diabetes, obesity, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. TGR5 is expressed in many metabolically active tissues, but complex enterohepatic bile acid cycling limits the exposure of some of these tissues to the receptor ligand. Profound interspecies differences in the biology of bile acids and their receptors in different cells and tissues exist. Data from preclinical studies show promising effects of targeting TGR5 on outcomes such as weight loss, glucose metabolism, energy expenditure, and suppression of inflammation. However, clinical studies are scarce. We give a summary of key concepts in bile acid metabolism; outline different downstream effects of TGR5 activation; and review available data on TGR5 activation, with a focus on the translation of preclinical studies into clinically applicable findings. Studies in rodents suggest an important role for Tgr5 in Glp-1 secretion, insulin sensitivity, and energy expenditure. However, evidence of effects on these processes from human studies is less convincing. Ultimately, safe and selective human TGR5 agonists are needed to test the therapeutic potential of TGR5.

Treatment outcomes from 68GaPSMA PET CT informed salvage radiation treatment in men with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy: Prognostic value of a negative PSMA PET

68Ga-PSMA (prostate-specific membrane antigen) PET/CT is increasingly used in men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) to triage those who will benefit from salvage radiation treatment (SRT). This study examines the value of PSMA-informed SRT in improving treatment outcomes in the context of biochemical failure after RP. Methods: We analyzed men with rising PSA after RP with PSA readings between 0.05 and 1.0 ng/mL, considered eligible for SRT at the time of PSMA. For each patient, clinical and pathologic features as well as scan results, including site of PSMA-positive disease, number of lesions, and a certainty score, were documented. Subsequent management, including SRT, and most recent PSA were recorded using medical records. Treatment response was defined as both PSA ≤ 0.1 ng/mL and >50% reduction in PSA. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for association of clinical variables and treatment response to SRT. Results: One hundred sixty-four men were included. PSMA was positive in 62% (n = 102/164): 38 of 102 in the prostatic fossa, 41 of 102 in pelvic nodes, and 23 of 102 distantly. Twenty-four patients received androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and were excluded for outcomes analysis. In total, 99 of 146 received SRT with a median follow-up after radiation treatment of 10.5 mo (interquartile range, 6–14 mo). Overall treatment response after SRT was 72% (n = 71/99). Forty-five percent (n = 27/60) of patients with a negative PSMA underwent SRT whereas 55% (33/60) did not. In men with a negative PSMA who received SRT, 85% (n = 23/27) demonstrated a treatment response, compared with a further PSA increase in 65% (22/34) in those not treated. In 36 of 99 patients with disease confined to the prostate fossa on PSMA, 81% (n = 29/36) responded to SRT. In total, 26 of 99 men had nodal disease on PSMA, of whom 61% (n = 16/26) had treatment response after SRT. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, PSMA and serum PSA significantly correlated with treatment response, whereas pT stage, Gleason score, and surgical margin status did not. Conclusion: PSMA PET is independently predictive of treatment response to SRT and stratifies men into a high treatment response to SRT (negative or fossa-confined PSMA) versus men with poor response to SRT (nodes or distant-disease PSMA). In particular, a negative PSMA PET result predicts a high response to salvage fossa radiotherapy.

Patient selection for prostate focal therapy in the era of active surveillance: an International Delphi Consensus Project

Background:Whole-gland extirpation or irradiation is considered the gold standard for curative oncological treatment for localized prostate cancer, but is often associated with sexual and urinary impairment that adversely affects quality of life. This has led to increased interest in developing therapies with effective cancer control but less morbidity. We aimed to provide details of physician consensus on patient selection for prostate focal therapy (FT) in the era of contemporary prostate cancer management.Methods:We undertook a four-stage Delphi consensus project among a panel of 47 international experts in prostate FT. Data on three main domains (role of biopsy/imaging, disease and patient factors) were collected in three iterative rounds of online questionnaires and feedback. Consensus was defined as agreement in ⩾80% of physicians. Finally, an in-person meeting was attended by a core group of 16 experts to review the data and formulate the consensus statement.Results:Consensus was obtained in 16 of 18 subdomains. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is a standard imaging tool for patient selection for FT. In the presence of an mpMRI-suspicious lesion, histological confirmation is necessary prior to FT. In addition, systematic biopsy remains necessary to assess mpMRI-negative areas. However, adequate criteria for systematic biopsy remains indeterminate. FT can be recommended in D’Amico low-/intermediate-risk cancer including Gleason 4+3. Gleason 3+4 cancer, where localized, discrete and of favorable size represents the ideal case for FT. Tumor foci <1.5 ml on mpMRI or <20% of the prostate are suitable for FT, or up to 3 ml or 25% if localized to one hemi-gland. Gleason 3+3 at one core 1mm is acceptable in the untreated area. Preservation of sexual function is an important goal, but lack of erectile function should not exclude a patient from FT.Conclusions:This consensus provides a contemporary insight into expert opinion of patient selection for FT of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Focal irreversible electroporation as primary treatment for localized prostate cancer

To determine the safety, quality of life (QoL) and short‐term oncological outcomes of primary focal irreversible electroporation (IRE) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa), and to identify potential risk factors for oncological failure.

Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Prospective, Human, In Vivo Study Protocol (IDEAL Phase 2b)

Background Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is an emerging technique delivering electrical pulses to ablate tissue, with the theoretical advantage to overcome the main shortcomings of conventional thermal ablation. Recent short-term research showed that IRE for the ablation of renal masses is a safe and feasible treatment option. In an ablate and resect design, histopathological analysis 4 weeks after radical nephrectomy demonstrated that IRE-targeted renal tumors were completely covered by ablation zone. In order to develop a validated long-term IRE follow-up study, it is essential to obtain clinical confirmation of the efficacy of this novel technology. Additionally, follow-up after IRE ablation obliges verification of a suitable imaging modality. Objective The objectives of this study are the clinical efficacy and safety of IRE ablation of renal masses and to evaluate the use of cross-sectional imaging modalities in the follow-up after IRE in renal tumors. This study conforms to the recommendations of the IDEAL Collaboration and can be categorized as a phase 2B exploration trial. Methods In this prospective clinical trial, IRE will be performed in 20 patients aged 18 years and older presenting with a solid enhancing small renal mass (SRM) (≤4 cm) who are candidates for ablation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) will be performed at 1 day pre-IRE, and 1 week post-IRE. Computed tomography (CT), CEUS, and MRI will be performed at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-IRE. Results Presently, recruitment of patients has started and the first inclusions are completed. Preliminary results and outcomes are expected in 2018. Conclusions To establish the position of IRE ablation for treating renal tumors, a structured stepwise assessment in clinical practice is required. This study will offer fundamental knowledge on the clinical efficacy of IRE ablation for SRMs, potentially positioning IRE as ablative modality for renal tumors and accrediting future research with long-term follow-up. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT02828709; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02828709 (archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6nmWK7Uu9). Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects NL56935.018.16

Irreversible electroporation for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a summary of imaging findings and treatment feedback

PURPOSE Imaging plays a crucial role in ablative therapies for prostate cancer (PCa). Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a new treatment modality used for focal treatment of PCa. We aimed to demonstrate what imaging modalities can be used by descriptively reporting contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS), multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and grey-scale transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) results. Furthermore, we aimed to correlate quantitatively the ablation zone seen on mpMRI and CEUS with treatment planning to provide therapy feedback. METHODS Imaging data was obtained from two prospective multicenter trials on IRE for localized low- to intermediate-risk PCa. The ablation zone volume (AZV) seen on mpMRI and CEUS was 3D reconstructed to correlate with the planned AZV. RESULTS Descriptive examples are provided using mpMRI, TRUS, and CEUS for treatment planning and follow-up after IRE. The mean AZV on T2-weighted imaging 4 weeks following IRE was 12.9 cm3 (standard deviation [SD]=7.0), 5.3 times larger than the planned AZV. Linear regression showed a positive correlation (r=0.76, P = 0.002). For CEUS the mean AZV was 20.7 cm3 (SD=8.7), 8.5 times larger than the planned AZV with a strong positive correlation (r=0.93, P = 0.001). Prostate volume is reduced over time (mean= -27.5%, SD=11.9%) due to ablation zone fibrosis and deformation, illustrated by 3D reconstruction. CONCLUSION The role of imaging in conjunction with IRE is of crucial importance to guide clinicians throughout the treatment protocol. CEUS and mpMRI may provide essential treatment feedback by visualizing the ablation zone dimensions and volume.

Feasibility and safety of focal irreversible electroporation as salvage treatment for localized radio-recurrent prostate cancer

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, early quality‐of‐life (QoL) and oncological outcomes of salvage focal irreversible electroporation (IRE) for radio‐recurrent prostate cancer (PCa).

Irreversible Electroporation of Prostate Tumors

In the past years, focal therapy in localized prostate cancer has gained increasing interest. In focal therapy the tumor lesion is targeted while sparing adjacent anatomical structures that are of importance for urinary, rectal, and erectile function, aiming for functional preservation. The first phase 1–2 trials in human showed that irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a safe and effective treatment modality for focal therapy in localized prostate cancer. Functional outcomes are promising, while all treated patients being pad-free continent following the IRE procedure. Potency was preserved in 56–95% of the patients that had a good erectile function prior to the IRE procedure. Although good short-term oncological outcome has been shown, long-term data are warranted. This chapter focuses on the clinical aspects of prostate cancer treatment with irreversible electroporation, elaborating on patient selection, treatment procedures, and follow-up after focal therapy and provides an update on current results on irreversible electroporation in prostate cancer.

Impact on genitourinary function and quality of life following focal irreversible electroporation of different prostate segments

PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate the genitourinary function and quality of life (QoL) following the ablation of different prostate segments with irreversible electroporation (IRE) for localized prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS Sixty patients who received primary focal IRE for organ-confined PCa were recruited for this study. Patients were evaluated for genitourinary function and QoL per prostate segment treated (anterior vs. posterior, apex vs. base vs. apex-to-base, unilateral vs. bilateral). IRE system settings and patient characteristics were compared between patients with preserved vs. those with impaired erectile function and urinary continence. Data were prospectively collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months using the expanded prostate cancer index composite, American Urological Association symptom score, SF-12 physical and mental component summary surveys. Difference over time within segments per questionnaire was evaluated using the Wilcoxons signed rank test. Outcome differences between segments were assessed using covariance models. Baseline measurements included questionnaire scores, age, and prostate volume. RESULTS There were no statistically significant changes over time for overall urinary (P = 0.07-0.89), bowel (P = 0.06-0.79), physical (P = 0.18-0.71) and mental (P = 0.45-0.94) QoL scores within each segment. Deterioration of sexual function scores was observed at 6 months within each segment (P = 0.001-0.16). There were no statistically significant differences in QoL scores between prostate segments (P = 0.08-0.97). Older patients or those with poor baseline sexual function at time of treatment were associated with a greater risk of developing erectile dysfunction. CONCLUSION IRE is a feasible modality for all prostate segments without any significantly different effect on the QoL outcomes. Older patients and those with poor sexual function need to be counseled regarding the risk of erectile dysfunction.