Download PDF
Semin intervent Radiol 2017; 34(02): 187-200
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1602710
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Therapeutic Ultrasound and Prostate Cancer

Karthik M. Sundaram
1   Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Sam S. Chang
2   Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
David F. Penson
2   Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Sandeep Arora
1   Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
2   Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 June 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Therapeutic ultrasound approaches including high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) are emerging as popular minimally invasive alternative treatments for localized, low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer. FDA approval was recently granted for two ultrasound-guided HIFU devices. Clinical trials for devices using MRI guidance are ongoing. The current level of evidence for whole-gland ultrasound ablation suggests that its clinical efficacy and adverse event rates including erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence are similar to current definitive therapies such as radical prostatectomy and external-beam radiotherapy. Short-term data suggest that more focal therapy could reduce the rates of adverse events.

Keywords

high-intensity focused ultrasound - prostate cancer - therapeutic ultrasound - high-intensity directional ultrasound
 

  • References

  • 1 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016; 66 (01) 7-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tosoian JJ, Carter HB, Lepor A, Loeb S. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13 (04) 205-215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Prensner JR, Rubin MA, Wei JT, Chinnaiyan AM. Beyond PSA: the next generation of prostate cancer biomarkers. Sci Transl Med 2012; 4 (127) 127rv3
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2016. Cancer Facts Fig 2016; 2016: 1-69
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, 2014. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/clinicians-providers/guidelines-recommendations/guide/index . Accessed April 26, 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Troyer DA, Lucia MS, de Bruïne AP. , et al. Prostate cancer detected by methylated gene markers in histopathologically cancer-negative tissues from men with subsequent positive biopsies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18 (10) 2717-2722 A
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Perera M, Krishnananthan N, Lindner U, Lawrentschuk N. An update on focal therapy for prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 2016. Available at: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nrurol.2016.177 . Accessed October 1, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chu KF, Dupuy DE. Thermal ablation of tumours: biological mechanisms and advances in therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2014; 14 (03) 199-208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Barret E, Durand M. Technical aspects of focal therapy in localized prostate cancer. France: Springer-Verlag; 2015: 19-28
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Nour SG. Magnetic resonance image-guided focal prostate ablation. Semin Intervent Radiol 2016; 33 (03) 206-216
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hu JC, Laviana A, Sedrakyan A. High-intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer: novelty or innovation?. JAMA 2016; 315 (24) 2659-2660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Barkin J. High intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Can J Urol 2011; 18 (02) 5634-5643
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tvakkoli J, Sanghvi N. Ultrasound-guided HIFU and thermal ablation. In: Frenkel V. . ed. Therapeutic Ultrasound: Mechanisms to Applications. Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc; 2011: 137-164
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Rewcastle JC. High intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer: a review of the scientific foundation, technology and clinical outcomes. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2006; 5 (06) 619-625
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Westwood M, Joore M, Grutters J. , et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue (sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles) compared with contrast- enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the characterisation of focal liver lesions and detection of liver met. Health Technol. Assess. (Rockv) 2013; 17 (16) 7-243
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Dickinson L, Arya M, Afzal N. , et al. Medium-term outcomes after whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of nonmetastatic prostate cancer from a multicentre registry cohort. Eur Urol 2016; 70 (04) 668-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Jarow JP, Ahmed HU, Choyke PL, Taneja SS, Scardino PT. Partial gland ablation for prostate cancer: Report of a food and drug administration, American urological association, and society of urologic oncology public workshop. Urology 2016; 88: 8-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ramsay CR, Adewuyi TE, Gray J. , et al. Ablative therapy for people with localised prostate cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2015; 19 (49) 1-490
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ganzer R, Fritsche H-M, Brandtner A. , et al. Fourteen-year oncological and functional outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound in localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2013; 112 (03) 322-329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ganzer R, Robertson CN, Ward JF. , et al. Correlation of prostate-specific antigen nadir and biochemical failure after high-intensity focused ultrasound of localized prostate cancer based on the Stuttgart failure criteria - analysis from the @-Registry. BJU Int 2011; 108 (8 B): 196-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Crouzet S, Chapelon JY, Rouvière O. , et al. Whole-gland ablation of localized prostate cancer with high-intensity focused ultrasound: oncologic outcomes and morbidity in 1002 patients. Eur Urol 2014; 65 (05) 907-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Blana A, Brown SCW, Chaussy C. , et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer: comparative definitions of biochemical failure. BJU Int 2009; 104 (08) 1058-1062
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ramalingam S, Eisenberg A, Foo WC. , et al. Treatment-related neuroendocrine prostate cancer resulting in Cushing's syndrome. Int J Urol 2016; 23 (12) 1038-1041
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Thüroff S, Chaussy C. Evolution and outcomes of 3 MHz high intensity focused ultrasound therapy for localized prostate cancer during 15 years. J Urol 2013; 190 (02) 702-710
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Uchida T, Tomonaga T, Kim H. , et al. Improved outcomes with advancements in high intensity focused ultrasound devices for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2015; 193 (01) 103-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chin JL, Billia M, Relle J. , et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation of prostate tissue in patients with localized prostate cancer: a prospective phase 1 clinical trial. Eur Urol 2016; 70 (03) 447-455
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ghai S, Louis AS, Van Vliet M. , et al. Real-time MRI-guided focused ultrasound for focal therapy of locally confined low-risk prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205 (02) W177-84
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Napoli A, Anzidei M, De Nunzio C. , et al. Real-time magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound focal therapy for localised prostate cancer: preliminary experience. Eur Urol 2013; 63 (02) 395-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Asimakopoulos AD, Miano R, Virgili G, Vespasiani G, Finazzi Agrò E. HIFU as salvage first-line treatment for palpable, TRUS-evidenced, biopsy-proven locally recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a pilot study. Urol Oncol 2012; 30 (05) 577-583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gelet A, Chapelon JY, Poissonnier L. , et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after external beam radiotherapy: early experience of salvage therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasonography. Urology 2004; 63 (04) 625-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Chaussy C, Thüroff S, Bergsdorf T. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after curative therapy. HIFU (Ablatherm) as a treatment option [in German]. Urologe A 2006; 45 (10) 1271-1275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Poissonnier L, Murat F-J, Belot A. , et al. Adénocarcinome prostatique en récidive locale après radiothérapie exclusive: résultats du traitement par ultrasons focalisés. Prog Urol 2008; 18 (04) 223-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Murat F-J, Poissonnier L, Rabilloud M. , et al. Mid-term results demonstrate salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) as an effective and acceptably morbid salvage treatment option for locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2009; 55 (03) 640-647
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Mearini L, Porena M. Transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of prostate cancer: past, present, and future. Indian J Urol 2010; 26 (01) 4-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Berge V, Dickinson L, McCartan N. , et al. Morbidity associated with primary high intensity focused ultrasound and redo high intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2014; 191 (06) 1764-1769
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA. , et al; ProtecT Study Group. 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375 (15) 1415-1424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D. , et al. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes--a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2015; 67 (04) 771-777
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B. , et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 2015; 313 (04) 390-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Ahmed HU, Hindley RG, Dickinson L. , et al. Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13 (06) 622-632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Ahmed HU, Dickinson L, Charman S. , et al. Focal ablation targeted to the index lesion in multifocal localised prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Eur Urol 2015; 68 (06) 927-936
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Cordeiro ER, Cathelineau X, Thüroff S, Marberger M, Crouzet S, de la Rosette JJMCH. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for definitive treatment of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110 (09) 1228-1242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Rischmann P, Gelet A, Riche B. , et al. Focal high intensity focused ultrasound of unilateral localized prostate cancer: a prospective multicentric hemiablation study of 111 patients. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (02) 267-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Rosenkrantz AB, Verma S, Choyke P. , et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: A Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR. J Urol 2016; 196 (06) 1613-1618 . Full version available from: http://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinicalguidance/Consensus-Statement-Prostate-MRI-andMRI-Targeted-Biopsy.pdf . Accessed April 26, 2017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ghai S, Trachtenberg J. In-bore MRI interventions: current status and future applications. Curr Opin Urol 2015; 25 (03) 205-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Hijnen NM, Elevelt A, Grüll H. Stability and trapping of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents during high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation therapy. Invest Radiol 2013; 48 (07) 517-524
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Hijnen NM, Elevelt A, Pikkemaat J, Bos C, Bartels LW, Grüll H. The magnetic susceptibility effect of gadolinium-based contrast agents on PRFS-based MR thermometry during thermal interventions. J Ther Ultrasound 2013; 1 (01) 8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Valerio M, Emberton M, Eggener SE, Ahmed HU. The challenging landscape of medical device approval in localized prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13 (02) 91-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 FDA. FDA Executive Summary, Ablatherm® Integrated Imaging High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU). 2014 :1–63. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/Gastroenterology-UrologyDevicesPanel/ucm389395.htm . Accessed April 26, 2017
    PubMed
  • 49 FDA Executive Summary, Prepared for the October 1, 2014 meeting of the Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel. SonaCare Medical, LLC for Sonablate® 450. 2014:1–56. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/Gastroenterology-UrologyDevicesPanel/UCM416679.pdf . Accessed April 26, 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M. , et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (04) 618-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Aus G, Burnett A, Canby-Hagino ED. , et al. Prostate Cancer: Guideline for the Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. Am Urol Assoc Educ Res 2007:1-254. Available at: https://www.auanet.org/guidelines/prostate-cancer . Accessed April 26, 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Valerio M, Cerantola Y, Eggener SE. , et al. New and established technology in focal ablation of the prostate: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (01) 17-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Liu YY, Chiang PH. Comparisons of oncological and functional outcomes between primary whole-gland cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23 (01) 328-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Barret E, Ahallal Y, Sanchez-Salas R. , et al. Morbidity of focal therapy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2013; 63 (04) 618-622
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Iberti CT, Mohamed N, Palese MA. A review of focal therapy techniques in prostate cancer: clinical results for high-intensity focused ultrasound and focal cryoablation. Rev Urol 2011; 13 (04) e196-e202
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Roach III M, Hanks G, Thames Jr H. , et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 65 (04) 965-974
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Mertan FV, Greer MD, Borofsky S. , et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of recurrent prostate cancer. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2016; 25 (03) 139-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Muller BG, van den Bos W, Brausi M. , et al. Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in focal therapy for prostate cancer: a Delphi consensus project. BJU Int 2014; 114 (05) 698-707
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Tyson MD, Penson DF, Resnick MJ. The comparative oncologic effectiveness of available management strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2017; 35 (02) 51-58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Laviana AA, Ilg AM, Veruttipong D. , et al. Utilizing time-driven activity-based costing to understand the short- and long-term costs of treating localized, low-risk prostate cancer. Cancer 2016; 122 (03) 447-455
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar