Krebskontrolle im Fokus – Einblicke und Ausblicke rund um die fokale Therapie des Prostatakrebses

Zusammenfassung

Im Spannungsfeld zwischen Ganzdrüsenstandardtherapien auf der einen und aktiver Überwachung auf der anderen Seite suchen Betroffene bei Prostatakrebs seit einigen Jahren nach wenig invasiven Alternativen. Insbesondere wird schon lange die Möglichkeit hinterfragt, ob nicht bei begrenzten Risikosituationen nur eine Behandlung des Tumors selbst unter Schonung des Restorgans möglich wäre. Der vorliegende Artikel stellt Argumente für und gegen eine fokale Behandlung gegenüber und erläutert technische Innovationen der letzten Jahre. Ein relativ hoher Anteil von durch eine Standardtherapie überbehandelten Patienten in der Niedrigrisiko-Situation auf der einen Seite und eine wesentlich verbesserte Technik in Diagnostik (v. a. mpMRT) und Therapie sind wesentliche Argumente, die nach Ansicht der Autoren zu einer Verschiebung vom Konzept der vollständigen Eradikation des Tumors unter Inkaufnahme von Nebenwirkungen hin zur ausreichend effektiven lokalen Tumorkontrolle durch eine fokale Behandlung mit besserem Erhalt der Lebensqualität in geeigneten Fällen führen wird.

Abstract

Faced with the dilemma of choosing between the extremes of standard whole gland therapy and active surveillance, those affected by prostate cancer have recently been on the lookout for less invasive alternatives. Particularly the question of whether it would be possible in low risk cancer to treat only the tumour itself while sparing the organ has long been considered. This article discusses the pros and cons of focal treatment and elucidates the latest innovative technologies. High overtreatment rates in low-risk patients submitted to standard therapy and considerable technological advances in diagnosis (particularly multiparametric MRI) and therapy are regarded by the authors as key arguments for abandoning complete tumour eradication with its side effects in favour of sufficient local cancer control by focal treatment with better preserved quality of life in suitable cases.

Schlüsselwörter

Niedrigrisikoprostatakarzinom - Gleason-Klassifikation - mpMRT - fokale Therapie - Rezidivtherapie

Key words

low-risk prostate cancer - Gleason grading system - multiparametric MRI - focal therapy - relapse treatment

• Literatur

• 1 Krebs in Deutschland 2009/2010. 9. Ausgabe. Robert Koch-Institut Hrsg und die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V. Hrsg Berlin: 2013
• 2 Andriole GL. Update of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Recent Results Cancer Res 2014; 202: 53-57
• 3 Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ et al. ERSPC Investigators. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 981-990 Erratum in: N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 2137
• 4 McNeal JE. Cancer volume and site of origin of adenocarcinoma in the prostate: relationship to local and distant spread. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 258
• 5 Chen ME, Johnston DA, Tang K et al. Detailed mapping of prostate carcinoma foci: biopsy strategy implications. Cancer 2000; 89: 1800-1809
• 6 Bott SR, Ahmed HU, Hindley RG et al. The index lesion and focal therapy: an analysis of the pathological characteristics of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 106: 1607-1611
• 7 Epstein JI, Allsbrook Jr WC, Amin MB et al. ISUP Grading Committee The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 1228-1242
• 8 Helpap B, Egevad L. The value of the modified Gleason grading system of prostate adenocarcinoma in routine urological diagnostics. Urologe A 2007; 46: 59-62
• 9 Burchardt M, Engers R, Müller M et al. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading: evaluation using prostate cancer tissue microarrays. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008; 134: 1071-1078
• 10 Griffiths DF, Melia J, McWilliam LJ et al. A study of Gleason score interpretation in different groups of UK pathologists; techniques for improving reproducibility. BJU Int 2011; 107: 749-754
• 11 Truesdale MD, Cheetham PJ, Turk AT et al. Gleason score concordance on biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer: is pathological re-evaluation necessary prior to radical prostatectomy?. Histopathology 2006; 48: 655-662
• 12 Berney DM, Algaba F, Camparo P et al. The reasons behind variation in Gleason grading of prostatic biopsies: areas of agreement and misconception among 266 European pathologists. Histopathology 2014; 64: 405-411
• 13 Rider JR, Sandin F, Andrén O et al. Long-term outcomes among noncuratively treated men according to prostate cancer risk category in a nationwide, population-based study. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 88-96
• 14 http://www.dgu.de/fileadmin/MDB/PDF/konsultationsfassung-leitlinie-prostatakarzinom.pdf
• 15 Ahmed HU, Arya M, Freeman A et al. Do low-grade and low-volume prostate cancers bear the hallmarks of malignancy?. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: e509-e517
• 16 Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. European urology 2013; 64: 713-719
• 17 Bratan F, Niaf E, Melodelima C et al. Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. European radiology 2013; 23: 2019-2029
• 18 Isebaert S, Van den Bergh L, Haustermans K et al. Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer localization in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging: JMRI 2013; 37: 1392-1401
• 19 Rud E, Klotz D, Rennesund K et al. Detection of the Index Tumor and Tumor Volume in Prostate Cancer using T2w and DW MRI alone. BJU Int 2014;
• 20 Thompson JE, Moses D, Shnier R et al. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging guiding diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer, and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over-detection: a prospective study. J Urol 2014;
• 21 Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J et al. Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2013; 190: 1380-1386
• 22 Abd-Alazeez M, Kirkham A, Ahmed HU et al. Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies as the reference standard. Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases 2013;
• 23 Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. European radiology 2012; 22: 746-757
• 24 Rothke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP et al. PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI of the prostate. RoFo: Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Röntgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin 2013; 185: 253-261
• 25 Arumainayagam N, Ahmed HU, Moore CM et al. Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard. Radiology 2013; 268: 761-769
• 26 Schimmoller L, Quentin M, Arsov C et al. Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard. European radiology 2013; 23: 3185-3190
• 27 Epstein JI, Allsbrook Jr WC, Amin MB et al. ISUP Grading Committee The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 1228-1242
• 28 Baumunk D, Blana A, Ganzer R et al. Focal prostate cancer therapy: capabilities, limitations and prospects. Urologe A 2013; 52: 549-556
• 29 Interdisciplinary Consensus conference during the 7^th International Symposium on Focal Therapy and Imaging in Prostate & Kidney Cancer, held in Pasadena, August 21–23 2014
• 30 Klotz L, Emberton M. Management of low risk prostate cancer – Active surveillance and focal therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2014; 11: 324-334
• 31 Moore CM, Azzouzi AR, Barret E et al. Determination of optimal drug dose and light dose index to achieve minimally invasive focal ablation of localized prostate cancer using WST11-Vascular Targeted Photodynamic (VTP) therapy. BJU Int 2014;
• 32 Valerio M, Emberton M, Barret E et al. Health technology assessment in evolution – focal therapy in localised prostate cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2014; 25: 1-9
• 33 Valerio M, Dickinson L, Ali A et al. A prospective development study investigating focal irreversible electroporation in men with localised prostate cancer: Nanoknife Electroporation Ablation Trial (NEAT). Contemp Clin Trials 2014; 39: 57-65
• 34 Rouvière O, Gelet A, Crouzet S et al. Prostate focused ultrasound focal therapy – imaging for the future. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2012; 9: 721-727
• 35 Crouzet S, Rouviere O, Martin X et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound as focal therapy of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2014; 24: 225-230
• 36 Garcia-Albeniz X. Immediate versus deferred initiation of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer with psa-only relapse. An observational Follow-up-Study. ASCO 2014; Chicago: Abstract 5003
• 37 Parekh A, Graham PL, Nguyen PL. Cancer control and complications of salvage local therapy after failure of radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Semin Radiat Oncol 2013; 23: 222-234
• 38 Sylvester J, Grimm P, Blasco J et al. The role of androgen ablation in patients with biochemical or local failure after definitive radiation therapy: a survey of practice patterns of urologists and radiation oncologists in the United States. Urology 2001; 58 (Suppl. 01) 65-70
• 39 Crouzet S, Murat FJ, Pommier P et al. Locally recurrent prostate cancer after initial radiation therapy: early salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound improves oncologic outcomes. Radiother Oncol 2012; 105: 198-202
• 40 Rouvière O. Imaging techniques for local recurrence of prostate cancer: for whom, why and how?. Diagn Interv Imaging 2012; 93: 279-290
• 41 Eder M, Neels O, Müller M et al. Novel Preclinical and Radiopharmaceutical Aspects of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC: A New PET Tracer for Imaging of Prostate Cancer. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2014. 7. 779-796
• 42 Roethke MC, Kuru TH, Afshar-Oromieh A et al. Hybrid positron emission tomography – magnetic resonance imaging with gallium 68 prostate-specific membrane antigen tracer: a next step for imaging of recurrent prostate cancer – Preliminary results. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 862-864