Effect of Focal vs Extended Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Localized Low- or Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer on Early Oncological Control: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Mené entre 2015 et 2020 sur 106 patients atteints d'un cancer de la prostate de stade localisé à risque faible ou intermédiaire de récidive (âge médian : 64 ans ; durée médiane de suivi : 30 mois), cet essai randomisé multicentrique compare l'efficacité d'une électroporation irréversible focale et d'une électroporation irréversible étendue

Résumé en anglais

Focal ablative irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a therapy that treats only the area of the tumor with the aim of achieving oncological control while reducing treatment-related functional detriment.To evaluate the effect of focal vs extended IRE on early oncological control for patients with localized low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.In this randomized clinical trial conducted at 5 centers in Europe, men with localized low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomized to receive either focal or extended IRE ablation. Data were collected at baseline and at regular intervals after the procedure from June 2015 to January 2020, and data were analyzed from September 2021 to July 2022.Oncological outcome as indicated by presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥2) on transperineal template-mapping prostate biopsy at 6 months after IRE. Descriptive measures of results from that biopsy included the number and location of positive cores.A total of 51 and 55 patients underwent focal and extended IRE, respectively. Median (IQR) age was 64 years (58-67) in the focal ablation group and 64 years (57-68) in the extended ablation group. Median (IQR) follow-up time was 30 months (24-48). Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 9 patients (18.8%) in the focal ablation group and 7 patients (13.2%) in the extended ablation group. There was no significant difference in presence of clinically significant prostate cancer between the 2 groups. In the focal ablation group, 17 patients (35.4%) had positive cores outside of the treated area, 3 patients (6.3%) had positive cores in the treated area, and 5 patients (10.4%) had positive cores both in and outside of the treated area. In the extended group, 10 patients (18.9%) had positive cores outside of the treated area, 9 patients (17.0%) had positive cores in the treated area, and 2 patients (3.8%) had positive cores both in and outside of the treated area. Clinically significant cancer was found in the treated area in 5 of 48 patients (10.4%) in the focal ablation group and 5 of 53 patients (9.4%) in the extended ablation group.This study found that focal and extended IRE ablation achieved similar oncological outcomes in men with localized low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Because some patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer are still candidates for active surveillance, focal therapy may be a promising option for those patients with a high risk of cancer progression.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01835977