Long-term Outcomes of Focal Cryotherapy for Low- to Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: Results and Matched Pair Analysis with Active Surveillance

• Published in: European urology focus 2022-05, Vol.8 (3), p.701-709
• Main Authors: Marra, Giancarlo, Soeterik, Timo, Oreggia, Davide, Tourinho-Barbosa, Rafael, Moschini, Marco, Filippini, Claudia, van Melick, Harm H.E., van den Bergh, Roderick C.N., Gontero, Paolo, Cathala, Nathalie, Macek, Petr, Sanchez-Salas, Rafael, Cathelineau, Xavier
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Active surveillance; Cryotherapy; Focal therapy; Localized disease; Prostate cancer
• ISSN: 2405-4569; 2405-4569
• DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.008

To date, only one trial compared focal therapy and active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). In addition, long-term outcomes of focal cryotherapy (FC) are lacking. Our aim was to evaluate long-term outcomes of FC and compare them with AS. We included two prospective series of 121 (FC) and 459 (AS) consecutive patients (2008–2018) for low- to intermediate-risk PCa. Study outcomes were radical therapy–free or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)-free, any treatment-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival. A matched pair analysis was performed using seven covariates. The median FC follow-up was 85 mo (interquartile range 58–104); 92 (76%) men had International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1. Among matched variables, no significant differences were present except for cT stage and year of entry (both p < 0.01). Ten-year radical therapy–free or ADT-free, any treatment-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival were 51%, 40.2%, 93.9%, and 97%, respectively for FC. No differences were noted with AS (all p > 0.05), with the exception of time to radical therapy, time to radical therapy and ADT, and time to any treatment, all being shorter for AS (all p < 0.01). Freedom from radical treatment or ADT was higher for FC (AS 10 yr 39.3%; p = 0.04). Complications were relatively rare (26.5%) and mainly of low grade (Clavien >2, n = 3); three men developed incontinence (p = 0.0814), while both International Index of Erectile Function 5 and International Prostate Symptom Score scores increased (p = 0.0287 and p = 0.0165, respectively). Limitations include absence of randomization. At an early long-term follow-up, FC in the context of mainly low-risk PCa is safe and increases time to radical therapy but does not provide meaningful oncological advantages compared with AS. We compared focal cryotherapy with active surveillance mainly for low-risk prostate cancer. Focal cryotherapy, despite having fewer complications, did not yield meaningful advantages over active surveillance at 10 yr. Active surveillance should be preferred to focal cryotherapy for these patients. Focal cryotherapy is safe. When compared with active surveillance in the context of mainly low-risk prostate cancer, it increases time to radical therapy but does not show meaningful oncological advantages.