ORLANDO, FL USA (UroToday.com) - There are currently no randomized studies that compare high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and other treatment strategies for prostate cancer. Sebastien Crouzet presented his group’s study in which they compared the outcomes of patients who were treated with HIFU and those that were treated by external beam radiation (EBRT).
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
The authors presented analysis for 190 patients, out of 256 eligible candidates, as they stated their decision to pursue a matched pair design. These patients were prospectively followed. Their primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival rate.
They explained that in their results the 5-year progression free survival rate was not different between patients treated with either method. Patients in the HIFU group had a higher palliative androgen deprivation-free rate as authors stated in their presentation.
Their conclusion was that both HIFU and EBRT has similar five-year progression-free survival rates, and the main difference between the groups was with regards to palliative S-ADT, for which the need was higher for the EBRT group. The results of this study are strengthened due to the authors’ decision to choose a matched-pair analysis as this creates two equal groups, at baseline, for analysis. Barring any limitations, and if the results are confirmed, HIFU seems to be the method of choice for patients with prostate cancer as there are many potential benefits: no radiation, same 5-year survival rate, and lower need for palliative androgen deprivation therapy which can be bothersome for patients.
Presented by Sebastien Crouzet, MD at the American Urological Association (AUA) Annual Meeting- May 16 - 21, 2014 - Orlando, Florida USA
Written by Garen Abedi, MD, University of California (Irvine), and medical writer for UroToday.com