Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Focal irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer: functional outcomes and short-term oncological control

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 19, pages 46–52 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background:

Current data on the use of irreversible electroporation (IRE) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) is limited. We aim to evaluate the safety, short-term functional and oncological outcomes of focal IRE in low-intermediate risk PCa.

Methods:

Between February 2013 and May 2014, 32 consecutive men underwent IRE at a single centre. Patients with low-intermediate risk PCa who had not received previous PCa treatment were included for analysis. The tumour was ablated using 3–6 electrodes, ensuring a minimum 5-mm safety margin around the visible magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesion. Follow-up included recording Clavien complications, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaires (baseline, 1.5, 3, 6 months), 6-month multi-parametric MRI (mp-MRI) and 7-month biopsy. Findings on mp-MRI and biopsy were sub-divided into infield, adjacent or outfield of the treatment zone.

Results:

Twenty-five men were included for final analysis. Safety follow-up revealed one Clavien Grade 3 complication and five Grade 1 complications. Functional follow-up confirmed no significant change in American Urological Association urinary symptom score, sexual or bowel function. Infield, there were no suspicious findings on mp-MRI (n=24) or biopsy (n=21) in all patients. Adjacent to the treatment zone, five (21%) had suspicious findings on mp-MRI with four (19%) proving to be significant on biopsy. Outfield, there were two (8%) with suspicious findings on mp-MRI and one (5%) significant finding on biopsy. For the five patients with significant findings on follow-up biopsy, one is awaiting repeat IRE, one had radical prostatectomy and three remained on active surveillance.

Conclusions:

In selected patients with low-intermediate risk PCa, focal IRE appears to be safe with minimal morbidity. There were no infield recurrences and 76% of patients were histologically free of significant cancer at 8 months. Almost all recurrences were adjacent to the treatment zone, and this was addressed by widening the treatment margins.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A . Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64: 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Loeb S, Bjurlin MA, Nicholson J, Tammela TL, Penson DF, Carter HB et al. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Master VA, Chi T, Simko JP, Weinberg V, Carroll PR . The independent impact of extended pattern biopsy on prostate cancer stage migration. J Urol 2005; 174: 1789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheets NC, Goldin GH, Meyer AM, Wu Y, Chang Y, Sturmer T et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2012; 307: 1611.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Valerio M, Ahmed HU, Emberton M, Lawrentschuk N, Lazzeri M, Montironi R et al. The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Onik G, Mikus P, Rubinsky B . Irreversible electroporation: implications for prostate ablation. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6: 295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee EW, Wong D, Prikhodko SV, Perez A, Tran C, Loh CT et al. Electronmicroscopic demonstration and evaluation of irreversible electroporation-induced nanopores on hepatocyte membranes. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23: 107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Valerio M, Stricker PD, Ahmed HU, Dickinson L, Ponsky L, Shnier R et al. Initial assessment of safety and clinical feasibility of irreversible electroporation in the focal treatment of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014; 17: 343.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Neal RE 2nd, Millar JL, Kavnoudias H, Royce P, Rosenfeldt F, Pham A et al. In vivo characterization and numerical simulation of prostate properties for non-thermal irreversible electroporation ablation. Prostate 2014; 74: 458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. van den Bos W, Muller BG, de la Rosette JJ . Arandomized controlled trial on focal therapy for localized prostate carcinoma: hemiablation versus complete ablation with irreversible electroporation. J Endourol 2013; 27: 262.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van den Bos W, de Bruin DM, Muller BG, Varkarakis IM, Karagiannis AA, Zondervan PJ et al. Thesafety and efficacy of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer: a multicentre prospective human in vivo pilot study protocol. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e006382.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosette Jd . Registry of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer with use of nanoknife device. Clinical Trials.gov: Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society 2014.

  16. Valerio M, Dickinson L, Ali A, Ramachandran N, Donaldson I, Freeman 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G et al. Esur prostate Mr guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rubinsky J, Onik G, Mikus P, Rubinsky B . Optimal parameters for the destruction of prostate cancer using irreversible electroporation. J Urol 2008; 180: 2668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA . Classificationof surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, Sandler HM, Sanda MG . Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (epic) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 2000; 56: 899.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Barzell WWIW, Andriole G . Transperineal template guided saturation biopsy of the prostate: rationale, indications and technique. Urology Times 2003; 31: 41.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kirkwood B . Essential Medical Statistics, 2nd edn. Blackwell Science: Mass Malden, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D, Barret E, Berge V, Bott S et al. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes-a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ahmed HU, Dickinson L, Charman S, Weir S, McCartan N, Hindley RG et al. Focal ablation targeted to the index lesion in multifocal localised prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Eur Urol 2015.

  25. Julien, Le N, Andrew BR, Arnauld V, Clément O, Fang-Ming D, Jonathan M et al. Image guided focal therapy of mri-visible prostate cancer: defining a 3d treatment margin based on MRI-histology co-registration analysis. J Urol 2015; 194: 364–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Edd JF, Horowitz L, Davalos RV, Mir LM, Rubinsky B . In vivo results of a new focal tissue ablation technique: irreversible electroporation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2006; 53: 1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Maor E, Ivorra A, Leor J, Rubinsky B . The effect of irreversible electroporation on blood vessels. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6: 307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tsivian M, Polascik TJ . Bilateralfocal ablation of prostate tissue using low-energy direct current (ledc): a preclinical canine study. BJU Int 2013; 112: 526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC et al. No surgical innovation without evaluation: the ideal recommendations. Lancet 2009; 374: 1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. McCulloch P, Cook JA, Altman DG, Heneghan C, Diener MK . Ideal framework for surgical innovation 1: the idea and development stages. BMJ 2013; 346: f3012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Thompson JE, Moses D, Shnier R, Brenner P, Delprado W, Ponsky L et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. J Urol 2014; 192: 67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Quoc Nguyen and Sarita Tiwari from Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre-NSW (APCRC-NSW), IT applications group and CANSTO Database. This research is supported by The Department of Health and Ageing for its funding of the Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre-NSW, The National Health and Medical Research Council, St Vincent’s Prostate Cancer Centre and the RT Hall Trust.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Vincent’s Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia

    F Ting, M Tran, A Siriwardana, P J Van Leeuwen & P D Stricker

  2. Garvan Institute of Medical Research/The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia

    F Ting, M Tran, M Böhm, A Siriwardana, P J Van Leeuwen, A-M Haynes & P D Stricker

  3. School of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    F Ting, M Tran, A Siriwardana & P D Stricker

  4. Douglass Hanly Moir Pathology, Macquarie Park, NSW, Australia

    W Delprado

  5. Southern Radiology, Randwick, NSW, Australia

    R Shnier

Authors
  1. F Ting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M Böhm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A Siriwardana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P J Van Leeuwen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A-M Haynes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. W Delprado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. R Shnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. P D Stricker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F Ting.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ting, F., Tran, M., Böhm, M. et al. Focal irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer: functional outcomes and short-term oncological control. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19, 46–52 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.47

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.47

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links