Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Predictors of biochemical recurrence after primary focal cryosurgery (hemiablation) for localized prostate cancer: A multi-institutional analytic comparison of Phoenix and Stuttgart criteria

  • Michael Kongnyuy
  • , Michael J. Lipsky
  • , Shahidul Islam
  • , Dennis J. Robins
  • , Shaun Hager
  • , Daniel M. Halpern
  • , Kaitlin E. Kosinski
  • , Jeffrey T. Schiff
  • , Anthony T. Corcoran
  • , Sven Wenske
  • , Aaron E. Katz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background The Phoenix definition (PD) and Stuttgart definition (SD) designed to determine biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with postradiotherapy and high-intensity focused ultrasound organ-confined prostate cancer are being applied to follow patients after cryosurgery. We sought to identify predictors of BCR using the PD and SD criteria in patients who underwent primary focal cryosurgery (PFC). Materials and methods We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent PFC (hemiablation) at 2 referral centers from 2000 to 2014. Patients were followed up with serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA). PSA levels, pre- and post-PFC biopsy, Gleason scores, number of positive cores, and BCR (PD = [PSA nadir+2 ng/ml]; SD = [PSA nadir+1.2 ng/ml]) were recorded. Patients who experienced BCR were biopsied, monitored carefully or treated at the discretion of the treating urologist. Cox regression and survival analyses were performed to assess time to BCR using PD and SD. Results A total of 163 patients were included with a median follow-up of 36.6 (interquartile range: 18.9–56.4) months. In all, 64 (39.5%) and 98 (60.5%) experienced BCR based on PD and SD, respectively. On multivariable Cox regression, the number of positive pre-PFC biopsy cores was an independent predictor of both PD (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.4, P = 0.001) and SD (HR = 1.3, P = 0.006) BCRs. Post-PFC PSA nadir was an independent predictor of BCR using the PD (HR = 2.2, P = 0.024) but not SD (HR = 1.4, P = 0.181). Survival analysis demonstrated a 3-year BCR-free survival rate of 56% and 36% for PD and SD, respectively. Of those biopsied after BCR, 14/26 (53.8%) using the PD and 18/35 (51.4%) using the SD were found to have residual/recurrent cancer. Of those with prostate cancer on post-PFC biopsy, 57.1% of those with BCR by the PD and 66.7% of those with BCR by the SD were found to have a Gleason score ≥7. Conclusion Both the PD and the SD may be used to determine BCR in post-PFC patients. However, the ideal definition of BCR after PFC remains to be elucidated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)530.e15-530.e19
JournalUrologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations
Volume35
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2017
Externally publishedYes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Biochemical disease-free survival
  • Phoenix
  • Primary focal cryosurgery
  • Prostate cancer
  • Stuttgart

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Urology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Predictors of biochemical recurrence after primary focal cryosurgery (hemiablation) for localized prostate cancer: A multi-institutional analytic comparison of Phoenix and Stuttgart criteria'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this