Focal therapy for prostate cancer: Attitude and practice patterns.

Abstract

e541 Background: Focal therapy (FT) for localized prostate cancer (PCa) has been shown to have encouraging short term oncological outcomes, excellent preservation of functional outcomes and is increasing in popularity in Urologic community. We aim to evaluate the preferences and practice trends among urologists regarding this upcoming treatment strategy. Methods: An anonymous online questionnaire was designed to collect information on urologists’ views and use of focal therapy. The survey was sent to members of the Endourological Society (ES) and American Urological Association (AUA). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was done to determine predictors for utilization of FT for localized prostate cancer. Results: A total of 383 responses were received [AUA: 342, ES: 41]. Mean age of respondents was 43(±11.2) years. Although about half of the respondents (51.4%) believed FT to be moderate to extremely beneficial in the treatment of PCa, only 23% (89) of the respondents currently utilize FT in their practice. While the most common setting for utilization of FT was in patients with unilateral intermediate risk (75.2%) PCa, a small percentage of respondents also used FT for patients with bilateral intermediate risk and unilateral high risk PCa (9% and 7% respectively). The most common FT modality was Cryoablation in 62% followed by High Intensity Focused Ultrasound in 44%. Most common reasons for not using focal therapy were the lack of belief in ‘index lesion theory’ (186) (63.2%) followed by the lack of experience (121) (41.1%). About 58.2% respondents would use FT often in an office or outpatient setting if they had access to reliable and cost effective options. Surgeon’s experience (practice for more than 15 years) (p = 0.035) was the only independent predictor for utilizing FT in localized PCa. Conclusions: Only a quarter of our respondents utilize FT in their practice with surgeon’s experience being the only independent predictor for utilizing FT. Majority of respondents though consider FT to be beneficial in prostate cancer management would use it more often if they provided more reliable and cost effective options. Over time experience and accessibility to reliable methods to perform FT may lead to further use of this novel treatment.