Transurethral Prostate Enucleation in Surveillance Protocol for Low Risk Prostate Cancer

NCT ID: NCT05631080

Last Updated: 2022-11-30

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

50 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2015-01-31

Study Completion Date

2024-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

We will compare oncological and functional outcomes of anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) versus continued medical treatment in low-risk prostate cancer patients for whom an active surveillance protocol was selected.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men; in 2018 1,276,106 new cases of prostate cancer were reported worldwide (1).

The diagnosis of prostate cancer is based on the microscopic evaluation of prostate tissue obtained via needle biopsy.

The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus system assigns new Grade Groups from 1 to 5, derived from the Gleason score (2).

Clinicians have stratified the diagnosis into low, intermediate, and high-risk disease based on the sum of Gleason patterns, prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, and clinical stage (3).

Recently The National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk stratification uses a 5-tier system by adding very low- and very high- as a subdivision of the low- and high-risk groups (4).

Men diagnosed with localized disease (defined as no regional lymph nodes or distant metastases) have 3 primary options: expectant management, surgery and radiation.

Expectant management (monitoring for prostate cancer progression while not undergoing definitive therapy) consists of watchful waiting and active surveillance (5).

According to The Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) trial which randomized 1643 localized prostate cancer men to active monitoring, surgery, or radiation. At 120 months, ProtecT found that 1.5% of patients on active monitoring died from prostate cancer, which did not differ significantly from the 0.9% after surgery or the 0.7% after radiation (6).

The use of active surveillance (AS) for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is well established, although the criteria for admission to a protocol vary according to the institution. (7-9) Men with significantly enlarged prostates (\>100 g) may be assigned a high-risk category when their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rises above 10 ng/ml, although there is evidence AS is safe in this population. (10) In the presence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), men with significantly enlarged prostates often undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) to treat PCa and coexisting LUTS. This approach, which prioritizes oncologic control, may increase surgical morbidity for patients who otherwise might continue AS after an outlet procedure to address their LUTS.

The use of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for the management of LUTS in men with significantly enlarged prostates and coexisting low-risk PCa has not been prospectively studied. HoLEP has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for men with LUTS. (11) Incidental detection of malignancy at the time of HoLEP ranges from 5% to 13% in men without a prior diagnosis of PCa, and there is evidence PSA has improved sensitivity for cancer progression in the post-HoLEP setting. (12-15) The management of T1a-b PCa incidentally discovered after transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) has been well documented with AS recommended for most patients. (16-18) However, the management of men with known low-risk PCa, clinically significant LUTS, and significantly enlarged prostates remains underexplored.

Herein, we prospectively assess patients with low-risk PCa on AS who underwent AEEP for clinically significant LUTS and enlarged prostate gland size.

Our study focuses on functional and oncologic outcomes.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Prostate Cancer Stage I Bladder Outlet Obstruction

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Surveillance with medical treatment for bladder outlet obstruction

Patients with low-risk prostate cancer who were elected for active surveillance protocol will have only medical treatment for control of their lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to bladder outlet obstruction

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Surveillance with anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction

Patients with low-risk prostate cancer who were elected for active surveillance protocol will be offered anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate for control of their lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to bladder outlet obstruction

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Anatomical Endoscpic enucleation of the Prostate

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate adenoma

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Anatomical Endoscpic enucleation of the Prostate

Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate adenoma

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

AEEP

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Life expectancy \>/= 10 years
2. Low risk prostate cancer with minor institutional amendment of EAU guidelines:

* PSA \< 10 ng/ml or up to 20 ng/ml if PSA density is more than 15%
* Stage T1, T2a.
* Gleason score \<7 (ISUP grade 1)
3. Bladder outlet obstruction:

* IPSS \> 9
* Peak flow rate (Qmax \< 15)
* Imperative indication for BOO surgery

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients who are not willing
* Patients with bladder dysfunction (cystopathy) or other infravesical cause of obstruction other than prostate
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

MALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Mansoura University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Ahmed Elshal

A. Professor of Urology

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Ahmed Elshal, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Mansoura University

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Urology and nephrology center

Al Mansurah, DK, Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Mans 22-4-2016

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id