FARP: Focal Prostate Ablation Versus Radical Prostatectomy

Sponsor
Oslo University Hospital (Other)
Overall Status
Recruiting
CT.gov ID
NCT03668652
Collaborator
University of Oslo (Other)
200
1
2
84
2.4

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

This study aims to compare the treatment results of HIFU and Radical prostatectomy.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Device: Focal HIFU treatment using Focal One (EDAP TMS) or TULSA-PRO (Profound Medical)
  • Procedure: Radical prostatectomy
N/A

Detailed Description

The FARP randomized control study will compare focal ablation of prostate using High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) applied by FocalOne® or TULSA® device versus Radical Prostatectomy (RP) in patients with unilateral, intermediate risk prostate cancer.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Anticipated Enrollment :
200 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Intervention Model Description:
Randomized controlled trial.Randomized controlled trial.
Masking:
None (Open Label)
Masking Description:
Focal treatment of prostate cancer using HIFU compared to Radical prostatectomy.
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
A Randomized Control Trial of Focal Prostate Ablation Versus Radical Prostatectomy
Actual Study Start Date :
Sep 30, 2017
Anticipated Primary Completion Date :
Sep 30, 2021
Anticipated Study Completion Date :
Sep 30, 2024

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: Focal prostate cancer treatment by HIFU

Patients with target lesion distance < 30 mm from the rectum will be treated with High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) applied by FocalOne HIFU device and patients with lesion > 30 mm from the rectum will be treated with TULSA applied by TULSA-PRO.

Device: Focal HIFU treatment using Focal One (EDAP TMS) or TULSA-PRO (Profound Medical)
HIFU arm: Focal ablation of prostate cancer using HIFU Focal One or TULSA -PRO

Active Comparator: Radical Prostatectomy

Robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy or open retro-pubic radical prostatectomy will be performed using validated radical prostatectomy technique. Nerve sparing surgery on side of cancer free prostate lobe will be performed and type of nerve sparing procedure will be specified.

Procedure: Radical prostatectomy
Prostatectomy arm: Robot assisted or open retropubic prostatectomy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Treatment failure. [At 36 months from the treatment date.]

    Treatment failure in HIFU focal ablation arm is classified as the need for secondary whole gland treatment as radical prostatectomy or EBRT. Treatment failure in radical prostatectomy arm is classified as PSA > 0.2 or positive surgical margins and need for EBRT.

Secondary Outcome Measures

  1. To compare urinary continence between focal ablation and radical prostatectomy. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26) questionnaire for the evaluation of continence will be used. Variation in urinary continence according to the number of pads used/day due to continence problems compared to baseline. Categories are defined as (full continence= 0 pads/day; security pad or mild incontinence =1pad/day; moderate incontinence= 2pads/day and severe incontinence >2pads/day).

  2. To compare erectile function between focal ablation and radical prostatectomy. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire for the evaluation erectile function will be used. A score of 1-5 is awarded to each of the 5 questions. Change in total score will be measured between the baseline and most recent follow-up visit.

  3. To compare quality of life between focal ablation and radical prostatectomy. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-c30) for the evaluation of quality of life between focal ablation and radical prostatectomy will be used.

  4. Focal ablation failure. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    Focal ablation failure is classified as presence of clinically significant cancer on control MRI-3D TRUS image fusion guided biopsy in the treated prostate zone. At least 2 targeted biopsy cores will be localized in the treatment zone. Prostate biopsy will be performed at 12 and 36 months from the treatment date.

  5. To compare short, medium and long term adverse events related to treatments. [Within 36 months from the treatment date]

    All adverse events will be registered prospectively.

  6. Diagnostic failure. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    Diagnostic failure is classified as diagnosis of clinically significant cancer localized outside of treatment zone in treated lobe and in any region of non- treated prostate lobe. MRI and systematic radom prostate biopsy form each prostate sextant will be performed and location of each biopsy trajectory will be registered using Trinity (Koelis) device. Prostate biopsy will be performed at 12 and 36 months from the treatment date.

  7. Cancer progression including development of metastases. [Within 36 months years from the treatment date.]

    Whole body MRI or PET CT will be performed if suspicion on metastases.

  8. Cancer specific and all-cause mortality. [Within 36 months from the treatment date.]

    Cause of the mortality will be evaluated and registered.

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
45 Years to 80 Years
Sexes Eligible for Study:
Male
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
No
Inclusion Criteria:
  • PSA ≤ 20 ng/ml

  • Initial diagnosis of localized prostate cancer (stage ≤ T2b)

  • Biopsy proven unilateral prostate cancer Gleason score 3+3 and not eligible to active surveillance program [cancer invades over a length of at least 5 mm and MRI demonstrates cancer suspicious lesion score ESUR ≥ 4/5 localized in line with the biopsy AND/OR Gleason score 3+4 (without length criteria of positive biopsies or tumor volume on MRI)

  • Patients may have biopsy verified clinically insignificant prostate cancer on the contra-lateral prostate lobe (Gleason score 3+3, maximal cancer core length < 5 mm, MRI score ESUR ≤ 3)

Exclusion Criteria:
  • Clinical stage T3

  • Metastatic lymph node on MRI or CT

  • Patients already treated for Pca (hormone therapy, EBRT)

  • Patients with contra-indications to MRI

  • Patients with inflammatory bowel disease or rectal fistula

  • History of previous pelvic radiotherapy

  • History of bladder cancer

  • History of bladder neck or urethral stricture

  • Urogenital infection in progress

  • Allergy to latex or gadolinium

  • Patients on life support or suffering form unstable neurological diseases

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 Department of Urology Aker, Oslo University Hospital Oslo Norway 0514

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • Oslo University Hospital
  • University of Oslo

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Eduard Baco, MD, PhD, Department of Urology Aker, Oslo University Hospital

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

None provided.
Responsible Party:
Eduard Baco, Principal Investigator, Oslo University Hospital
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT03668652
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • 2017/703
First Posted:
Sep 12, 2018
Last Update Posted:
Mar 16, 2021
Last Verified:
Mar 1, 2021
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
No
Plan to Share IPD:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
No
Keywords provided by Eduard Baco, Principal Investigator, Oslo University Hospital
Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Mar 16, 2021