EDAP TMS (EDAP) announced the publication of the full results from the HIFI study in the prestigious, peer-reviewed journal, European Urology, which has the highest impact factor amongst scientific journals focused in urology. The study evaluated HIFU versus radical prostatectomy as a first line treatment of localized prostate cancer. The paper is entitled “Whole-gland or Subtotal High-intensity Focused Ultrasound Versus Radical Prostatectomy: The Prospective, Noninferiority, Nonrandomized, HIFI Trial” and is authored by Dr. Guillaume Ploussard from Department of Urology, UROSUD, Clinique La Croix du Sud, France. Highlights: At 30 months, the adjusted STFS was higher in the HIFU arm compared with RP arm; the risk of salvage treatment is lower in the HIFU arm compared to RP. This result remains true when analyzing the subgroup with intermediate risk; International Continence Society score, a measure of stress urinary incontinence was significantly less deteriorated for HIFU; International Index of Erectile Function-5, a well validated measurement of erectile function, decreased significantly less after HIFU than after RP with a drop in difference in medians from -9, Post-procedural benefits of HIFU on both erectile function and urinary continence were demonstrated despite patients in the HIFU-treated group being an average of 9.6 years older
Don't Miss our Black Friday Offers:
- Unlock your investing potential with TipRanks Premium - Now At 40% OFF!
- Make smarter investments with weekly expert stock picks from the Smart Investor Newsletter
Published first on TheFly – the ultimate source for real-time, market-moving breaking financial news. Try Now>>
See Insiders’ Hot Stocks on TipRanks >>
Read More on EDAP:
- EDAP TMS announces scientific presentation on feasability of Focal One
- EDAP TMS announces scientific presentation of data comparing Focal One HIFU
- EDAP TMS price target lowered to $5 from $6 at Piper Sandler
- EDAP TMS S.A. Reports Strong Q3 2024 Growth
- EDAP TMS Sees Strong Growth and Advances in AI
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
