Literature DB >> 18342430

Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance.

Nicholas J van As1, Andrew R Norman, Karen Thomas, Vincent S Khoo, Alan Thompson, Robert A Huddart, Alan Horwich, David P Dearnaley, Christopher C Parker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Outcome data from a prospective study of active surveillance of localised prostate cancer were analysed to identify factors, present at the time of diagnosis, that predict subsequent radical treatment.
METHODS: Eligible patients had clinical stage T1-T2a, N0-Nx, M0-Mx adenocarcinoma of the prostate with serum PSA<15 ng/ml, Gleason score <or= 7, primary Gleason grade <or= 3, and % positive biopsy cores (pbc) <or= 50%. Monitoring included serial PSA measurement and repeat prostate biopsies. Radical treatment was initiated in the event of biochemical progression (PSA velocity > 1 ng/ml/yr) or histological progression (primary Gleason grade >or= 4, or %pbc > 50%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis of baseline variables was performed with respect to time to radical treatment.
RESULTS: The 326 men recruited from 2002 to 2006 have been followed for a median of 22 mo. Median age was 67 yr, and median initial PSA (iPSA) 6.4 ng/ml. Sixty-five patients (20%) had deferred radical treatment, 16 (5%) changed to watchful waiting because of increasing comorbidity, 7 (2%) died of other causes, and 238 (73%) remain on surveillance. On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the free/total PSA ratio (p<0.001) and clinical T stage (p=0.006) were independent determinants of time to radical treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to established prognostic factors, the free/total PSA ratio may predict time to radical treatment in patients with untreated, localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. This possibility warrants further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18342430     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.02.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  59 in total

1.  Utility of Gleason pattern 4 morphologies detected on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies for prediction of upgrading or upstaging in Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Trevor A Flood; Nicola Schieda; Daniel T Keefe; Rodney H Breau; Chris Morash; Kevin Hogan; Eric C Belanger; Kien T Mai; Susan J Robertson
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2016-07-10       Impact factor: 4.064

2.  The importance of active surveillance, and immediate re-biopsy in low-risk prostate cancer: The largest series from Turkey.

Authors:  Göksel Bayar; Kaya Horasanlı; Hüseyin Acinikli; Orhan Tanrıverdi; Ayhan Dalkılıç; Serdar Arısan
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2016-09

3.  [Active surveillance of low risk prostate cancer].

Authors:  K Lellig; B Beyer; M Graefen; D Zaak; C Stief
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Sophie M Bruinsma; Joseph Nicholson; Alberto Briganti; Tom Pickles; Yoshiyuki Kakehi; Sigrid V Carlsson; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in low- and high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Uğur Boylu; Ahmet Bindayi; Eyüp Veli Küçük; Fikret Fatih Önol; Eyüp Gümüş
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-01-06

Review 6.  Treatment of localized prostate cancer: when is active surveillance appropriate?

Authors:  Peter C Albertsen
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Predictive role of free prostate-specific antigen in a prospective active surveillance program (PRIAS).

Authors:  Hanna Vasarainen; Jolanda Salman; Heidi Salminen; Riccardo Valdagni; Tom Pickles; Chris Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Antti Rannikko
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Scott E Eggener; Alex Mueller; Ryan K Berglund; Raj Ayyathurai; Cindy Soloway; Mark S Soloway; Robert Abouassaly; Eric A Klein; Steven J Jones; Chris Zappavigna; Larry Goldenberg; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Bertrand Guillonneau
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Diagnostic prostate biopsy performed in a non-academic center increases the risk of re-classification at confirmatory biopsy for men considering active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  L M Wong; S Ferrara; S M H Alibhai; A Evans; T Van der Kwast; G Trottier; N Timilshina; A Toi; G Kulkarni; R Hamilton; A Zlotta; N Fleshner; A Finelli
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Radical prostatectomy findings in patients predicted to have low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer diagnosed by extended-core biopsies: an analysis of volume and zonal distribution of tumour foci.

Authors:  John W Davis; Jeri Kim; John F Ward; Xuemai Wang; Hiro Nakanishi; R Joseph Babaian; Patricia Troncoso
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 5.588

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.