PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an option for men with clinically localized prostate cancer and may be suitable for those with very low risk disease. We determined the percentage of men in a large prostate cancer registry who met criteria predictive of latent prostate cancer. We also assessed the percentage of men meeting these criteria who chose surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational study of 1,886 men diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer between 1999 and 2004 from the CaPSURE database. Outcomes were percent of men meeting Epstein surveillance criteria (prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, clinical T1 or T2a, prostate specific antigen density less than 0.15, fewer than 1 of 3 biopsy cores positive, and absence of Gleason pattern 4 and 5 on biopsy) and percent selecting surveillance stratified by risk group. RESULTS: Of 1,886 men with all 5 criteria documented 16.4% (310 of 1,886) met all 5 surveillance criteria and 9.0% (28 of 310) of men in this very low risk category actually chose surveillance compared with 4.3% (68 of 1,576) of patients in other risk groups (p <0.01). On multivariable analysis of the entire cohort older age was the only demographic predictor of surveillance. Being in the very low risk group was also a predictor of surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Of men presenting with localized prostate cancer 16% met the criteria for very low risk disease. However, only a small subset of eligible men chose active surveillance, suggesting that it may be underused in the management of very low risk prostate cancer.
PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an option for men with clinically localized prostate cancer and may be suitable for those with very low risk disease. We determined the percentage of men in a large prostate cancer registry who met criteria predictive of latent prostate cancer. We also assessed the percentage of men meeting these criteria who chose surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational study of 1,886 men diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer between 1999 and 2004 from the CaPSURE database. Outcomes were percent of men meeting Epstein surveillance criteria (prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, clinical T1 or T2a, prostate specific antigen density less than 0.15, fewer than 1 of 3 biopsy cores positive, and absence of Gleason pattern 4 and 5 on biopsy) and percent selecting surveillance stratified by risk group. RESULTS: Of 1,886 men with all 5 criteria documented 16.4% (310 of 1,886) met all 5 surveillance criteria and 9.0% (28 of 310) of men in this very low risk category actually chose surveillance compared with 4.3% (68 of 1,576) of patients in other risk groups (p <0.01). On multivariable analysis of the entire cohort older age was the only demographic predictor of surveillance. Being in the very low risk group was also a predictor of surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Of men presenting with localized prostate cancer 16% met the criteria for very low risk disease. However, only a small subset of eligible men chose active surveillance, suggesting that it may be underused in the management of very low risk prostate cancer.
Authors: Vincent Fradet; John Kurhanewicz; Janet E Cowan; Alexander Karl; Fergus V Coakley; Katsuto Shinohara; Peter R Carroll Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-05-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Scott E Eggener; Ketan Badani; Daniel A Barocas; Glen W Barrisford; Jed-Sian Cheng; Arnold I Chin; Anthony Corcoran; Jonathan I Epstein; Arvin K George; Gopal N Gupta; Matthew H Hayn; Eric C Kauffman; Brian Lane; Michael A Liss; Moben Mirza; Todd M Morgan; Kelvin Moses; Kenneth G Nepple; Mark A Preston; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Matthew J Resnick; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Jonathan Silberstein; Eric A Singer; Geoffrey A Sonn; Preston Sprenkle; Kelly L Stratton; Jennifer Taylor; Jeffrey Tomaszewski; Matt Tollefson; Andrew Vickers; Wesley M White; William T Lowrance Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-04-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: J B Eifler; J Alvarez; T Koyama; R M Conwill; C R Ritch; K E Hoffman; M J Resnick; D F Penson; D A Barocas Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jeri Kim; James Ebertowski; Matthew Janiga; Jorge Arzola; Gayle Gillespie; Michael Fountain; Douglas Soderdahl; Edith Canby-Hagino; Sally Elsamanoudi; Jennifer Gurski; John W Davis; Patricia A Parker; Douglas D Boyd Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jinping Xu; James Janisse; Julie J Ruterbusch; Joel Ager; Joe Liu; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Kendra L Schwartz Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 5.166