Literature DB >> 18792067

Currently used criteria for active surveillance in men with low-risk prostate cancer: an analysis of pathologic features.

Nazareno Suardi1, Umberto Capitanio, Felix K H Chun, Markus Graefen, Paul Perrotte, Thorsten Schlomm, Alexander Haese, Hartwig Huland, Andreas Erbersdobler, Francesco Montorsi, Pierre I Karakiewicz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) represents a treatment option for select patients with low-risk, organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). In this report, the authors addressed the rates of misclassification associated with the use of 5 different clinical criteria for AS. Misclassification was defined as the presence of either nonorgan-confined disease or high-grade PCa.
METHODS: Between 1992 and 2007, 4885 patients underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at 1 of 2 European academic centers, and the patients were identified who fulfilled the criteria for AS according to 5 different investigational groups (Hardie et al, Roemeling et al, Choo et al, Klotz, and D'Amico and Coleman). Statistics targeted the rates of misclassification for each of the 5 definitions.
RESULTS: Four thousand three hundred eight patients, 4047 patients, 3993 patients, 2455 patients, and 2345 patients fulfilled the AS criteria of Hardie et al, Roemeling et al, Choo et al, Klotz, and D'Amico and Coleman, respectively. Extracapsular extension was reported in 13.5% to 26% of patients, and seminal vesicle invasion was reported in 2.9% to 8.2% of patients. When PCa with Gleason scores from 8 to 10 at RP was considered high grade, the misclassification rates were 27%, 25%, 25%, 15%, and 14% for the 5 studies, respectively. Conversely, when PCa with Gleason scores from 7 to 10 was considered high grade, the misclassification rates increased to 56%, 55%, 45%, 42%, and 39%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The currently available AS criteria are limited by a high rate of misclassification. The use of more selective AS criteria may reduce the rate of misclassification but also may reduce significantly the percentage of patients who may be considered for AS. (c) 2008 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18792067     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23827

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  30 in total

Review 1.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging.

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

Review 3.  Prostate cancer in 2010: GSU: misclassification or biological progression?

Authors:  Umberto Capitanio; Nazareno Suardi
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Biopsy and treatment decisions in the initial management of prostate cancer and the role of PCA3; a systematic analysis of expert opinion.

Authors:  Bertrand Tombal; Filip Ameye; Alexandre de la Taille; Theo de Reijke; Paolo Gontero; Alexander Haese; Paul Kil; Paul Perrin; Mesut Remzi; Jörg Schröder; Mark Speakman; Alessandro Volpe; Bianca Meesen; Herman Stoevelaar
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Formalized prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer: is it possible?

Authors:  Carvell T Nguyen; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 3.285

6.  Regional, provider, and economic factors associated with the choice of active surveillance in the treatment of men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ann S Hamilton; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Joseph Lipscomb; Steven T Fleming; Mary Lo; Dian Wang; Michael Goodman; Alex Ho; Jean B Owen; Chandrika Rao; Robert R German
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

Review 7.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: past, present and future.

Authors:  Eric A Singer; Aradhana Kaushal; Baris Turkbey; Anna Couvillon; Peter A Pinto; Howard L Parnes
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.645

8.  Adverse Pathologic Features at Radical Prostatectomy: Effect of Preoperative Risk on Oncologic Outcomes.

Authors:  Mariam Imnadze; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for 3 published active surveillance protocols.

Authors:  C Shad Thaxton; Stacy Loeb; Kimberly A Roehl; Donghui Kan; William J Catalona
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 10.  Prostate focused ultrasound focal therapy--imaging for the future.

Authors:  Olivier Rouvière; Albert Gelet; Sébastien Crouzet; Jean-Yves Chapelon
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 66.675

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.