Literature DB >> 19426187

Final outcomes of patients with low-risk prostate cancer suitable for active surveillance but treated surgically.

Mark Louie-Johnsun1, Mischel Neill, Karien Treurnicht, Michael Jarmulowicz, Christopher Eden.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the outcomes of a contemporary cohort of patients referred from around the UK with low-risk prostate cancer consistent with the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines for active surveillance but who were treated with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in a single surgeon series. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 1080 consecutive patients who underwent LRP between March 2000 and April 2008, 549 patients (51%) had low preoperative risk disease (PSA level <10 ng/mL, clinical stage < or =T2a and biopsy Gleason score < or =6). The pathological outcomes of these 549 patients as well as a subgroup of 74 patients with preoperative prediction of 'insignificant' disease were assessed.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 61 years, the mean (range) PSA level was 6.1 (1-9) ng/mL; 38% of patients were staged as cT2a. In all, 126 patients (23%) were upgraded on final pathology to Gleason score > or =7. In all, 29 patients (5%) had extraprostatic extension with seminal vesicle invasion in five (0.9%). Of the 74 patients with preoperative prediction of insignificant disease, 61% had significant disease with 16% upgraded to an intermediate-risk group. Overall, there were positive margins in 44 patients (8.0%) and biochemical failure occurred in six patients (1.1%) with a median follow-up of 28 months.
CONCLUSION: In this contemporary UK cohort of patients with apparently low- or favourable-risk prostate cancer, 23% will have higher grade disease than preoperatively predicted. Even though active surveillance is increasingly being recommended for managing low-risk localized prostate cancer, patients and their physicians need to be aware of the potential for harbouring more significant disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19426187     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08597.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  12 in total

1.  Apparent diffusion coefficient value is a strong predictor of unsuspected aggressiveness of prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Raphaele Renard Penna; Geraldine Cancel-Tassin; Eva Comperat; Pierre Mozer; Priscilla Léon; Justine Varinot; Morgan Roupret; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Olivier Lucidarme; Olivier Cussenot
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Biomarker research in prostate cancer--towards utility, not futility.

Authors:  Sheng Fei Oon; Stephen R Pennington; John M Fitzpatrick; R William G Watson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Performance of biopsy factors in predicting unfavorable disease in patients eligible for active surveillance according to the PRIAS criteria.

Authors:  G I Russo; T Castelli; V Favilla; G Reale; D Urzì; S Privitera; E Fragalà; S Cimino; G Morgia
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for prediction of insignificant prostate cancer in potential candidates for active surveillance.

Authors:  Tae Heon Kim; Jae Yong Jeong; Sin Woo Lee; Chan Kyo Kim; Byung Kwan Park; Hyun Hwan Sung; Hwang Gyun Jeon; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Il Seo; Hyun Moo Lee; Han Yong Choi; Seong Soo Jeon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis.

Authors:  Julia H Hayes; Daniel A Ollendorf; Steven D Pearson; Michael J Barry; Philip W Kantoff; Susan T Stewart; Vibha Bhatnagar; Christopher J Sweeney; James E Stahl; Pamela M McMahon
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Active surveillance versus surgery for low risk prostate cancer: a clinical decision analysis.

Authors:  David Liu; Harold P Lehmann; Kevin D Frick; H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Pathological findings following radical prostatectomy in patients who are candidates for active surveillance: impact of varying PSA levels.

Authors:  Dong Il Kang; Thomas L Jang; Jeongyun Jeong; Eun Young Choi; Kelly Johnson; Dong Hyeon Lee; Wun-Jae Kim; Isaac Yi Kim
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-07-25       Impact factor: 3.285

8.  PHI and PCA3 improve the prognostic performance of PRIAS and Epstein criteria in predicting insignificant prostate cancer in men eligible for active surveillance.

Authors:  Francesco Cantiello; Giorgio Ivan Russo; Antonio Cicione; Matteo Ferro; Sebastiano Cimino; Vincenzo Favilla; Sisto Perdonà; Ottavio De Cobelli; Carlo Magno; Giuseppe Morgia; Rocco Damiano
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Validation of Selection Criteria for Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Saif Elamin; Nikita Rajiv Bhatt; Niall F Davis; Paul Sweeney
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-04-01

Review 10.  Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Tonye A Jones; Jan Phillip Radtke; Boris Hadaschik; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.309

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.