OBJECTIVE: to assess the patterns of care for low-risk localized prostate cancer. Management of this condition is highly controversial, with a range of treatment options, but there are no published UK data. METHODS: data from the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Cancer Registry were linked to the UK Association of Cancer registries postcode directory. The demographic and clinical characteristics, and the initial management of men diagnosed with low-risk localized prostate cancer in the UK between 2000 and 2006 were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 43,322 cases of localized prostate cancer were recorded in the BAUS Registry between 2000 and 2006, of which 8861 (20%) met the criteria for low-risk disease. The proportion classified as low risk ranged from 16% in 2000 to 21% in 2006. The proportion of men with low-risk disease opting for 'watchful waiting' increased from 0% to 39% over the same period. Treatment choice was associated with socio-economic status. For example, radical prostatectomy was chosen by 34% of patients in the most affluent quintile, compared with 19% in the most deprived quintile (P= 0.01). CONCLUSION: the management of low-risk localized prostate cancer in the UK has changed markedly in recent years, and contrasts with that in the USA. The association observed between socio-economic status and choice of treatment deserves further study.
OBJECTIVE: to assess the patterns of care for low-risk localized prostate cancer. Management of this condition is highly controversial, with a range of treatment options, but there are no published UK data. METHODS: data from the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Cancer Registry were linked to the UK Association of Cancer registries postcode directory. The demographic and clinical characteristics, and the initial management of men diagnosed with low-risk localized prostate cancer in the UK between 2000 and 2006 were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 43,322 cases of localized prostate cancer were recorded in the BAUS Registry between 2000 and 2006, of which 8861 (20%) met the criteria for low-risk disease. The proportion classified as low risk ranged from 16% in 2000 to 21% in 2006. The proportion of men with low-risk disease opting for 'watchful waiting' increased from 0% to 39% over the same period. Treatment choice was associated with socio-economic status. For example, radical prostatectomy was chosen by 34% of patients in the most affluent quintile, compared with 19% in the most deprived quintile (P= 0.01). CONCLUSION: the management of low-risk localized prostate cancer in the UK has changed markedly in recent years, and contrasts with that in the USA. The association observed between socio-economic status and choice of treatment deserves further study.
Authors: E Le Fur; J P Malhaire; D Baverez; F Delage; M A Perrouin-Verbe; F Schlurmann; S Guerif; G Fournier; O Pradier; A Valeri Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-11-11 Impact factor: 3.621
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
Authors: Hashim U Ahmed; Viktor Berge; David Bottomley; William Cross; Rakesh Heer; Richard Kaplan; Tom Leslie; Chris Parker; Clare Relton; Richard Stephens; Matthew R Sydes; Lindsay Turnbull; Jan van der Meulen; Andrew Vickers; Timothy Wilt; Mark Emberton Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 66.675
Authors: Jinping Xu; Anne Victoria Neale; Rhonda K Dailey; Susan Eggly; Kendra L Schwartz Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2012 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Sophie M Bruinsma; Chris H Bangma; Peter R Carroll; Michael S Leapman; Antti Rannikko; Neophytos Petrides; Mahesha Weerakoon; Leonard P Bokhorst; Monique J Roobol Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 14.432