Literature DB >> 21757259

[EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease].

A Heidenreich1, J Bellmunt, M Bolla, S Joniau, M Mason, V Matveev, N Mottet, H P Schmid, T van der Kwast, T Wiegel, F Zattoni.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to present a summary of the 2010 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised cancer of the prostate (PCa).
METHODS: The working panel performed a literature review of the new data emerging from 2007 to 2010. The guidelines were updated, and level of evidence and grade of recommendation were added to the text based on a systematic review of the literature, which included a search of online databases and bibliographic reviews.
RESULTS: A full version is available at the EAU office or Web site (www.uroweb.org). Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population-based screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for PCa. A systematic prostate biopsy under ultrasound guidance and local anaesthesia is the preferred diagnostic method. Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy. PSA doubling time in < 3 yr or a biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention. In men with locally advanced PCa in whom local therapy is not mandatory, watchful waiting (WW) is a treatment alternative to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with equivalent oncologic efficacy. Active treatment is mostly recommended for patients with localised disease and a long life expectancy with radical prostatectomy (RP) shown to be superior to WW in a prospective randomised trial. Nerve-sparing RP represents the approach of choice in organ-confined disease; neoadjuvant androgen deprivation demonstrates no improvement of outcome variables. Radiation therapy should be performed with at least 74Gy and 78Gy in low-risk and intermediate/high-risk PCa, respectively. For locally advanced disease, adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior disease-specific and overall survival rates and represents the treatment of choice. Follow-up after local therapy is largely based on PSA, and a disease-specific history with imaging is indicated only when symptoms occur.
CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing. These EAU guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and put them into clinical practice.
Copyright © 2011 AEU. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21757259     DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2011.04.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Actas Urol Esp        ISSN: 0210-4806            Impact factor:   0.994


  18 in total

1.  [New puncture techniques in urology using 3D-assisted imaging].

Authors:  M Ritter; M-C Rassweiler; J J Rassweiler; M S Michel
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Comparison of open and robotic-assisted prostatectomy: The University of British Columbia experience.

Authors:  Louis-Olivier Gagnon; S Larry Goldenberg; Kenny Lynch; Antonio Hurtado; Martin E Gleave
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy vs. Open Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiu-Wu Pan; Xin-Ming Cui; Jing-Fei Teng; Dong-Xu Zhang; Zhi-Jun Wang; Fa-Jun Qu; Yi Gao; Xin-Gang Cui; Dan-Feng Xu
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 0.656

4.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: an underutilized opportunity for reducing harm.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

5.  Clinical significance of pelvic lymph node status in prostate cancer: review of 1690 cases.

Authors:  Livia Maccio; Valeria Barresi; Federica Domati; Eugenio Martorana; Anna Maria Cesinaro; Mario Migaldi; Francesco Iachetta; Antonio Ieni; Luca Reggiani Bonetti
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 3.397

6.  A single centre experience of active surveillance as management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer in Ireland.

Authors:  J C Forde; P J Daly; S White; M Morrin; G P Smyth; B D P O'Neill; R E Power
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2013-09-29       Impact factor: 1.568

7.  CD8+ T Cells Impact Rising PSA in Biochemically Relapsed Cancer Patients Using Immunotherapy Targeting Tumor-Associated Antigens.

Authors:  Neal D Shore; Matthew P Morrow; Trevor McMullan; Kimberly A Kraynyak; Albert Sylvester; Khamal Bhatt; Jocelyn Cheung; Jean D Boyer; Li Liu; Brian Sacchetta; Samantha Rosencranz; Elizabeth I Heath; Luke Nordquist; Heather H Cheng; Scott T Tagawa; Leonard J Appleman; Ronald Tutrone; Jorge A Garcia; Young E Whang; W Kevin Kelly; David B Weiner; Mark L Bagarazzi; Jeffrey M Skolnik
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 11.454

8.  Stiffness of prostate gland measured by transrectal real-time shear wave elastography for detection of prostate cancer: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Yonghao Ji; Litao Ruan; Wei Ren; Guoliang Dun; Jianxue Liu; Yaoren Zhang; Qinyun Wan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  A duplex real-time PCR assay for the detection and quantification of avian reovirus and Mycoplasma synoviae.

Authors:  Li Huang; Zhixun Xie; Liji Xie; Xianwen Deng; Zhiqin Xie; Sisi Luo; Jiaoling Huang; Tingting Zeng; Jiaxun Feng
Journal:  Virol J       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 4.099

10.  Interdisciplinary decision making in prostate cancer therapy - 5-years' time trends at the Interdisciplinary Prostate Cancer Center (IPC) of the Charité Berlin.

Authors:  Daniel Baumunk; Roman Reunkoff; Julien Kushner; Alexandra Baumunk; Carsten Kempkensteffen; Ursula Steiner; Steffen Weikert; Lutz Moser; Mark Schrader; Stefan Höcht; Thomas Wiegel; Kurt Miller; Martin Schostak
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.