Literature DB >> 23271779

Active surveillance: the Canadian experience with an "inclusive approach".

Laurence Klotz1.   

Abstract

Active surveillance has evolved to become a standard of care for favorable-risk prostate cancer. This is a summary of the rationale, method, and results of active surveillance beginning in 1995 with the first prospective trial of this approach. This was a prospective, single-arm cohort study. Patients were managed with an initial expectant approach. Definitive intervention was offered to those patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of less than 3 years, Gleason score progression (to 4+3 or greater), or unequivocal clinical progression. Survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard model were applied to the data. Since November 1995, 450 patients have been managed with active surveillance. The cohort included men under 70 with favorable-risk disease and men of age more than 70 with favorable- or intermediate-risk cancer (Gleason score 3+4 or PSA 10-15). Median follow-up is 6.8 years (range 1-16 years). Overall survival is 78.6%. Ten-year prostate cancer actuarial survival is 97.2%. Five of 450 patients (1.1%) have died of prostate cancer. Thirty percent of patients have been reclassified as higher-risk patients and offered definitive therapy. The commonest indication for treatment was a PSA doubling time less than 3 years (48%) or Gleason upgrading (26%). Of 117 patients treated radically, the PSA failure rate was 50%. This represents 13% of the total cohort. Most PSA failures occurred early; at 2 years, 44% of the treated patients had PSA failure. The hazard ratio for non-prostate cancer mortality to prostate cancer mortality was 18.6 at 10 years. In conclusion, we observed a very low rate of prostate cancer mortality in an intermediate time frame. Among the one-third of patients who were reclassified as higher risk and retreated, PSA failure was relatively common. However, other-cause mortality accounted for almost all of the deaths. Further studies are warranted to improve the identification of patients who harbor more aggressive disease in spite of favorable clinical parameters at diagnosis [reproduced from Klotz (1) with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health].

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23271779      PMCID: PMC3540875          DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr        ISSN: 1052-6773


  20 in total

1.  PSA doubling time predicts the outcome after active surveillance in screening-detected prostate cancer: results from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Sweden section.

Authors:  Ali Khatami; Khatami Ali; Gunnar Aus; Aus Gunnar; Jan-Erik Damber; Damber Jan-Erik; Hans Lilja; Lilja Hans; Pär Lodding; Lodding Pär; Jonas Hugosson; Hugosson Jonas
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2007-01-01       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Leslie A Mangold; Mario Eisenberger; Frederick J Dorey; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-07-27       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Feasibility study: watchful waiting for localized low to intermediate grade prostate carcinoma with selective delayed intervention based on prostate specific antigen, histological and/or clinical progression.

Authors:  Richard Choo; Laurence Klotz; Cyril Danjoux; Gerard C Morton; Gerrit DeBoer; Ewa Szumacher; Neil Fleshner; Peter Bunting; George Hruby
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 4.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: for whom?

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  The Vienna nomogram: validation of a novel biopsy strategy defining the optimal number of cores based on patient age and total prostate volume.

Authors:  Mesut Remzi; Yan Kit Fong; Michael Dobrovits; Theodore Anagnostou; Christian Seitz; Matthias Waldert; Mike Harik; Sybille Marihart; Michael Marberger; Bob Djavan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Active surveillance: the Canadian experience.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.309

7.  Modeling prostate specific antigen kinetics in patients on active surveillance.

Authors:  Liying Zhang; Andrew Loblaw; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome.

Authors:  Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Stijn H de Vries; Tineke Wolters; Claartje Gosselaar; Geert J L H van Leenders; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-12-05       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Expectant management of early stage prostatic cancer: Swedish experience.

Authors:  J E Johansson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 10.  Stage T1A carcinoma of prostate.

Authors:  H Matzkin; J P Patel; J E Altwein; M S Soloway
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  7 in total

1.  Coffee and tea consumption in relation to prostate cancer prognosis.

Authors:  Milan S Geybels; Marian L Neuhouser; Jonathan L Wright; Marni Stott-Miller; Janet L Stanford
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  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

3.  The biopsy Gleason score 3+4 in a single core does not necessarily reflect an unfavourable pathological disease after radical prostatectomy in comparison with biopsy Gleason score 3+3: looking for larger selection criteria for active surveillance candidates.

Authors:  R Schiavina; M Borghesi; E Brunocilla; D Romagnoli; D Diazzi; F Giunchi; V Vagnoni; C V Pultrone; H Dababneh; A Porreca; M Fiorentino; G Martorana
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  Trends in prostate cancer incidence and mortality in Canada during the era of prostate-specific antigen screening.

Authors:  James Dickinson; Amanda Shane; Marcello Tonelli; Sarah Connor Gorber; Michel Joffres; Harminder Singh; Neil Bell
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2016-03-02

5.  Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma: An aggressive variant that is underdiagnosed and undersampled on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy.

Authors:  Previn Gulavita; Shaheed W Hakim; Nicola Schieda; Rodney H Breau; Chris Morash; Daniel T Keefe; Susan J Robertson; Kien T Mai; Eric C Belanger; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Acknowledging unreported problems with active surveillance for prostate cancer: a prospective single-centre observational study.

Authors:  Lukas J Hefermehl; Daniel Disteldorf; Kurt Lehmann
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Active surveillance in intermediate risk prostate cancer: is it safe? Opinion: No.

Authors:  Nishanth Krishnananthan; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.