OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examine the oncologic outcomes of men with low, intermediate and high preoperative risk for prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy prior to and during the active surveillance era. METHODS: We analyzed records from patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at our Canadian tertiary care facility from 2000 to 2012. Patients were stratified by D'Amico preoperative risk category and by year of treatment. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We included 2643 consecutive patients in our analysis. The proportion of men with low-risk disease undergoing radical prostatectomy decreased from 2007 onwards coincident with the implementation of an active surveillance strategy in our institution. Men with low-risk and high-risk disease showed significantly worse biochemical outcomes from 2007 to 2012 compared to 2000 to 2006 (p < 0.05), while men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer showed no significant differences (p = 0.27). Within the low-risk cohort, the later treatment group displayed significantly lower age, pre-treatment prostate specific antigen and tumour volume and significantly higher testosterone and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The time period corresponding with the implementation of active surveillance at our institution corresponded with significant deterioration of biochemical outcomes in the low- and high-risk groups. This suggests that the men with most favourable disease deferred treatment, whereas men with worse preoperative disease characteristics were increasingly treated with radical prostatectomy in the past 6 years perhaps to their benefit.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examine the oncologic outcomes of men with low, intermediate and high preoperative risk for prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy prior to and during the active surveillance era. METHODS: We analyzed records from patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at our Canadian tertiary care facility from 2000 to 2012. Patients were stratified by D'Amico preoperative risk category and by year of treatment. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We included 2643 consecutive patients in our analysis. The proportion of men with low-risk disease undergoing radical prostatectomy decreased from 2007 onwards coincident with the implementation of an active surveillance strategy in our institution. Men with low-risk and high-risk disease showed significantly worse biochemical outcomes from 2007 to 2012 compared to 2000 to 2006 (p < 0.05), while men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer showed no significant differences (p = 0.27). Within the low-risk cohort, the later treatment group displayed significantly lower age, pre-treatment prostate specific antigen and tumour volume and significantly higher testosterone and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The time period corresponding with the implementation of active surveillance at our institution corresponded with significant deterioration of biochemical outcomes in the low- and high-risk groups. This suggests that the men with most favourable disease deferred treatment, whereas men with worse preoperative disease characteristics were increasingly treated with radical prostatectomy in the past 6 years perhaps to their benefit.
Authors: Jean-Baptiste Beauval; Guillaume Ploussard; Michel Soulié; Christian Pfister; Simon Van Agt; Sébastien Vincendeau; Sébastien Larue; Jérome Rigaud; Nicolas Gaschignard; Morgan Rouprêt; Sarah Drouin; Mickael Peyromaure; Jean Alexandre Long; Francois Iborra; Guy Vallancien; Francois Rozet; Laurent Salomon Journal: Urology Date: 2012-07-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Roderick C N van den Bergh; Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Gunnar Aus; Jonas Hugosson; Antti S Rannikko; Teuvo L Tammela; Chris H Bangma; Fritz H Schröder Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Peter C Albertsen; James A Hanley; George H Barrows; David F Penson; Pam D H Kowalczyk; M Melinda Sanders; Judith Fine Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-09-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Phillip M Pierorazio; Thomas J Guzzo; Misop Han; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Jonathan I Epstein; Edward M Schaeffer; Mark Schoenberg; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin Journal: Urology Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Carmel N Anandadas; Noel W Clarke; Susan E Davidson; Patrick H O'Reilly; John P Logue; Lynne Gilmore; Ric Swindell; Richard J Brough; Guy D Wemyss-Holden; Maurice W Lau; Pradip M Javle; Vijay A C Ramani; James P Wylie; Gerald N Collins; Stephen Brown; Richard A Cowan Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kenneth Westover; Ming-Hui Chen; Judd Moul; Cary Robertson; Thomas Polascik; Daniel Dosoretz; Michael Katin; Sharon Salenius; Anthony V D'Amico Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Abhinav Sidana; David J Hernandez; Zhaoyong Feng; Alan W Partin; Bruce J Trock; Surajit Saha; Jonathan I Epstein Journal: Prostate Date: 2011-04-25 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Stephen A Boorjian; R Jeffrey Karnes; Laureano J Rangel; Eric J Bergstralh; Michael L Blute Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Stacy Loeb; Jonathan I Epstein; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book Date: 2016
Authors: Julie Y An; Abhinav Sidana; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A Pinto; İsmail Barış Türkbey Journal: Balkan Med J Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 2.021