Stacy Loeb1, Yasin Folkvaljon2, Danil V Makarov3, Ola Bratt4, Anna Bill-Axelson5, Pär Stattin6. 1. Department of Urology, New York University and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: stacyloeb@gmail.com. 2. Regional Cancer Centre, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden. 3. Department of Urology, New York University and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Urology, Helsingborg Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 5. Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 6. Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is an important yet underutilized strategy to reduce prostate cancer (PCa) overtreatment. OBJECTIVE: To examine the 5-yr outcomes of AS in a population-based setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, we identified 11 726 men ≤70 yr diagnosed with very low-risk to intermediate-risk PCa from 2003 to 2007 who completed 5 yr of follow-up. Of these men, 1729 (15%) chose AS for the primary management strategy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We calculated the probability of discontinuation of AS over time, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine factors associated with discontinuation. Reasons for discontinuation were assessed by data extraction from medical charts. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: By 5 yr, 64% of the men remained on AS. Predictors of discontinuation were younger age, fewer comorbidities, more education, higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and clinical stage T2 disease; marital status did not predict discontinuation. In a subset with data on the reason for discontinuation (86%), 20% of men discontinued because of patient preference, 52% because of PSA progression, 24% because of biopsy progression, and 3% for other reasons. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based setting, the majority of men remained on AS at 5 yr. However, one-fifth of the men who discontinued AS did so for nonbiologic reasons. Thus, there is a need for support and counseling for men to continue AS in the absence of signs of progression to improve adherence to AS and decrease overtreatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: Active surveillance (AS) is an important option to delay or avoid treatment for men with favorable prostate cancer features. This study shows that at 5 yr, 64% of men across an entire population remained on AS. We concluded that AS is a durable option and that counseling may be useful to promote adherence for men without progression.
BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is an important yet underutilized strategy to reduce prostate cancer (PCa) overtreatment. OBJECTIVE: To examine the 5-yr outcomes of AS in a population-based setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, we identified 11 726 men ≤70 yr diagnosed with very low-risk to intermediate-risk PCa from 2003 to 2007 who completed 5 yr of follow-up. Of these men, 1729 (15%) chose AS for the primary management strategy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We calculated the probability of discontinuation of AS over time, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine factors associated with discontinuation. Reasons for discontinuation were assessed by data extraction from medical charts. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: By 5 yr, 64% of the men remained on AS. Predictors of discontinuation were younger age, fewer comorbidities, more education, higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and clinical stage T2 disease; marital status did not predict discontinuation. In a subset with data on the reason for discontinuation (86%), 20% of men discontinued because of patient preference, 52% because of PSA progression, 24% because of biopsy progression, and 3% for other reasons. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based setting, the majority of men remained on AS at 5 yr. However, one-fifth of the men who discontinued AS did so for nonbiologic reasons. Thus, there is a need for support and counseling for men to continue AS in the absence of signs of progression to improve adherence to AS and decrease overtreatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: Active surveillance (AS) is an important option to delay or avoid treatment for men with favorable prostate cancer features. This study shows that at 5 yr, 64% of men across an entire population remained on AS. We concluded that AS is a durable option and that counseling may be useful to promote adherence for men without progression.
Authors: Alvin C Goh; Marc A Kowalkowski; Donald E Bailey; Meredith W Kazer; Sara J Knight; David M Latini Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Eugene K Lee; Janet Baack; Heidi Penn; Cecil T Bromfield; David A Duchene; J Brantley Thrasher; Jeffrey M Holzbeierlein Journal: Can J Urol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 1.344
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: Marc A Dall'Era; Peter C Albertsen; Christopher Bangma; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland; Laurence H Klotz; Christopher Parker; Mark S Soloway Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Issa J Dahabreh; Mei Chung; Ethan M Balk; Winifred W Yu; Paul Mathew; Joseph Lau; Stanley Ip Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-02-20 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Patricia A Ganz; John M Barry; Wylie Burke; Nananda F Col; Phaedra S Corso; Everett Dodson; M Elizabeth Hammond; Barry A Kogan; Charles F Lynch; Lee Newcomer; Eric J Seifter; Janet A Tooze; Kasisomayajula Viswanath; Hunter Wessells Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-02-20 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sue M Evans; Jeremy L Millar; Ian D Davis; Declan G Murphy; Damien M Bolton; Graham G Giles; Mark Frydenberg; Nick Andrianopoulos; Julie M Wood; Albert G Frauman; Anthony J Costello; John J McNeil Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2013-06-03 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Mieke Van Hemelrijck; Annette Wigertz; Fredrik Sandin; Hans Garmo; Karin Hellström; Per Fransson; Anders Widmark; Mats Lambe; Jan Adolfsson; Eberhard Varenhorst; Jan-Erik Johansson; Pär Stattin Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-05-04 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Patrick O Richard; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Tony Panzarella; Laurence Klotz; Maria Komisarenko; Neil E Fleshner; David Urbach; Antonio Finelli Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Alex Z Wang; Amir H Lebastchi; Luke P O'Connor; Michael Ahdoot; Sherif Mehralivand; Nitin Yerram; Samir S Taneja; Arvin K George; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; John F Ward; Pilar Laguna; Jean de la Rosette; Peter A Pinto Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Maximilian F Lang; Mark D Tyson; JoAnn Rudd Alvarez; Tatsuki Koyama; Karen E Hoffman; Matthew J Resnick; Matthew R Cooperberg; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Vivien Chen; Lisa E Paddock; Ann S Hamilton; Mia Hashibe; Michael Goodman; Sheldon Greenfield; Sherrie H Kaplan; Antoinette Stroup; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas Journal: Urology Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 2.649