Literature DB >> 25131660

Can we expand active surveillance criteria to include biopsy Gleason 3+4 prostate cancer? A multi-institutional study of 2,323 patients.

Guillaume Ploussard1, Hendrik Isbarn2, Alberto Briganti3, Prasanna Sooriakumaran4, Christian I Surcel5, Laurent Salomon6, Massimo Freschi7, Cristian Mirvald5, Henk G van der Poel8, Anna Jenkins9, Piet Ost10, Inge M van Oort11, Ofer Yossepowitch12, Gianluca Giannarini13, Roderick C N van den Bergh14.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the expandability of active surveillance (AS) to Gleason score 3+4 cancers by assessing the unfavorable disease risk in a large multi-institutional cohort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis including 2,323 patients with localized Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer who underwent a radical prostatectomy between 2005 and 2013 from 6 academic centers. We analyzed the rates of biopsy downgrading/upgrading and advanced stage in the overall cohort by employing standardized AS criteria (using biopsy Gleason score 3+4).
RESULTS: The final pathologic Gleason score was 3+3 = 6 in 8%, 3+4 = 7 in 67%, 4+3 = 7 in 20%, and 8 to 10 in 5% cases. The overall rate of unfavorable disease (upgrading or advanced stage or both) was 46%. In multivariable analysis, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level>10 ng/ml, PSA density (PSAD) >0.15 ng/ml/g, clinical stage >T1, and>2 positive cores were predictors of unfavorable disease. According to the AS criteria used, the risk of unfavorable disease ranged from 30% to 42%. In patients without any risk factor (PSA level≤ 10 ng/ml, PSAD ≤ 0.15 ng/ml/g, T1c, and ≤ 2 positive cores), the unfavorable disease rate was 19%. The main limitations of this study are the retrospective design and nonstandardization of pathologic assessment between centers.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 cancer have unfavorable disease at final pathology. Nevertheless, expanding AS eligibility to these patients may be acceptable provided adherence to strict selection criteria leading to a<20% risk of unfavorable disease. Future tools for selection such as magnetic resonance imaging, early rebiopsy, and serum markers may be especially beneficial in this group of patients.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active surveillance; Gleason score; Outcomes; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Reclassification

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25131660     DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.07.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Oncol        ISSN: 1078-1439            Impact factor:   3.498


  19 in total

1.  Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness by Use of the Combination of Quantitative DWI and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Andreas M Hötker; Yousef Mazaheri; Ömer Aras; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Improved decision making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: a multicenter study on pathologic and oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jean Baptiste Beauval; Guillaume Ploussard; Bastien Cabarrou; Mathieu Roumiguié; Adil Ouzzane; Jérome Gas; Annabelle Goujon; Gautier Marcq; Romain Mathieu; Sébastien Vincendeau; Xavier Cathelineau; Pierre Mongiat-Artus; Laurent Salomon; Michel Soulié; Arnaud Méjean; Alexandre de La Taille; Morgan Rouprêt; François Rozet
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Characterization of a "low-risk" cohort of grade group 2 prostate cancer patients: Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database.

Authors:  Kathleen F McGinley; Xizi Sun; Lauren E Howard; William J Aronson; Martha K Terris; Christopher J Kane; Christopher L Amling; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 3.369

4.  Prognostic Utility of a New mRNA Expression Signature of Gleason Score.

Authors:  Jennifer A Sinnott; Sam F Peisch; Svitlana Tyekucheva; Travis Gerke; Rosina Lis; Jennifer R Rider; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Meir J Stampfer; Lorelei A Mucci; Massimo Loda; Kathryn L Penney
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 5.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tosoian; H Ballentine Carter; Abbey Lepor; Stacy Loeb
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  Further reduction of disqualification rates by additional MRI-targeted biopsy with transperineal saturation biopsy compared with standard 12-core systematic biopsies for the selection of prostate cancer patients for active surveillance.

Authors:  J P Radtke; T H Kuru; D Bonekamp; M T Freitag; M B Wolf; C D Alt; G Hatiboglu; S Boxler; S Pahernik; W Roth; M C Roethke; H P Schlemmer; M Hohenfellner; B A Hadaschik
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  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

8.  Pathological Outcome following Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Prostate Specific Antigen Greater than 10 ng/ml and Histologically Favorable Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Jiwoong Yu; Young Suk Kwon; Sinae Kim; Christopher Sejong Han; Nicholas Farber; Jongmyung Kim; Seok Soo Byun; Wun-Jae Kim; Seong Soo Jeon; Isaac Yi Kim
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  [Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer].

Authors:  Annika Herlemann; Christian G Stief
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 0.639

10.  Computationally Derived Cribriform Area Index from Prostate Cancer Hematoxylin and Eosin Images Is Associated with Biochemical Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy and Is Most Prognostic in Gleason Grade Group 2.

Authors:  Patrick Leo; Sacheth Chandramouli; Xavier Farré; Robin Elliott; Andrew Janowczyk; Kaustav Bera; Pingfu Fu; Nafiseh Janaki; Ayah El-Fahmawi; Mohammed Shahait; Jessica Kim; David Lee; Kosj Yamoah; Timothy R Rebbeck; Francesca Khani; Brian D Robinson; Natalie N C Shih; Michael Feldman; Sanjay Gupta; Jesse McKenney; Priti Lal; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2021-04-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.