Literature DB >> 25363612

Active surveillance for localized prostate cancer: an analysis of patient contacts and utilization of healthcare resources.

Frederik B Thomsen1, Kasper D Berg, M Andreas Røder, Peter Iversen, Klaus Brasso.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Evidence supports active surveillance (AS) as a means to reduce overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The consequences of close and long-standing follow-up with regard to outpatient visits, tests and repeated biopsies are widely unknown. This study investigated the trajectory and costs of AS in patients with localized PCa.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 317 PCa patients were followed in a prospective, single-arm AS cohort. The primary outcomes were number of patient contacts, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests, biopsies, hospital admissions due to biopsy complications and patients eventually undergoing curative treatment. The secondary outcome was cost.
RESULTS: The 5 year cumulative incidence of discontinued AS in a competing-risk model was 40%. During the first 5 years of AS patients underwent a median of two biopsy sets, and patients were seen in an outpatient clinic including PSA testing three to four times annually. In total, 38 of the 406 biopsy sessions led to hospital admission and 87 of the 317 patients required treatment for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). With a median of 3.7 years' follow-up, the total cost of AS was euro (€) 1,240,286. Assuming all patients had otherwise undergone primary radical prostatectomy, the cost difference favoured AS with a net benefit of €662,661 (35% reduction).
CONCLUSIONS: AS entails a close clinical follow-up with a considerable risk of rebiopsy complication, treatment of BOO and subsequent delayed definitive therapy. This risk should be weighed against a potential economic benefit and reduction in the risk of overtreatment compared to immediate radical treatment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active surveillance; complications; healthcare resources; prostate cancer; treatment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25363612     DOI: 10.3109/21681805.2014.970572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Urol        ISSN: 2168-1805            Impact factor:   1.612


  7 in total

1.  Active surveillance of prostate cancer: Current state of practice and utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ridwan Alam; H Ballentine Carter; Jonathan I Epstein; Jeffrey J Tosoian
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2017

2.  Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of active surveillance in prostate cancer among urologists: a real-life survey from Brazil.

Authors:  Marcelo Langer Wroclawski; Breno Santos Amaral; Paulo Priante Kayano; Wilson Francisco Schreiner Busato; Sebastião José Westphal; Erik Montagna; Bianca Bianco; Andrey Soares; Fernando Cotait Maluf; Gustavo Caserta Lemos; Arie Carneiro
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 2.090

Review 3.  Defining and Measuring Adherence in Observational Studies Assessing Outcomes of Real-world Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Glenda Kith; Sarah Lisker; Urmimala Sarkar; Jill Barr-Walker; Benjamin N Breyer; Nynikka R Palmer
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-07-06

4.  Quantitative ultrasound spectroscopic imaging for characterization of disease extent in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Ali Sadeghi-Naini; Ervis Sofroni; Naum Papanicolau; Omar Falou; Linda Sugar; Gerard Morton; Martin J Yaffe; Robert Nam; Alireza Sadeghian; Michael C Kolios; Hans T Chung; Gregory J Czarnota
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.243

Review 5.  Epigenetic Signature: A New Player as Predictor of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (PCa) in Patients on Active Surveillance (AS).

Authors:  Matteo Ferro; Paola Ungaro; Amelia Cimmino; Giuseppe Lucarelli; Gian Maria Busetto; Francesco Cantiello; Rocco Damiano; Daniela Terracciano
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-05-27       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Trends in active surveillance for very low-risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?

Authors:  Rahul R Parikh; Sinae Kim; Mark N Stein; Bruce G Haffty; Isaac Y Kim; Sharad Goyal
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 4.452

7.  Data on the quality and methods of studies reporting healthcare costs of post-prostate biopsy sepsis.

Authors:  Mark N Alshak; Michael D Gross; Jonathan E Shoag; Aaron A Laviana; Michael A Gorin; Art Sedrakyan; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Data Brief       Date:  2019-07-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.