Pauline Filippou1, Christopher J Welty1, Janet E Cowan1, Nannette Perez1, Katsuto Shinohara1, Peter R Carroll2. 1. Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA, USA. 2. Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: peter.carroll@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biopsy progression on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) often reflects failure of the initial biopsy to detect cancer present at enrollment. The risks for delayed treatment among men who progress on AS are not well defined. OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes for men who underwent surgery after AS compared to men who underwent immediate surgery and the influence of selection bias on this outcome. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: AS-eligible (ASE) men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) after a median of 20 mo of AS were compared to ASE men who underwent RP within 6 mo of diagnosis. A subset of men on AS who underwent RP after upgrade to Gleason 3+4 was compared to matched controls with similar pretreatment biopsy features who underwent immediate RP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENT AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Rates of adverse pathology (upstaging, positive surgical margin, or Gleason upgrading) were examined. Logistic regression was used to determine associations between treatment subgroup and adverse pathology. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 157 ASE men who underwent delayed RP after AS, 54 were upgraded to Gleason 3+4 before surgery. ASE men who underwent immediate RP had lower probability of adverse pathology than ASE men who underwent delayed RP (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.55). The rate of adverse pathology did not differ between immediate and delayed RP patients matched for pretreatment characteristics (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.27-2.28). The observational design of this study is its main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to men with similar pretreatment biopsy features, those who underwent delayed RP were not at higher risk of adverse pathology. PATIENT SUMMARY: The oncologic safety of delayed treatment when indicated for men enrolled in active surveillance for prostate cancer is important. We found that men who underwent delayed surgery had similar outcomes to men who underwent immediate prostatectomy.
BACKGROUND: Biopsy progression on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) often reflects failure of the initial biopsy to detect cancer present at enrollment. The risks for delayed treatment among men who progress on AS are not well defined. OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes for men who underwent surgery after AS compared to men who underwent immediate surgery and the influence of selection bias on this outcome. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: AS-eligible (ASE) men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) after a median of 20 mo of AS were compared to ASE men who underwent RP within 6 mo of diagnosis. A subset of men on AS who underwent RP after upgrade to Gleason 3+4 was compared to matched controls with similar pretreatment biopsy features who underwent immediate RP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENT AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Rates of adverse pathology (upstaging, positive surgical margin, or Gleason upgrading) were examined. Logistic regression was used to determine associations between treatment subgroup and adverse pathology. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 157 ASE men who underwent delayed RP after AS, 54 were upgraded to Gleason 3+4 before surgery. ASE men who underwent immediate RP had lower probability of adverse pathology than ASE men who underwent delayed RP (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.55). The rate of adverse pathology did not differ between immediate and delayed RP patients matched for pretreatment characteristics (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.27-2.28). The observational design of this study is its main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to men with similar pretreatment biopsy features, those who underwent delayed RP were not at higher risk of adverse pathology. PATIENT SUMMARY: The oncologic safety of delayed treatment when indicated for men enrolled in active surveillance for prostate cancer is important. We found that men who underwent delayed surgery had similar outcomes to men who underwent immediate prostatectomy.
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: François Audenet; Emily A Vertosick; Samson W Fine; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers; Victor E Reuter; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Karim A Touijer Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Mariana Andozia Morini; Roberto Lodeiro Muller; Paulo César Barbosa de Castro Junior; Rafael José de Souza; Eliney Ferreira Faria Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Gregory B Auffenberg; Susan Linsell; Apoorv Dhir; Stacie N Myers; Bradley Rosenberg; David C Miller Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-05-30 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Elizabeth Rourke; Abhijit Sunnapwar; Daniel Mais; Vishal Kukkar; John DiGiovanni; Dharam Kaushik; Michael A Liss Journal: Investig Clin Urol Date: 2019-07-30
Authors: Ekaterina Laukhtina; Reza Sari Motlagh; Keiichiro Mori; Fahad Quhal; Victor M Schuettfort; Hadi Mostafaei; Satoshi Katayama; Nico C Grossmann; Guillaume Ploussard; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Alberto Briganti; Mohammad Abufaraj; Dmitry Enikeev; Benjamin Pradere; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 4.226