Literature DB >> 26332209

Active surveillance in localized prostate cancer: comparison of incidental tumours (T1a/b) and tumours diagnosed by core needle biopsy (T1c/T2a): results from the HAROW study.

Jan Herden1, Sebastian Wille1, Lothar Weissbach2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a comparative prospective analysis of patients with incidental T1a/T1b prostate cancer (IPCa) and those with prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosed by core needle biopsy, treated by active surveillance (AS), with regard to inclusion criteria, progression and switch to deferred treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The HAROW study is an observational outcomes research study on the management of localized PCa. Treating urologists reported clinical variables and information on therapy and clinical course of disease at 6-month intervals. With respect to therapy, only recommendations were made; the final decision on the therapeutic method rested with the treating physician.
RESULTS: Out of 2 957 patients included in the HAROW study, 447 chose AS. The median follow-up was 28.3 months. T1a, T1b, T1c and T2a disease were diagnosed in 81, 18, 292 and 56 patients, respectively. Patients in the IPCa group had lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (4.2 vs 6.1 ng/mL) and more comorbidities than those diagnosed by core needle biospy. The IPCa group also had fewer re-biopsies (25.3 vs 43.2%) and fewer changes to invasive treatment (12.1 vs 25.9%). No significant differences were found with respect to the criteria for discontinuation, subsequent therapies and histological findings after radical prostatectomy.
CONCLUSION: Urologists are highly inclined to use AS as a therapeutic option in IPCa. More patients with IPCa than those diagnosed after core needle biopsy continued on AS, which was also associated with the indication for a re-biopsy being less stringently observed.
© 2015 The Authors BJU International © 2015 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HAROW study; T1a/T1b prostate cancer; active surveillance; incidental prostate cancer; outcomes research

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26332209     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  4 in total

1.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: comparison between incidental tumors vs. tumors diagnosed at prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Mattia Luca Piccinelli; Stefano Luzzago; Giulia Marvaso; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Noriyoshi Miura; Victor M Schuettfort; Keiichiro Mori; Abdulmajeed Aydh; Matteo Ferro; Francesco A Mistretta; Nicola Fusco; Giuseppe Petralia; Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa; Shahrokh F Shariat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Ottavio de Cobelli; Gennaro Musi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-10-23       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Clinical experience with active surveillance protocol using regular magnetic resonance imaging instead of regular repeat biopsy for monitoring: A study at a high-volume center in Korea.

Authors:  Hyun Kyu Ahn; Kwang Suk Lee; Kyo Chul Koo; Byung Ha Chung
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2020-12-05

3.  Acknowledging unreported problems with active surveillance for prostate cancer: a prospective single-centre observational study.

Authors:  Lukas J Hefermehl; Daniel Disteldorf; Kurt Lehmann
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Two Decades of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer in a Single-Center Cohort: Favorable Outcomes after Transurethral Resection of the Prostate.

Authors:  Sarah Hagmann; Venkat Ramakrishnan; Alexander Tamalunas; Marc Hofmann; Moritz Vandenhirtz; Silvan Vollmer; Jsmea Hug; Philipp Niggli; Antonio Nocito; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Kurt Lehmann; Lukas John Hefermehl
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 6.639

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.