Literature DB >> 26707510

Metastatic Prostate Cancer in Men Initially Treated with Active Surveillance.

Toshihiro Yamamoto1, H Bindu Musunuru1, Danny Vesprini1, Liying Zhang1, Gabriella Ghanem1, Andrew Loblaw1, Laurence Klotz2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an approach to low and low intermediate risk prostate cancer that is designed to decrease overtreatment. Despite close monitoring a small subset of patients progress to metastatic disease. We analyzed the clinical and pathological correlates of surveillance in patients who eventually experienced metastasis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single center, prospective cohort study. Eligible patients were treated with an expectant approach. The main outcome measure was metastasis-free survival. Predictive factors for metastasis were identified.
RESULTS: Metastasis developed in 30 of 980 patients, of whom 211 were classified at intermediate risk, including 14 who progressed to metastatic disease. Median followup was 6.3 years, median age was 70 years, median prostate specific antigen was 6.2 ng/ml and median time to metastasis was 8.9 years. Metastases developed in bone in 18 patients (60%) and in lymph nodes in 13 (43%). Prostate specific antigen doubling time less than 3 years (HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4-9.4, p = 0.0006), Gleason score 7 (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.3, p = 0.0018) and a total of 3 or more positive cores (HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-6.8, p = 0.0028) were independent predictors of metastasis. Although the intermediate risk group was at higher risk for metastasis, those with Gleason score 6 and prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml were not at increased risk for metastasis. Metastasis developed in only 2 patients with Gleason score 6 and neither had surgical pathology grading.
CONCLUSION: Active surveillance appears safe in patients at low risk and in select patients at intermediate risk, particularly those with Gleason score 6 and prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml. Patients with elements of Gleason pattern 4 on diagnostic biopsy are at increased risk for eventual metastasis when treated with an initial conservative approach.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  neoplasm grading; neoplasm metastasis; prostatic neoplasms; risk factors; watchful waiting

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26707510     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.11.075

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  31 in total

1.  Targeted Biopsy to Detect Gleason Score Upgrading during Active Surveillance for Men with Low versus Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Nima Nassiri; Daniel J Margolis; Shyam Natarajan; Devi S Sharma; Jiaoti Huang; Frederick J Dorey; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 2.  Active Surveillance for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Risk of Pathological Upgrading and Up Staging among Men with Low Risk Prostate Cancer Varies by Race: Results from the National Cancer Database.

Authors:  Matthew J Maurice; Debasish Sundi; Edward M Schaeffer; Robert Abouassaly
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-08-28       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Presence of invasive cribriform or intraductal growth at biopsy outperforms percentage grade 4 in predicting outcome of Gleason score 3+4=7 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Charlotte F Kweldam; Intan P Kümmerlin; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Luca Incrocci; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Monique J Roobol; Geert J van Leenders
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 7.842

5.  Prostate cancer mortality and metastasis under different biopsy frequencies in North American active surveillance cohorts.

Authors:  Jane M Lange; Aaron A Laviana; David F Penson; Daniel W Lin; Anna Bill-Axelson; Sigrid V Carlsson; Lisa F Newcomb; Bruce J Trock; H Ballentine Carter; Peter R Carroll; Mathew R Cooperberg; Janet E Cowan; Laurence H Klotz; Ruth B Etzioni
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Health Economic Impact and Prospective Clinical Utility of Oncotype DX® Genomic Prostate Score.

Authors:  David Albala; Michael J Kemeter; Phillip G Febbo; Ruixiao Lu; Vincy John; Dylan Stoy; Bela Denes; Marybeth McCall; Alan W Shindel; Frank Dubeck
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2016

7.  Biopsy Perineural Invasion in Prostate Cancer Patients Who Are Candidates for Active Surveillance by Strict and Expanded Criteria.

Authors:  Robert M Turner; Todd S Yecies; Jonathan G Yabes; Benjamin T Ristau; Elen Woldemichael; Benjamin J Davies; Bruce L Jacobs; Joel B Nelson
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Clinical Usefulness of Total Length of Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Lucas W Dean; Melissa Assel; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers; Hikmat A Al-Ahmadie; Ying-Bei Chen; Anuradha Gopalan; S Joseph Sirintrapun; Satish K Tickoo; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Victor E Reuter; Behfar Ehdaie; Samson W Fine
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Risk of Metastasis in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer Managed with Active Surveillance at a Tertiary Cancer Center.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Nicole Benfante; Ricardo Alvim; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew Vickers; Victor E Reuter; Samson W Fine; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Michal Wiseman; Maha Mamoor; Behfar Ehdaie; Vincent Laudone; Peter Scardino; James Eastham; Karim Touijer
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 10.  A review on the role of tissue-based molecular biomarkers for active surveillance.

Authors:  Sanoj Punnen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.