Literature DB >> 26884580

Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer (Cancer Care Ontario Guideline): American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement.

Ronald C Chen1, R Bryan Rumble1, D Andrew Loblaw1, Antonio Finelli1, Behfar Ehdaie1, Matthew R Cooperberg1, Scott C Morgan1, Scott Tyldesley1, John J Haluschak1, Winston Tan1, Stewart Justman1, Suneil Jain2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To endorse Cancer Care Ontario's guideline on Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines developed by other professional organizations.
METHODS: The Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. The ASCO Endorsement Panel then reviewed the content and the recommendations.
RESULTS: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer guideline, published in May 2015, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer guideline with added qualifying statements. The Cancer Care Ontario recommendation regarding 5-alpha reductase inhibitors was not endorsed by the ASCO panel. RECOMMENDATIONS: For most patients with low-risk (Gleason score ≤ 6) localized prostate cancer, active surveillance is the recommended disease management strategy. Factors including younger age, prostate cancer volume, patient preference, and ethnicity should be taken into account when making management decisions. Select patients with low-volume, intermediate-risk (Gleason 3 + 4 = 7) prostate cancer may be offered active surveillance. Active surveillance protocols should include prostate-specific antigen testing, digital rectal examinations, and serial prostate biopsies. Ancillary radiologic and genomic tests are investigational but may have a role in patients with discordant clinical and/or pathologic findings. Patients who are reclassified to a higher-risk category (Gleason score ≥ 7) or who have significant increases in tumor volume on subsequent biopsies should be offered active therapy.
© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26884580     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.7759

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  86 in total

Review 1.  One is the new six: The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) patient-focused approach to Gleason grading.

Authors:  John R Srigley; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; Hemamali Samaratunga; John Yaxley; Andrew J Evans
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Use of Conservative Management for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in the Veterans Affairs Integrated Health Care System From 2005-2015.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Nataliya Byrne; Danil V Makarov; Herbert Lepor; Dawn Walter
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2018

4.  Radical prostatectomy versus deferred treatment for localised prostate cancer.

Authors:  Robin Wm Vernooij; Michelle Lancee; Anne Cleves; Philipp Dahm; Chris H Bangma; Katja Kh Aben
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-06-04

5.  Population-based study of grade progression in patients who harboured Gleason 3 + 3.

Authors:  Fanny Sampurno; Arul Earnest; Jeremy Millar; Mark Frydenberg; Declan Murphy; Warwick Delprado; Sue Evans
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  African-American Prostate Cancer Disparities.

Authors:  Zachary L Smith; Scott E Eggener; Adam B Murphy
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 7.  Active Surveillance for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.

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

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.  Active treatment in low-risk prostate cancer: a population-based study.

Authors:  S Roy; M E Hyndman; B Danielson; A Fairey; R Lee-Ying; W Y Cheung; A R Afzal; Y Xu; T Abedin; H C Quon
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 10.  Exploring Variation in the Use of Conservative Management for Low-risk Prostate Cancer in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Nataliya K Byrne; Binhuan Wang; Danil V Makarov; Daniel Becker; David R Wise; Herbert Lepor; Dawn Walter
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-02-22       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.