Christopher J Kane1, Scott E Eggener2, Alan W Shindel3, Gerald L Andriole4. 1. Department of Urology, University of California San Diego Health System, San Diego, CA, USA. Electronic address: ckane@ucsd.edu. 2. Department of Urology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA. 4. Division of Urologic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. OBJECTIVE: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. PATIENT SUMMARY: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Published by Elsevier B.V.
CONTEXT: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. OBJECTIVE: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. PATIENT SUMMARY: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors: Weisi Xie; Nicholas P Reder; Can Koyuncu; Patrick Leo; Sarah Hawley; Hongyi Huang; Chenyi Mao; Nadia Postupna; Soyoung Kang; Robert Serafin; Gan Gao; Qinghua Han; Kevin W Bishop; Lindsey A Barner; Pingfu Fu; Jonathan L Wright; C Dirk Keene; Joshua C Vaughan; Andrew Janowczyk; Adam K Glaser; Anant Madabhushi; Lawrence D True; Jonathan T C Liu Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: Richard J Rebello; Christoph Oing; Karen E Knudsen; Stacy Loeb; David C Johnson; Robert E Reiter; Silke Gillessen; Theodorus Van der Kwast; Robert G Bristow Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Jia Ying Isaac Tay; Ken Chow; Dominic J Gavin; Evie Mertens; Nicholas Howard; Benjamin Thomas; Philip Dundee; Justin Peters; Paul Simkin; Sevastjan Kranz; Moira Finlay; Stefan Heinze; Brian Kelly; Anthony Costello; Niall Corcoran Journal: BJUI Compass Date: 2021-06-04
Authors: Benedikt Hoeh; Rocco Flammia; Lukas Hohenhorst; Gabriele Sorce; Francesco Chierigo; Zhe Tian; Fred Saad; Michele Gallucci; Alberto Briganti; Carlo Terrone; Shahrokh F Shariat; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel; Felix K H Chun; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Prostate Int Date: 2022-01-26
Authors: Valentin H Meissner; Mira Woll; Donna P Ankerst; Stefan Schiele; Jürgen E Gschwend; Kathleen Herkommer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-05-10 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Benedikt Hoeh; Maria N Welte; Clara Humke; Clarissa Wittler; Christoph Würnschimmel; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix K H Chun; Philipp Mandel; Luis A Kluth Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-12-09