Literature DB >> 29793403

Active surveillance of men with low risk prostate cancer: evidence from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Victoria.

Melanie A Evans1, Jeremy L Millar2, Arul Earnest2, Mark Frydenberg3, Ian D Davis3, Declan G Murphy4, Paul Aidan Kearns5, Sue M Evans.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the practice of active surveillance (AS) for men with low risk prostate cancer by examining the characteristics of those who commence AS, the rate of adherence to accepted AS follow-up protocols over 2 years, and factors associated with good adherence. Design, setting: Retrospective cohort study; analysis of data collected from 38 sites participating in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Victoria. PARTICIPANTS: Men diagnosed with prostate cancer between August 2008 and December 2014 aged 75 years or less at diagnosis, managed by AS for at least 2 years, and with an ISUP grade group of 3 or less (Gleason score no worse than 4 + 3 = 7). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence to an AS schedule consisting of at least three PSA measurements and at least one biopsy in the 2 years following diagnosis.
RESULTS: Of 1635 men eligible for inclusion in the analysis, 433 (26.5%) adhered to the AS protocol. The significant predictor of adherence in the multivariate model was being diagnosed in a private hospital (v public hospital: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.83; 95% CI, 1.42-2.37; P < 0.001). Significant predictors of non-adherence included being diagnosed by transurethral resection of the prostate (v transrectal ultrasound biopsy [TRUS]: OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.77; P < 0.001) or transperineal biopsy (v TRUS: OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19-0.52; P < 0.001), and being 66 years of age or more at diagnosis (v < 55 years: OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.92; P = 0.015).
CONCLUSION: Almost three-quarters of men who had prostate cancer with low risk of disease progression did not have follow-up investigations consistent with standard AS protocols. The clinical consequences of this shortcoming are unknown.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Early detection of cancer; Education, public health; Health services research; Prevention and control; Preventive health services; Prostate; Prostatic neoplasms; Quality of health care

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29793403     DOI: 10.5694/mja17.00559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   7.738


  5 in total

Review 1.  Defining and Measuring Adherence in Observational Studies Assessing Outcomes of Real-world Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Glenda Kith; Sarah Lisker; Urmimala Sarkar; Jill Barr-Walker; Benjamin N Breyer; Nynikka R Palmer
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-07-06

2.  Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Anne Hogden; Kate Churruca; Frances Rapport; David Gillatt
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Comparison of urinary and sexual patient-reported outcomes between open radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score matched, population-based study in Victoria.

Authors:  Michael Rechtman; Andrew Forbes; Jeremy L Millar; Melanie Evans; Lachlan Dodds; Declan G Murphy; Sue M Evans
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Large variation in conservative management of low-risk prostate cancer in Australia and New Zealand.

Authors:  Wee Loon Ong; Isaac Thangasamy; Declan Murphy; Elizabeth Pritchard; Susan Evans; Jeremy Millar; Venu Chalasani; Prem Rashid; Matthew Winter; Ian Vela; David Pryor; Stephen Mark; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 5.969

5.  Natural history of prostate cancer on active surveillance: stratification by MRI using the PRECISE recommendations in a UK cohort.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Armando Stabile; Vasilis Stavrinides; Elizabeth Osinibi; Adam Retter; Clément Orczyk; Valeria Panebianco; Bruce J Trock; Alex Freeman; Aiman Haider; Shonit Punwani; Clare Allen; Alex Kirkham; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 5.315

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.