BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is associated with favorable outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. We assessed its effect on the risk of PCa reclassification (PCaR) during active surveillance. METHODS: Anthropometric, demographic, and clinical data concerning men diagnosed with a low-risk PCa and initially managed with active surveillance at the two participating institutions were retrospectively collected. The Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) was used for patients' self-assessment of their daily exercise and their consequent stratification into three groups: sedentary (PASE ≤ 65), moderately active (65 < PASE < 125), active (PASE ≥ 125). Kaplan-Meier model was used to evaluate the predictive role of PA on PCaR, computed at 2, 5, 10 years after diagnosis; differences between lifestyle groups were assessed using the log-rank and uni-/multivariable Cox analyses applied to identify predictors of reclassification. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included in the analysis, with a median age of 66 years (IQR: 59-70); 16% were active, 45% were former smokers, and 3 presented with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density was 0.12 (IQR: 0.07-0.15); 34 men showed a PSA doubling time <10 years. The Median PASE score was 86 (IQR: 61.5-115.8): 24 patients were sedentary, 46 moderately active, and 15 active. At a median follow-up of 37 months (IQR: 14-53), 25% of patients experienced PCaR. These were less physically active (PASE score 69.3 vs 87.8; p = 0.056) and presented with significantly smaller prostates (46 ml vs 50.7 ml; p = 0.001) and a higher PSAD (0.14 vs 0.10; p = 0.019). At 2 years, the risk of reclassification was 25 ± 5%, while it was 38 ± 7% at both 5 and 10 years. The risk was significantly different in the three PA groups (Log Rank p = 0.033). PASE score was the only independent predictor of PCaR (HR: 0.987; 95%CI: 0.977-0.998; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: PA influences PCa evolution, as increasing levels are associated with a significantly reduced risk of tumor reclassification among patients undergoing active surveillance.
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is associated with favorable outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. We assessed its effect on the risk of PCa reclassification (PCaR) during active surveillance. METHODS: Anthropometric, demographic, and clinical data concerning men diagnosed with a low-risk PCa and initially managed with active surveillance at the two participating institutions were retrospectively collected. The Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) was used for patients' self-assessment of their daily exercise and their consequent stratification into three groups: sedentary (PASE ≤ 65), moderately active (65 < PASE < 125), active (PASE ≥ 125). Kaplan-Meier model was used to evaluate the predictive role of PA on PCaR, computed at 2, 5, 10 years after diagnosis; differences between lifestyle groups were assessed using the log-rank and uni-/multivariable Cox analyses applied to identify predictors of reclassification. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included in the analysis, with a median age of 66 years (IQR: 59-70); 16% were active, 45% were former smokers, and 3 presented with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density was 0.12 (IQR: 0.07-0.15); 34 men showed a PSA doubling time <10 years. The Median PASE score was 86 (IQR: 61.5-115.8): 24 patients were sedentary, 46 moderately active, and 15 active. At a median follow-up of 37 months (IQR: 14-53), 25% of patients experienced PCaR. These were less physically active (PASE score 69.3 vs 87.8; p = 0.056) and presented with significantly smaller prostates (46 ml vs 50.7 ml; p = 0.001) and a higher PSAD (0.14 vs 0.10; p = 0.019). At 2 years, the risk of reclassification was 25 ± 5%, while it was 38 ± 7% at both 5 and 10 years. The risk was significantly different in the three PA groups (Log Rank p = 0.033). PASE score was the only independent predictor of PCaR (HR: 0.987; 95%CI: 0.977-0.998; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: PA influences PCa evolution, as increasing levels are associated with a significantly reduced risk of tumor reclassification among patients undergoing active surveillance.
Authors: Stacy Loeb; Marc A Bjurlin; Joseph Nicholson; Teuvo L Tammela; David F Penson; H Ballentine Carter; Peter Carroll; Ruth Etzioni Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Vidit Sharma; Kevin M Wymer; Bijan J Borah; Daniel A Barocas; R Houston Thompson; R Jeffrey Karnes; Stephen A Boorjian Journal: J Urol Date: 2019-10-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Dean Ornish; Gerdi Weidner; William R Fair; Ruth Marlin; Elaine B Pettengill; Caren J Raisin; Stacey Dunn-Emke; Lila Crutchfield; F Nicholas Jacobs; R James Barnard; William J Aronson; Patricia McCormac; Damien J McKnight; Jordan D Fein; Ann M Dnistrian; Jeanmaire Weinstein; Tung H Ngo; Nancy R Mendell; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: A D Vandersluis; D E Guy; L H Klotz; N E Fleshner; A Kiss; C Parker; V Venkateswaran Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Joanne Frattaroli; Gerdi Weidner; Ann M Dnistrian; Colleen Kemp; Jennifer J Daubenmier; Ruth O Marlin; Lila Crutchfield; Loren Yglecias; Peter R Carroll; Dean Ornish Journal: Urology Date: 2008-07-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: David E Guy; Avi Vandersluis; Laurence H Klotz; Neil Fleshner; Alexander Kiss; Chris Parker; Vasundara Venkateswaran Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Efthymios Papadopoulos; Shabbir M H Alibhai; George A Tomlinson; Andrew G Matthew; Michael Nesbitt; Antonio Finelli; John Trachtenberg; Daniel Santa Mina Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2019-07-15 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Antonio Cicione; Aldo Brassetti; Riccardo Lombardo; Antonio Franco; Beatrice Turchi; Simone D'Annunzio; Antonio Nacchia; Andrea Tubaro; Giuseppe Simone; Cosimo De Nunzio Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 6.639