Active surveillance criteria for prostate cancer: Can they be applied to Japanese patients?

International Journal of Urology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 163-166

  Goto, Yusuke ^a   Nozumi, Kazuyoshi ^a   Miyazaki, Kanetaka ^a   Matsumoto, Akihiro ^a   Inoue, Atsushi ^a   Kito, Hiroki ^a   Hasegawa, Naoki ^a   Nagata, Maki ^a   Kakuta, Yukio ^a   Suzuki, Hiroyoshi ^b   Yamaguchi, Kunio ^a  

^a YOKOHAMA ROSAI HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b TOHO UNIVERSITY SAKURA MEDICAL CENTER   (Japan)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Criteria; Gleason upgrading; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; JAPANESE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY;

AGED; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; JAPAN; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84856211470     PISSN: 09198172     EISSN: 14422042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02900.x     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Committee for Establishment of the Guidelines on Screening for Prostate Cancer; Japanese Urological Association. Updated Japanese Urological Association Guidelines on prostate-specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer in 2010. 2010.
2. Sirovich BE, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence? JAMA 2003; 289: 1414-20.
3. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ etal. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009; 360: 1320-8.
4. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schröder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur. Urol. 2007; 52: 1560-3.
5. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C etal. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J. Urol. 2007; 178: 2359-65.
6. Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE etal. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 2008; 112: 2664-70.
7. Conti SL, Dall'era M, Fradet V, Cowan JE, Simko J, Carroll PR. Pathological outcomes of candidates for active surveillance of prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2009; 181: 1628-33.
8. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A etal. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010; 28: 126-31.
9. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Shiraishi T etal. Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for active surveillance in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. Jpn J. Clin. Oncol. 2008; 38: 122-8.
10. Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti JC Jr. Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 2007; 69: 495-9.
11. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC etal. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer mortality after radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2011; 185: 869-75.