Erratum: Age-adjusted validation of the most stringent criteria for active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer patients (Cancer DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26234);Age-adjusted validation of the most stringent criteria for active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer patients

Cancer

Volumn 118, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 973-980

  Suardi, Nazareno ^a   Gallina, Andrea ^a   Capitanio, Umberto ^a   Salonia, Andrea ^a   Lughezzani, Giovanni ^a   Freschi, Massimo ^a   Mottrie, Alexander ^b   Rigatti, Patrizio ^a   Montorsi, Francesco ^a   Briganti, Alberto ^a  

^a VITA SALUTE SAN RAFFAELE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^b OLV HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

active surveillance; age; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT MONITORING; PATIENT SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; VALIDATION STUDY; AGE DISTRIBUTION; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER RISK; LOW RISK PATIENT; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATECTOMY;

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

EID: 84856778646     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26532     Document Type: Erratum

References (29)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008; 58: 71-96.
2. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL, 3rd, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 1310-1319.
3. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 1320-1328.
4. Hardie C, Parker C, Norman A, et al. Early outcomes of active surveillance for localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2005; 95: 956-960.
5. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S, Ayyathurai R, Kava B, Manoharan M,. Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the Miami experience. BJU Int. 2008; 101: 165-169.
6. Klotz L,. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: for whom? J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 8165-8169.
7. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, et al. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol. 2007; 178: 2359-2364; discussion 2364-2365.
8. Ercole B, Marietti SR, Fine J, Albertsen PC,. Outcomes following active surveillance of men with localized prostate cancer diagnosed in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2008; 180: 1336-1339; discussion 1340-1341.
9. Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, de Vries SH, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in 3 subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol. 2007; 51: 1244-1250; discussion 1251.
10. Stattin P, Holmberg E, Bratt O, Adolfsson J, Johansson JE, Hugosson J,. Surveillance and deferred treatment for localized prostate cancer. Population based study in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden. J Urol. 2008; 180: 2423-2429; discussion 2429-2430.
11. Venkitaraman R, Norman A, Woode-Amissah R, et al. Predictors of histological disease progression in untreated, localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2007; 178 (3 pt 1): 833-837.
12. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol. 2009; 55: 1-8.
13. Warlick C, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Carter HB,. Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98: 355-357.
14. Ploussard G, Xylinas E, Salomon L, et al. The role of biopsy core number in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2009; 56: 891-898.
15. Suardi N, Capitanio U, Chun FK, et al. Currently used criteria for active surveillance in men with low-risk prostate cancer: an analysis of pathologic features. Cancer. 2008; 113: 2068-2072.
16. Richstone L, Bianco FJ, Shah HH, et al. Radical prostatectomy in men aged ≥yen;70 years: effect of age on upgrading, upstaging, and the accuracy of a preoperative nomogram. BJU Int. 2008; 101: 541-546.
17. Carter HB, Walsh PC, Landis P, Epstein JI,. Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: preliminary results. J Urol. 2002; 167: 1231-1234.
18. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB,. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA. 1994; 271: 368-374.
19. McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA,. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol. 1988; 12: 897-906.
20. Bastian PJ, Carter BH, Bjartell A, et al. Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: from definition to clinical implications. Eur Urol. 2009; 55: 1321-1330.
21. van As NJ, Norman AR, Thomas K, et al. Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2008; 54: 1297-1305.
22. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A,. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 126-131.
23. Kane CJ, Im R, Amling CL, et al. Outcomes after radical prostatectomy among men who are candidates for active surveillance: results from the SEARCH database. Urology. 2010; 76: 695-700.
24. Suardi N, Briganti A, Gallina A, et al. Testing the most stringent criteria for selection of candidates for active surveillance in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2010; 105: 1548-1552.
25. Chun FK, Suardi N, Capitanio U, et al. Assessment of pathological prostate cancer characteristics in men with favorable biopsy features on predominantly sextant biopsy [serial online]. Eur Urol. 2009; 55: 617-628-6.
26. Smaldone MC, Cowan JE, Carroll PR, Davies BJ,. Eligibility for active surveillance and pathological outcomes for men undergoing radical prostatectomy in a large, community based cohort. J Urol. 2010; 183: 138-143.
27. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J,. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2005; 293: 2095-2101.
28. Magheli A, Rais-Bahrami S, Humphreys EB, Peck HJ, Trock BJ, Gonzalgo ML,. Impact of patient age on biochemical recurrence rates following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2007; 178: 1933-1937; discussion 1937-1938.
29. Eggener SE, Mueller A, Berglund RK, et al. A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2009; 181: 1635-1641; discussion 1641.