Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: Knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 177-181

  Gorin, M A ^a   Eldefrawy, A ^a   Ekwenna, O ^a   Soloway, M S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI MILLER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

active surveillance; survey; watchful waiting

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ARTICLE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; RESIDENCY EDUCATION; TUMOR VOLUME; UROLOGIST;

BIOPSY, NEEDLE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MALE; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUESTIONNAIRES; UROLOGY;

EID: 84861232311     PISSN: 13657852     EISSN: 14765608     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2011.57     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO et al. The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 291-303
2. Patel MI, DeConcini DT, Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Wheeler T, Scardino PT. An analysis of men with clinically localized prostate cancer who deferred definitive therapy. J Urol 2004; 171: 1520-1524
3. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, Metter EJ, Landis P, Walsh PC et al. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol 2007; 178: 2359-2364
4. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Shiraishi T, Ogawa O, Suzukamo Y, Fukuhara S et al. Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for active surveillance in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2008; 38: 122-128
5. Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Stauf F, Cooperberg MR et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 2008; 112: 2664-2670
6. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Aus G, Hugosson J, Rannikko AS et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1-8
7. 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
8. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Acosta K, Kava B, Manoharan M. Careful selection and close monitoring of lowrisk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 831-835
9. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 2007; 177: 2106-2131
10. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 61-71
11. National comprehensive cancer network clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer (version 4.2011). http://www.nccn.org/professionals/ physician-gls/pdf/prostate.pdf. Accessed 15 July 2011
12. Lawrentschuk N, Klotz L. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update. Nat Rev Urol 2011; 8: 312-320
13. Gorin MA, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Soloway MS. Factors that influence patient enrollment in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2011; 77: 588-591
14. Barocas DA, Cowan JE, SmithJr JA, Carroll PR. What percentage of patients with newly diagnosed carcinoma of the prostate are candidates for surveillance? An analysis of the CaPSURE database. J Urol 2008; 180: 1330-1334
15. van den Bergh RC, van Vugt HA, Korfage IJ, Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Schröder FH et al. Disease insight and treatment perception of men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 105: 322-328
16. van den Bergh RC, Essink-Bot ML, Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW. Do anxiety and distress increase during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer? J Urol 2010; 183: 1786-1791
17. Daubenmier JJ, Weidner G, Marlin R, Crutchfield L, Dunn-Emke S, Chi C et al. Lifestyle and health-related quality of life of men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance. Urology 2006; 67: 125-130
18. Holmboe ES, Concato J. Treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer: asking men what's important. J Gen Intern Med 2000; 15: 694-701
19. Berry DL, Ellis WJ, Woods NF, Schwien C, Mullen KH, Yang C. Treatment decision-making by men with localized prostate cancer: the influence of personal factors. Urol Oncol 2003; 21: 93-100
20. Davison BJ, Oliffe JL, Pickles T, Mroz L. Factors influencing men undertaking active surveillance for the management of low-risk prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2009; 36: 89-96
21. Hadway P, Barrett LK, Waghorn DJ, Hasan K, Bdesha A, Haldar N et al. Urosepsis and bacteraemia caused by antibioticresistant organisms after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2009; 104: 1556-1558
22. Lange D, Zappavigna C, Hamidizadeh R, Goldenberg SL, Paterson RF, Chew BH. Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy- a new perspective. Urology 2009; 74: 1200-1205
23. Klein T, Palisaar RJ, Holz A, Brock M, Noldus J, Hinkel A. The impact of prostate biopsy and periprostatic nerve block on erectile and voiding function: a prospective study. J Urol 2010; 184: 1447-1452
24. Raz O, Haider M, Trachtenberg J, Leibovici D, Lawrentschuk N. MRI for men undergoing active surveillance or with rising PSA and negative biopsies. Nat Rev Urol 2010; 7: 543-551
25. Rapp DE, Chanduri K, Infusino G, Hoda ZA, Orvieto MA, Elliott SP et al. Internet survey of management trends of urethral strictures. Urol Int 2008; 80: 287-290
26. Swartz M, Vasavada S, Goldman H. Perioperative management of patients undergoing sling surgery: a survey of US urologists. Urology 2010; 76: 314-317