Defining and predicting indolent and low risk prostate cancer

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

Volumn 83, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 235-241

  Bangma, Chris H ^a   Roobol, Monique J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Indolent disease; Low risk disease; Nomogram; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

CANCER GROWTH; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER RISK; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; NOMOGRAM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EARLY DIAGNOSIS; HUMANS; MALE; NOMOGRAMS; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84864033039     PISSN: 10408428     EISSN: 18790461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2011.10.003     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Hudson T., Denis L.J. Europa Uomo: the European prostate cancer coalition. Recent Results Cancer Res 2007, 175:267-271.
2. Schroder F.H., et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009, 360(13):1320-1328.
3. Gosselaar C., Roobol M.J., Schroder F.H. Prevalence and characteristics of screen-detected prostate carcinomas at low prostate-specific antigen levels: aggressive or insignificant?. BJU Int 2005, 95(2):231-237.
4. Roemeling S., et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol 2007, 51(5):1244-1250. [Discussion 1251].
5. Bangma C.H., Roobol M.J., Steyerberg E.W. Predictive models in diagnosing indolent cancer. Cancer 2009, 115(Suppl. 13):3100-3106.
6. Bangma C.H., Roemeling S., Schroder F.H. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of early detected prostate cancer. World J Urol 2007, 25(1):3-9.
7. Welch H.G., Schwartz L.M., Woloshin S. Prostate-specific antigen levels in the United States: implications of various definitions for abnormal. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005, 97(15):1132-1137.
8. Miocinovic R., et al. Acceptance and durability of surveillance as a management choice in men with screen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer: improved outcomes with stringent enrollment criteria. Urology 2011, 77(4):980-984.
9. Lapointe J., et al. Genomic profiling reveals alternative genetic pathways of prostate tumorigenesis. Cancer Res 2007, 67(18):8504-8510.
10. Nonn L., et al. mRNA and micro-RNA expression analysis in laser-capture microdissected prostate biopsies: valuable tool for risk assessment and prevention trials. Exp Mol Pathol 2010, 88(1):45-51.
11. Ohori M., et al. The pathological features and prognosis of prostate cancer detectable with current diagnostic tests. J Urol 1994, 152(5 Pt 2):1714-1720.
12. Epstein J.I., et al. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994, 271(5):368-374.
13. Stamey T.A., et al. Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 1993, 71(Suppl. 3):933-938.
14. Wolters T., et al. A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol 2011, 185(1):121-125.
15. McLaren D.B., et al. Watchful waiting or watchful progression? Prostate specific antigen doubling times and clinical behavior in patients with early untreated prostate carcinoma. Cancer 1998, 82(2):342-348.
16. Braeckman J., et al. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasonography supplemented with computer-aided ultrasonography for detecting small prostate cancers. BJU Int 2008, 102(11):1560-1565.
17. Dickinson L., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011, 59(4):477-494.
18. Epstein J.I., et al. Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy?. A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of followup. J Urol 1993, 149(6):1478-1481.
19. Damiano R., et al. Clinicopathologic features of prostate adenocarcinoma incidentally discovered at the time of radical cystectomy: an evidence-based analysis. Eur Urol 2007, 52(3):648-657.
20. van den Bergh R.C., et al. Short-term outcomes of the prospective multicentre 'Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance' study. BJU Int 2010, 105(7):956-962.
21. Steyerberg E.W., et al. Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 2007, 177(1):107-112. [Discussion 112].
22. Kattan M.W., et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors. J Urol 2003, 170(5):1792-1797.
23. Kattan M.W., et al. Nomogram incorporating PSA level to predict cancer-specific survival for men with clinically localized prostate cancer managed without curative intent. Cancer 2008, 112(1):69-74.
24. Dong F., et al. Validation of pretreatment nomograms for predicting indolent prostate cancer: efficacy in contemporary urological practice. J Urol 2008, 180(1):150-154. [Discussion 154].
25. Bul M., et al. Updating the prostate cancer risk indicator for contemporary biopsy schemes. Can J Urol 2011, 18(2):5625-5629.
26. Nakanishi H., et al. A nomogram for predicting low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer: a tool in selecting patients for active surveillance. Cancer 2007, 110(11):2441-2447.
27. Vickers A., et al. Reducing unnecessary biopsy during prostate cancer screening using a four-kallikrein panel: an independent replication. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28(15):2493-2498.
28. van den Bergh R.C., et al. The prostate cancer prevention trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators indicating a positive prostate biopsy: a comparison. BJU Int 2008, 102(9):1068-1073.
29. Trottier G., Lawrentschuk N., Fleshner N.E. Prevention strategies in prostate cancer. Curr Oncol 2010, 17(Suppl. 2):S4-S10.
30. Cavadas V., et al. Prostate cancer prevention trial and European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer risk calculators: a performance comparison in a contemporary screened cohort. Eur Urol 2010, 58(4):551-558.
31. Oliveira M., et al. Head-to-head comparison of two online nomograms for prostate biopsy outcome prediction. BJU Int 2011, 107(11):1780-1783.
32. Cooperberg M.R. Prostate cancer risk assessment: choosing the sharpest tool in the shed. Cancer 2008, 113(11):3062-3066.
33. Albertsen P.C., et al. Impact of comorbidity on survival among men with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29(10):1335-1341.
34. Charlson M., et al. Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994, 47(11):1245-1251.
35. van Vugt H.A., et al. Prediction of prostate cancer in unscreened men: external validation of a risk calculator. Eur J Cancer 2011, 47(6):903-909.
36. Vickers A.J., Elkin E.B. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Mak 2006, 26(6):565-574.
37. Soloway M.S., et al. Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment. Eur Urol 2010, 58(6):831-835.
38. van As N.J., et al. Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. Eur Urol 2008, 54(6):1297-1305.
39. Tosoian J.J., et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the johns hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29(16):2185-2190.
40. Klotz L., et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28(1):126-131.
41. Vickers A.J., et al. A four-kallikrein panel predicts prostate cancer in men with recent screening: data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, Rotterdam. Clin Cancer Res 2010, 16(12):3232-3239.
42. Bangma C.H., et al. On the use of prostate-specific antigen for screening of prostate cancer in European Randomised Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer. Eur J Cancer 2010, 46(17):3109-3119.
43. Ankerst D.P., et al. Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3. J Urol 2008, 180(4):1303-1308. [Discussion 1308].
44. Wolters T., et al. The value of EZH2, p27(kip1), BMI-1 and MIB-1 on biopsy specimens with low-risk prostate cancer in selecting men with significant prostate cancer at prostatectomy. BJU Int 2010, 106(2):280-286.
45. Fradet V., et al. Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2010, 256(1):176-183.
46. Morgan V.A., et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring prostate cancer progression in patients managed by active surveillance. Br J Radiol 2011, 84(997):31-37.
47. Kattan M.W. Factors affecting the accuracy of prediction models limit the comparison of rival prediction models when applied to separate data sets. Eur Urol 2011, 59(4):566-567.