Pathological findings at radical prostatectomy in patients initially managed by active surveillance: A comparative analysis

Prostate

Volumn 72, Issue 14, 2012, Pages 1573-1579

  Iremashvili, Viacheslav ^a   Manoharan, Murugesan ^a   Rosenberg, Daniel L ^a   Acosta, Kristell ^a   Soloway, Mark S ^a  

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

Author keywords

active surveillance; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOPSY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; SURGICAL PATIENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; BIOPSY; COHORT STUDIES; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84865504276     PISSN: 02704137     EISSN: 10970045     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pros.22507     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Wever E, Gulati R, Feuer E, de Koning H,. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: Importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101 (6): 374-383;.
2. 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 (4): 1628-1633; discussion 1633-1624.
3. Thaxton CS, Loeb S, Roehl KA, Kan D, Catalona WJ,. Treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for 3 published active surveillance protocols. Urology 2010; 75 (2): 414-418;.
4. Ploussard G, Salomon L, Xylinas E, Allory Y, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Abbou CC, de la Taille A,. Pathological findings and prostate specific antigen outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men eligible for active surveillance - Does the risk of misclassification vary according to biopsy criteria ? J Urol 2010; 183 (2): 539-544;.
5. Suardi N, Briganti A, Gallina A, Salonia A, Karakiewicz PI, Capitanio U, Freschi M, Cestari A, Guazzoni G, Rigatti P, Montorsi F,. Testing the most stringent criteria for selection of candidates for active surveillance in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 105 (11): 1548-1552;.
6. 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 (1): 138-143;.
7. O'Brien D, Loeb S, Carvalhal GF, McGuire BB, Kan D, Hofer MD, Casey JT, Helfand BT, Catalona WJ,. Delay of surgery in men with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2011; 185 (6): 2143-2147;.
8. 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 (5): 368-374;. (Pubitemid 24037911)
9. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ Jr, Dotan ZA, DiBlasio CJ, Reuther A, Klein EA, Kattan MW,. Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (28): 7005-7012;.
10. Duffield AS, Lee TK, Miyamoto H, Carter HB, Epstein JI,. Radical prostatectomy findings in patients in whom active surveillance of prostate cancer fails. J Urol 2009; 182 (5): 2274-2278;.
11. Patel AR, Jones JS,. Optimal biopsy strategies for the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2009; 19 (3): 232-237;.
12. van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, Aus G, Pihl CG, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, Hugosson J,. Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes ? Cancer 2010; 116 (5): 1281-1290;.
13. Dall'Era MA, Cowan JE, Simko J, Shinohara K, Davies B, Konety BR, Meng MV, Perez N, Greene K, Carroll PR,. Surgical management after active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: Pathological outcomes compared with men undergoing immediate treatment. BJU Int 2011; 107 (8): 1232-1237;.
14. Holmstrom B, Holmberg E, Egevad L, Adolfsson J, Johansson JE, Hugosson J, Stattin P,. Outcome of primary versus deferred radical prostatectomy in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden Follow-Up Study. J Urol 2010; 184 (4): 1322-1327;.
15. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Acosta K, Kava B, Manoharan M,. 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;.
16. Manoharan M, Civantos F, Kim SS, Gomez P, Soloway MS,. Visual estimate of percent of carcinoma predicts recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003; 170 (4 Pt 1): 1194-1198;. (Pubitemid 37108111)
17. Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Carter HB,. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: An update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29 (16): 2185-2190;.
18. Adamy A, Yee DS, Matsushita K, Maschino A, Cronin A, Vickers A, Guillonneau B, Scardino PT, Eastham JA,. Role of prostate specific antigen and immediate confirmatory biopsy in predicting progression during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2011; 185 (2): 477-482;.
19. San Francisco IF, Werner L, Regan MM, Garnick MB, Bubley G, DeWolf WC,. Risk stratification and validation of prostate specific antigen density as independent predictor of progression in men with low risk prostate cancer during active surveillance. J Urol 2011; 185 (2): 471-476;.
20. Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Stauf F, Cooperberg MR, Meng MV, Kane CJ, Perez N, Master VA, Carroll PR,. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 2008; 112 (12): 2664-2670;. (Pubitemid 351969209)
21. Egevad L, Allsbrook WC Jr, Epstein JI,. Current practice of diagnosis and reporting of prostate cancer on needle biopsy among genitourinary pathologists. Hum Pathol 2006; 37 (3): 292-297;. (Pubitemid 43277517)
22. Karram S, Trock BJ, Netto GJ, Epstein JI,. Should intervening benign tissue be included in the measurement of discontinuous foci of cancer on prostate needle biopsy? Correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Am J Surg Pathol 2011; 35 (9): 1351-1355;.