Pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk prostate cancer meeting the Prostate Cancer International: Active Surveillance criteria

BJU International

Volumn 111, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 914-920

  Mitsuzuka, Koji ^a   Narita, Shintaro ^b   Koie, Takuya ^c   Kaiho, Yasuhiro ^a   Tsuchiya, Norihiko ^b   Yoneyama, Takahiro ^c   Kakoi, Narihiko ^d   Kawamura, Sadafumi ^d   Tochigi, Tatsuo ^d   Habuchi, Tomonori ^b   Ohyama, Chikara ^c   Arai, Yoichi ^a  

^a TOHOKU UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b AKITA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c HIROSAKI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d Miyagi Cancer Center   (Japan)

Author keywords

active surveillance; low risk prostate cancer; PRIAS; upgrading; upstaging

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOCHEMISTRY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; CANCER STAGING; COHORT ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; FOLLOW UP; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR VOLUME;

AGED; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR BURDEN; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84876895390     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11658.x     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J,. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005; 293: 2095-2101
2. Welch HG, Albertsen PC,. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen screening: 1986-2005. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 1325-1329
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: 414-418
4. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, et al. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 1560-1563
5. Hashimoto Y, Okamoto A, Imai A, et al. Biochemical outcome of small-volume or insignificant prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in Japanese population. Int J Clin Oncol 2012; 17: 119-122
6. 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
7. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, 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: 121-125
8. 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: 2274-2278
9. Conti SL, Dall'era M, Fradet V, et al. Pathological outcomes of candidates for active surveillance of prostate cancer. J Urol 2009; 181: 1628-1633
10. Louie-Johnsun M, Neill M, Treurnicht K, Jarmulowicz M, Eden C,. Final outcomes of patients with low-risk prostate cancer suitable for active surveillance but treated surgically. BJU Int 2009; 104: 1501-1504
11. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM,. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2011; 186: 1830-1834
12. Fradet V, Kurhanewicz J, Cowan JE, et al. Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2010; 256: 176-183
13. Morgan VA, Riches SF, Thomas K, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring prostate cancer progression in patients managed by active surveillance. Br J Radiol 2011; 84: 31-37
14. Abouassaly R, Lane BR, Jones JS,. Staging saturation biopsy in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance protocol. Urology 2008; 71: 573-577
15. Ploussard G, Durand X, Xylinas E, et al. Prostate cancer antigen 3 score accurately predicts tumour volume and might help in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 422-429
16. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 126-131
17. 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
18. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, 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: 831-835
19. Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 2185-2190
20. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 228-234
21. 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
22. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S, et al. Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the Miami experience. BJU Int 2008; 101: 165-169
23. Krakowsky Y, Loblaw A, Klotz L,. Prostate cancer death of men treated with initial active surveillance: clinical and biochemical characteristics. J Urol 2010; 184: 131-135