Identification of pathologically favorable disease in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients: Implications for active surveillance candidates selection

Prostate

Volumn 75, Issue 13, 2015, Pages 1484-1491

  Gandaglia, Giorgio ^a   Schiffmann, Jonas ^b   Schlomm, Thorsten ^b   Fossati, Nicola ^a   Moschini, Marco ^a   Suardi, Nazareno ^a   Chun, Felix K H ^b   Montorsi, Francesco ^a   Graefen, Markus ^b   Briganti, Alberto ^a  

^a SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

Author keywords

active surveillance; biochemical recurrence; favorable disease; final pathology; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ACCURACY; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RISK; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; DECISION CURVE ANALYSIS; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMEDIATE RISK PATIENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NOMOGRAM; PATHOLOGICALLY FAVORABLE PROSTATE CANCER; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; PATIENT SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; SURVIVAL RATE; SURVIVAL TIME; TUMOR VOLUME; VALIDATION STUDY; ADENOCARCINOMA; FOLLOW UP; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGED; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84939205035     PISSN: 02704137     EISSN: 10970045     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pros.23040     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, Mason M, Matveev V, Wiegel T, Zattoni F, Mottet N,. European Association of U. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 2014; 65 (1): 124-137.
2. Budaus L, Spethmann J, Isbarn H, Schmitges J, Beesch L, Haese A, Salomon G, Schlomm T, Fisch M, Heinzer H, Huland H, Graefen M, Steuber T., Inverse stage migration in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: Results of 8916 European patients treated within the last decade. BJU Int 2011; 108 (8): 1256-1261.
3. Jacobs BL, Zhang Y, Schroeck FR, Skolarus TA, Wei JT, Montie JE, Gilbert SM, Strope SA, Dunn RL, Miller DC, Hollenbeck BK., Use of advanced treatment technologies among men at low risk of dying from prostate cancer. JAMA 2013; 309 (24): 2587-2595.
4. Faisal FA, Sundi D, Pierorazio PM, Ball MW, Humphreys EB, Han M, Epstein JI, Partin AW, Carter HB, Bivalacqua TJ, Schaeffer EM, Ross AE., Outcomes of men with an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level as their sole preoperative intermediate- or high-risk feature. BJU Int 2014; 114: E120-E129.
5. Jung JW, Lee JK, Hong SK, Byun SS, Lee SE., Stratification of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2014; 115: 907-912.
6. Mullins JK, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Loeb S., The impact of anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy on cancer control: The 30-year anniversary. J Urol 2012; 188 (6): 2219-2224.
7. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML., Mayo Clinic validation of the D'amico risk group classification for predicting survival following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2008; 179 (4): 1354-1360; discussion 1360-1351.
8. Hong SK, Vertosick E, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA., Insignificant disease among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. World J Urol 2014; 32 (6): 1417-1421.
9. Abern MR, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Presti JC Jr., Amling CL, Freedland SJ., Delayed radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with biochemical recurrence: Possible implications for active surveillance from the SEARCH database. Prostate 2013; 73 (4): 409-417.
10. Ploussard G, Isbarn H, Briganti A, Sooriakumaran P, Surcel CI, Salomon L, Freschi M, Mirvald C, van der Poel HG, Jenkins A, Ost P, van Oort IM, Yossepowitch O, Giannarini G, van den Bergh RC, Members of the prostate cancer working group of the young academic urologists working party of the European association of U. Can we expand active surveillance criteria to include biopsy Gleason 3-+-4 prostate cancer? A multi-institutional study of 2,323 patients. Urol Oncol 2014; 33: 71.e1-e9.
11. Reese AC, Pierorazio PM, Han M, Partin AW., Contemporary evaluation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network prostate cancer risk classification system. Urology 2012; 80 (5): 1075-1079.
12. Moschini M, Gandaglia G, Suardi N, Fossati N, Cucchiara V, Damiano R, Cantiello F, Shariat SF, Montorsi F, Briganti A., Importance of prostate volume in the stratification of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2015, in press.
13. Schiffmann J, Connan J, Salomon G, Boehm K, Beyer B, Schlomm T, Tennstedt P, Sauter G, Karakiewicz PI, Graefen M, Huland H., Tumor volume in insignificant prostate cancer: Increasing threshold gains increasing risk. Prostate 2015; 75 (1): 45-49.
14. Boorjian SA, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guillonneau B, Karnes RJ, Moul JW, Schaeffer EM, Stief C, Zorn KC., A critical analysis of the long-term impact of radical prostatectomy on cancer control and function outcomes. Eur Urol 2012; 61 (4): 664-675.
15. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, Reese AC, Zaid HB, Porten SP, Shinohara K, Meng MV, Greene KL, Carroll PR., Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29 (2): 228-234.
16. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, Gingrich JR, Wei JT, Gilhooly P, Grob BM, Nsouli I, Iyer P, Cartagena R, Snider G, Roehrborn C, Sharifi R, Blank W, Pandya P, Andriole GL, Culkin D, Wheeler T,. Prostate Cancer Intervention versus Observation Trial Study G. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 (3): 203-213.
17. Bul M, van den Bergh RC, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Vasarainen H, Bangma CH, Schroder FH, Roobol MJ., Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110 (11): 1672-1677.
18. Godtman RA, Holmberg E, Khatami A, Stranne J, Hugosson J., Outcome following active surveillance of men with screen-detected prostate cancer. Results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol 2013; 63 (1): 101-107.
19. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB., Decision curve analysis: A novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006; 26 (6): 565-574.
20. Epstein JI, Chan DW, Sokoll LJ, Walsh PC, Cox JL, Rittenhouse H, Wolfert R, Carter HB., Nonpalpable stage T1c prostate cancer: Prediction of insignificant disease using free/total prostate specific antigen levels and needle biopsy findings. J Urol 1998; 160 (6 Pt 2): 2407-2411.
21. Pierorazio PM, Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI., Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: Data based on the modified Gleason scoring system. BJU Int 2013; 111 (5): 753-760.
22. Miyamoto H, Hernandez DJ, Epstein JI., A pathological reassessment of organ-confined, Gleason score 6 prostatic adenocarcinomas that progress after radical prostatectomy. Hum Pathol 2009; 40 (12): 1693-1698.
23. Hernandez DJ, Nielsen ME, Han M, Trock BJ, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Epstein JI., Natural history of pathologically organ-confined (pT2), Gleason score 6 or less, prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2008; 72 (1): 172-176.
24. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ Jr., Yossepowitch O, Vickers AJ, Klein EA, Wood DP, Scardino PT., Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27 (26): 4300-4305.
25. Resnick MJ, Koyama T, Fan KH, Albertsen PC, Goodman M, Hamilton AS, Hoffman RM, Potosky AL, Stanford JL, Stroup AM, Van Horn RL, Penson DF., Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2013; 368 (5): 436-445.
26. Delahunt B, Miller RJ, Srigley JR, Evans AJ, Samaratunga H., Gleason grading: Past, present and future. Histopathology 2012; 60 (1): 75-86.
27. Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO, Bjartell AS, Montorsi F, Freedland SJ, Erbersdobler A, van der Kwast TH., The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011; 60 (2): 291-303.
28. Merrill MM, Lane BR, Reuther AM, Zhou M, Magi-Galluzzi C, Klein EA., Tumor volume does not predict for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with surgical Gleason score 6 or less prostate cancer. Urology 2007; 70 (2): 294-298.
29. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, van den Bergh RC, Hoedemaeker RF, van Leenders GJ, Schroder FH, van der Kwast TH., 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.
30. 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 (1): 126-131.
31. Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, Taneja SS, Thoeny H, Villeirs G, Villers A., Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015, in press.
32. Loeb S, Bruinsma SM, Nicholson J, Briganti A, Pickles T, Kakehi Y, Carlsson SV, Roobol MJ., Active surveillance for prostate aancer: A systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification. Eur Urol 2015; 67 (4): 619-626.
33. Bostrom PJ, Bjartell AS, Catto JW, Eggener SE, Lilja H, Loeb S, Schalken J, Schlomm T, Cooperberg MR,. Genomic predictors of outcome in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015, in press.