Compliance rates with the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) protocol and disease reclassification in noncompliers

European Urology

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 814-821

  Bokhorst, Leonard P ^a   Alberts, Arnout R ^a   Rannikko, Antti ^b   Valdagni, Riccardo ^c   Pickles, Tom ^d   Kakehi, Yoshiyuki ^e   Bangma, Chris H ^a   Roobol, Monique J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b HELSINKI UNIVERSITY CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^c NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

^d BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^e KAGAWA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Compliance; Disease progression; Prostate biopsy; Prostate specific antigen; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; KALLIKREIN; KALLIKREIN-RELATED PEPTIDASE 3, HUMAN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPLIANCE (PHYSICAL); CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; FOLLOW UP; GLEASON SCORE; HAZARD RATIO; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; BIOPSY; BLOOD; CANCER STAGING; DISEASE COURSE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PROCEDURES; PROSTATE TUMOR; RISK; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; WATCHFUL WAITING;

AGED; BIOPSY; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; DISEASE PROGRESSION; HUMANS; KALLIKREINS; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84942981657     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.012     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. M. Bul, X. Zhu, R. Valdagni, and et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study Eur Urol 63 2012 597 603
2. J.J. Tosoian, B.J. Trock, P. Landis, and et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience J Clin Oncol 29 2011 2185 2190
3. M.S. Soloway, C.T. Soloway, A. Eldefrawy, K. Acosta, B. Kava, and M. Manoharan Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment Eur Urol 58 2010 831 835
4. E.D. Selvadurai, M. Singhera, K. Thomas, and et al. Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer Eur Urol 64 2013 981 987
5. M.R. Cooperberg, J.E. Cowan, J.F. Hilton, and et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 29 2011 228 234
6. L. Klotz, D. Vesprini, P. Sethukavalan, and et al. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 33 2015 272 277
7. R.C. van den Bergh, S. Roemeling, M.J. Roobol, W. Roobol, F.H. Schroder, and C.H. Bangma Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study Eur Urol 52 2007 1560 1563
8. L. Bokhorst, A. Alberts, Y. Kakehi, and et al. Frequency of PSA testing in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer J Urol 193 2015 e755
9. S. Loeb, A. Vellekoop, H.U. Ahmed, and et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy Eur Urol. 64 2013 876 892
10. T. Mkinen, A. Auvinen, M. Hakama, U.H. Stenman, and T.L. Tammela Acceptability and complications of prostate biopsy in population-based PSA screening versus routine clinical practice: a prospective, controlled study Urology 60 2002 846 850
11. C.J. Welty, J.E. Cowan, H. Nguyen, and et al. Extended follow-up and risk factors for disease reclassification from a large active surveillance cohort for localized prostate cancer J Urol 193 2015 807 811
12. M. Kates, J.J. Tosoian, B.J. Trock, Z. Feng, H.B. Carter, and A.W. Partin Indications for intervention during active surveillance of prostate cancer: a comparison of the Johns Hopkins and PRIAS protocols BJU Int. 115 2015 216 222
13. M. Bul, R.C. van den Bergh, A. Rannikko, and et al. Predictors of unfavourable repeat biopsy results in men participating in a prospective active surveillance program Eur Urol 61 2012 370 377
14. I.G. Schoots, N. Petrides, F. Giganti, and et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review Eur Urol 67 2015 627 636
15. A.E. Ross, S. Loeb, P. Landis, and et al. Prostate-specific antigen kinetics during follow-up are an unreliable trigger for intervention in a prostate cancer surveillance program J Clin Oncol 28 2010 2810 2816
16. M. Bul, X. Zhu, A. Rannikko, and et al. Radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer following initial active surveillance: results from a prospective observational study Eur Urol 62 2012 195 200
17. C.F. Kweldam, M.F. Wildhagen, C.H. Bangma, and G.J. van Leenders Disease-specific death and metastasis do not occur in patients with Gleason score ≤6 on radical prostatectomy BJU Int 116 2015 230 235
18. H.M. Ross, O.N. Kryvenko, J.E. Cowan, J.P. Simko, T.M. Wheeler, and J.I. Epstein Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) ≤6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes? Am J Surg Pathol 36 2012 1346 1352