Identification of candidates for active surveillance: Should we change the current paradigm?

Clinical Genitourinary Cancer

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 499-504

  Alcover, Joan ^a   Filella, Xavier ^a  

^a HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Gleason score; Insignificant prostate cancer; Prostate cancer; PSA

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CYSTECTOMY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MALE; NOMOGRAM; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL RATE; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TUMOR VOLUME; CANCER GRADING; HEALTH SURVEY; METABOLISM; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84947869682     PISSN: 15587673     EISSN: 19380682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2015.06.001     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. A. Horwich, C. Parker, C. Bangma, et al. ESMO Guidelines Working Group Prostate cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up Ann Oncol 21 suppl 5 2010 v129 v133
2. J. Ferlay, H.R. Shin, F. Bray, and et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008 Int J Cancer 127 2010 2893 2917
3. R. Siegel, D. Naishadham, and A. Jemal Cancer statistics, 2013 CA Cancer J Clin 63 2013 11 30
4. N. Howlader, A.M. Noone, M. Krapcho, and et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2012, based on November 2014 SEER data submission 2015 National Cancer Institute Bethesda, MD Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2012/ Accessed: July 14, 2015
5. W.A. Sakr, D.J. Grignon, J.D. Crissman, and et al. High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and prostatic adenocarcinoma between the ages of 20-69: an autopsy study of 249 cases In Vivo 8 1994 439 443
6. C. Gosselaar, M.J. Roobol, and F.H. Schröder Prevalence and characteristics of screen-detected prostate carcinomas at low prostate-specific antigen levels: aggressive or insignificant? BJU Int 95 2005 231 237
7. L. Klotz Cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatment Curr Opin Urol 22 2012 203 209
8. A.V. D'Amico, R. Whittington, S.B. Malkowicz, and et al. Clinical utility of the percentage of positive prostate biopsies in defining biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 18 2000 1164 1172
9. J.L. Stanford, Z. Feng, A.S. Hamilton, and et al. Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study JAMA 283 2000 354 360
10. A.S. Hamilton, J.L. Stanford, F.D. Gilliland, and et al. Health outcomes after external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study J Clin Oncol 19 2001 2517 2526
11. 125I prostate implantation Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 28 1994 985 990
12. D. Theodorescu, J.Y. Gillenwater, and P.G. Koutrouvelis Prostatourethral-rectal fistula after prostate brachytherapy Cancer 89 2000 2085 2091
13. D.Y. Gelblum, and L. Potters Rectal complications associated with transperineal interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48 2000 119 124
14. F.H. Schröder, J. Hugosson, M.J. Roobol, and et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study N Engl J Med 360 2009 1320 1328
15. G. Draisma, R. Postma, F.H. Schröder, and et al. Gleason score, age and screening: modeling dedifferentiation in prostate cancer Int J Cancer 119 2006 2366 2371
16. T.J. Wilt The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial: VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2012 2012 184 190
17. H.B. Carter, A.W. Partin, P.C. Walsh, and et al. Gleason score 6 adenocarcinoma: should it be labeled as cancer? J Clin Oncol 30 2012 4294 4296
18. P.A. Abrahamsson, W. Artibani, C.R. Chapple, and et al. European Association of Urology position statement on screening for prostate cancer Eur Urol 56 2009 270 271
19. B.R. Konety, V.Y. Bird, S. Deorah, and et al. Comparison of the incidence of latent prostate cancer detected at autopsy before and after the prostate specific antigen era J Urol 174 2005 1785 1788
20. A.R. Rich On the frequency of occurrence of occult carcinoma of the prostrate Int J Epidemiol 36 2007 274 277
21. T.A. Stamey, F.S. Freiha, J.E. McNeal, and et al. Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer Cancer 71 3 suppl 1993 933 938
22. J.I. Epstein, P.C. Walsh, M. Carmichael, and et al. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer JAMA 271 1994 368 374
23. J.I. Epstein, D.W. Chan, L.J. Sokoll, and et al. Nonpalpable stage T1c prostate cancer: prediction of insignificant disease using free/total prostate specific antigen levels and needle biopsy findings J Urol 160 1998 2407 2411
24. M. Ohori, F. Abbas, T.M. Wheeler, and et al. Pathological features and prognostic significance of prostate cancer in the apical section determined by whole mount histology J Urol 161 1999 500 504
25. C.H. Bangma, M.J. Roobol, and E.W. Steyerberg Predictive models in diagnosing indolent cancer Cancer 115 13 suppl 2009 3100 3106
26. J.A. Dugan, D.G. Bostwick, R.P. Myers, and et al. The definition and preoperative prediction of clinically insignificant prostate cancer JAMA 275 1996 288 294
27. S. Roemeling, M.J. Roobol, M.W. Kattan, and et al. Nomogram use for the prediction of indolent prostate cancer: impact on screen-detected populations Cancer 110 2007 2218 2221
28. P.J. Bastian, L.A. Mangold, J.I. Epstein, and et al. Characteristics of insignificant clinical T1c prostate tumors. A contemporary analysis Cancer 101 2004 2001 2005
29. J.R. Srigley, M.B. Amin, J.I. Epstein, and et al. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the prostate gland Arch Pathol Lab Med 130 2006 936 946
30. J.I. Epstein, W.C. Allsbrook Jr., M.B. Amin, et al. ISUP Grading Committee The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma Am J Surg Pathol 29 2005 1228 1242
31. F. Brimo, R. Montironi, L. Egevad, and et al. Contemporary grading for prostate cancer: implications for patient care Eur Urol 63 2013 892 901
32. C.R. King Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications Int J Cancer 90 2000 305 311
33. M.S. Cookson, N.E. Fleshner, S.M. Soloway, and et al. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications J Urol 157 1997 559 562
34. D. Thickman, W.C. Speers, P.J. Philpott, and et al. Effect of the number of core biopsies of the prostate on predicting Gleason score of prostate cancer J Urol 156 1996 110 113
35. N.E. Fleshner, M.S. Cookson, S.M. Soloway, and et al. Repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a strategy to improve the reliability of needle biopsy grading in patients with well-differentiated prostate cancer Urology 52 1998 659 662
36. K.R. Ghani, K. Grigor, D.N. Tulloch, and et al. Trends in reporting Gleason score 1991 to 2001: changes in the pathologist's practice Eur Urol 47 2005 196 201
37. C.J. Kane, J.C. Presti Jr., C.L. Amling, and et al. Changing nature of high risk patients undergoing radical prostatectomy J Urol 177 2007 113 117
38. A.V. D'Amico, M.H. Chen, J. Oh-Ung, and et al. Changing prostate-specific antigen outcome after surgery or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer during the prostate-specific antigen era Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 54 2002 436 441
39. P.A. Kupelian, J.C. Buchsbaum, M.A. Elshaikh, and et al. Improvement in relapse-free survival throughout the PSA era in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy: year of treatment an independent predictor of outcome Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57 2003 629 634
40. O.N. Gofrit, K.C. Zorn, G.D. Steinberg, and et al. The Will Rogers phenomenon in urological oncology J Urol 179 2008 28 33
41. W.R. Lee Improvement in prostate cancer survival over time: a 20-year analysis: the Will Rogers phenomenon returns Cancer J 18 2012 9 10
42. P.C. Albertsen, J.A. Hanley, and J. Fine 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer JAMA 293 2005 2095 2101
43. D.B. Chism, A.L. Hanlon, P. Troncoso, and et al. The Gleason score shift: score four and seven years ago Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56 2003 1241 1247
44. P.C. Albertsen, J.A. Hanley, G.H. Barrows, and et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon J Natl Cancer Inst 97 2005 1248 1253
45. 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
46. G. Ploussard, H. Isbarn, A. Briganti, et al. Members of the Prostate Cancer Working Group of the Young Academic Urologists Working Party of the European Association of Urology Can we expand active surveillance criteria to include biopsy Gleason 3 + 4 prostate cancer? A multi-institutional study of 2,323 patients Urol Oncol 33 2015 71.e1 71.e9
47. M.A. Dall'Era, P.C. Albertsen, C. Bangma, and et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature Eur Urol 62 2012 976 983
48. C.H. Bangma, M. Bul, T.H. van der Kwast, and et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 85 2013 295 302
49. M.W. Kattan, J.A. Eastham, T.M. Wheeler, and et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors J Urol 170 2003 1792 1797
50. E.W. Steyerberg, M.J. Roobol, M.W. Kattan, and et al. Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram J Urol 177 2007 107 112
51. F. Dong, M.W. Kattan, E.W. Steyerberg, and et al. Validation of pretreatment nomograms for predicting indolent prostate cancer: efficacy in contemporary urological practice J Urol 180 2008 150 154
52. H. Nakanishi, X. Wang, A. Ochiai, and et al. A nomogram for predicting low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer: a tool in selecting patients for active surveillance Cancer 110 2007 2441 2447
53. F.K. Chun, A. Haese, S.A. Ahyai, and et al. Critical assessment of tools to predict clinically insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in contemporary men Cancer 113 2008 701 709
54. A. Semjonow, B. Brandt, F. Oberpenning, and et al. Discordance of assay methods creates pitfalls for the interpretation of prostate-specific antigen values Prostate Suppl 7 1996 3 16
55. F.H. Jansen, M. Roobol, C.H. Bangma, and et al. Clinical impact of new prostate-specific antigen WHO standardization on biopsy rates and cancer detection Clin Chem 54 2008 1999 2006
56. C. Stephan, M. Klaas, C. Muller, and et al. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update Clin Chem 52 2006 59 64
57. C. Stephan, J. Kramer, H.A. Meyer, and et al. Different prostate-specific antigen assays give different results on the same blood sample: an obstacle to recommending uniform limits for prostate biopsies BJU Int 99 2007 1427 1431
58. L. Foj, X. Filella, J. Alcover, and et al. Variability of assay methods for total and free PSA after WHO standardization Tumour Biol 35 2014 1867 1873
59. J.C. Forde, L. Marignol, O. Blake, and et al. Standardization of assay methods reduces variability of total PSA measurements: an Irish study BJU Int 110 2012 644 650
60. A. Heidenreich, P.J. Bastian, J. Bellmunt, and et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013 Eur Urol 65 2014 124 137
61. X. Filella, J. Alcover, and R. Molina Active surveillance in prostate cancer: the need to standardize Tumour Biol 32 2011 839 843
62. K.L. Greene, P.C. Albertsen, R.J. Babaian, and et al. Prostate specific antigen best practice statement: 2009 update J Urol 182 2009 2232 2241
63. X. Filella, and L. Foj Emerging biomarkers in the detection and prognosis of prostate cancer Clin Chem Lab Med 53 2015 963 973