Published Ahead of Print on April 4, 2011 as /JCO J Clin Oncol by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION
|
|
- Andrea Reeves
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Published Ahead of Print on April 4, 2011 as /JCO The latest version is at JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Active Surveillance Program for Prostate Cancer: An Update of the Johns Hopkins Experience Jeffrey J. Tosoian, Bruce J. Trock, Patricia Landis, Zhaoyong Feng, Jonathan I. Epstein, Alan W. Partin, Patrick C. Walsh, and H. Ballentine Carter From The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, and Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD. Submitted September 30, 2010; accepted January 20, 2011; published online ahead of print at on April 4, Supported by The Patrick C. Walsh Prostate Cancer Research Fund and the Prostate Cancer Foundation. Presented in part at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Urological Association, May 31, 2010, San Francisco, CA. Authors disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article. Corresponding author: H. Ballentine Carter, MD, Department of Urology, Marburg 145, Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD ; hcarter@jhmi.edu by American Society of Clinical Oncology X/11/2999-1/$20.00 DOI: /JCO A B S T R A C T Purpose We assessed outcomes of men with prostate cancer enrolled in active surveillance. Patients and Methods Since 1995, a total of 769 men diagnosed with prostate cancer have been followed prospectively (median follow-up, 2.7 years; range, 0.01 to 15.0 years) on active surveillance. Enrollment criteria were for very-low-risk cancers, defined by clinical stage (T1c), prostate-specific antigen density 0.15 ng/ml, and prostate biopsy findings (Gleason score 6, two or fewer cores with cancer, and 50% cancer involvement of any core). Curative intervention was recommended on disease reclassification on the basis of biopsy criteria. The primary outcome was survival free of intervention, and secondary outcomes were rates of disease reclassification and exit from the program. Outcomes were compared between men who did and did not meet very-low-risk criteria. Results The median survival free of intervention was 6.5 years (range, 0.0 to 15.0 years) after diagnosis, and the proportions of men remaining free of intervention after 2, 5, and 10 years of follow-up were 81%, 59%, and 41%, respectively. Overall, 255 men (33.2%) underwent intervention at a median of 2.2 years (range, 0.6 to 10.2 years) after diagnosis; 188 men (73.7%) underwent intervention on the basis of disease reclassification on biopsy. The proportions of men who underwent curative intervention (P.026) or had biopsy reclassification (P.001) were significantly lower in men who met enrollment criteria than in those who did not. There were no prostate cancer deaths. Conclusion For carefully selected men, active surveillance with curative intent appears to be a safe alternative to immediate intervention. Limiting surveillance to very-low-risk patients may reduce the frequency of adverse outcomes. J Clin Oncol by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION There is concern that prostate cancer screening has led to the diagnosis and treatment of many cancers that would not have become life-threatening during a man s lifetime. 1 Recent studies have shown that the prevention of one death from prostate cancer may require active treatment of up to 48 men at a median follow-up of 9 years 2 and 12 men at a median follow-up of 14 years. 3 These findings emphasize the prevalence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer. 4 Today, the majority of men diagnosed with prostate cancer are older than age 65 years and have low- to intermediate-risk disease. 5 More than 90% of these patients will undergo active treatment that is unlikely to extend their life span, in contrast to younger patients or those with higher-risk disease. 5,6 Thus, unnecessary treatment of nonthreatening disease appears to be most common in older men. Active surveillance with curative intent is an alternative to immediate intervention that may reduce overtreatment. Men with cancers thought to pose minimal risk to life are monitored, and curative treatment is recommended if higher-risk features are detected during follow-up. In the short term, results from active surveillance studies have demonstrated a low risk of prostate cancer specific mortality Nonetheless, a prevailing concern is that surveillance may lead to a delay in treatment and may sacrifice the window of opportunity for cure. 13 Additional follow-up is necessary to more definitively address this issue. Since 1995, we have offered active surveillance as an alternative to immediate curative intervention in older men with presumed very-low-risk disease by American Society of Clinical Oncology 1 Copyright 2011 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
2 Tosoian et al The purpose of this study was to update the Johns Hopkins experience with active surveillance for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Cohort Enrollment and Follow-Up Since January 1995, older men presenting to our institution with verylow-risk prostate cancer (described in Patients and Methods) have been counseled that active surveillance is an acceptable alternative to immediate treatment. 14 Surveillance is primarily directed toward older patients, but men not meeting some criteria may elect to enroll because of comorbidities or for personal reasons if they have a Gleason score of 6. This observational cohort study has been approved by the institutional review board at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, and all patients provided informed consent before enrollment. Since 2005, 54.1% of men who were counseled that surveillance would be a reasonable option elected to enroll in the program. As previously described by Epstein et al, 15 and now endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 16 enrollment criteria aim to identify very-low-risk prostate cancer and include clinical stage T1c disease, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density less than 0.15 ng/ml, Gleason score 6, two or fewer biopsy cores with cancer, and a maximum of 50% involvement of any core with cancer. 15 Men meeting all criteria at diagnostic biopsy were classified as having very-low-risk disease. Our surveillance protocol includes semiannual PSA measurements (total and free) with digital rectal examination and annual 12- to 14-core surveillance biopsy (transition zone biopsies obtained routinely since 2009). Curative therapy was recommended on disease reclassification, which was defined by a surveillance biopsy in which biopsy enrollment criteria were no longer met (ie, upgrade to Gleason score 6, or two cores with cancer, or 50% cancer involvement of any core). Serum PSA concentration and PSA kinetics were not used as triggers for curative intervention. Notably, some patients chose to undergo curative intervention for personal reasons in the absence of disease reclassification. Statistical Analysis Study group characteristics at diagnosis (age, PSA, percent free PSA, PSA density [PSAD], the number of cores positive for cancer, the maximum percentage involvement of any core with cancer, and the year of diagnosis) were compared between treated and untreated men by using the t test in cases of equal variance and the Cochran t test in cases of unequal variance, with P.05 considered statistically significant. We calculated the crude proportion of men who experienced specific outcomes during surveillance, including curative intervention, biopsy reclassification, exit from the program, and death from all causes. Time on surveillance was defined from the time of diagnosis to an outcome, or to last clinical examination for those who did not reach a specified outcome. The proportion of patients experiencing each outcome was compared between men who met and did not meet all very-low-risk criteria by using Fisher s exact test. Additionally, the incidence rates of each outcome were calculated for all men in the study database and expressed as rates per 100 person-years of follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time on surveillance free of biopsy reclassification and time on surveillance free of curative intervention. Time zero was defined as the time of diagnosis, and time on surveillance was defined as the time from diagnosis to an outcome. Patients who withdrew or were lost to follow-up were censored at the time of their last visit, and those who died were censored at time of death. Active patients were censored at the time of their last surveillance visit. For men who underwent curative intervention, freedom from biochemical recurrence after treatment was estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. For this analysis, time zero was defined as the time of curative intervention, and patients not experiencing biochemical recurrence were censored at the time of their last PSA measurement. Recurrence was defined as PSA more than 0.2 ng/ml in men who underwent surgery and PSA of 2.0 ng/ml or more above the nadir in men who underwent radiation. 17 Men with less than 1 year of follow-up after treatment were not included in the analysis. In men who selected surgery or radiation therapy, freedom from biochemical recurrence was compared using the log-rank test. The level of significance was set at 0.05 in all analyses. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). RESULTS As of March 2010, 769 men (median age, 66 years; range, 45 to 92 years) had enrolled in the active surveillance program. Most participants were white (90.4%), although 6.2% were African American, and 3.4% were of other ethnic backgrounds. Even though the majority (78.4%) of men met all criteria for very-low-risk prostate cancer, 136 (17.7%) did not meet PSAD criteria, and 30 (3.9%) failed to meet another very-low-risk disease criterion. Specifically, 16 men (2.1%) had more than two cores positive for cancer, eight men (1.0%) had more than 50% involvement of a biopsy core, and six men (0.8%) had disease not classified as stage T1c or lower. All men met the criterion for a Gleason score 6 and, thus, no patient in this program had Gleason score 7 on the diagnostic biopsy. Overall, patients were followed for a median of 2.7 years (range, 0.01 to 15.0 years). As of March 2010, 418 men (54.4%) were active (no curative intervention or exit from the program), 255 (33.2%) underwent curative intervention, 82 (10.7%) withdrew or were lost to follow-up, and 14 (1.8%) died of causes other than prostate cancer (Fig 1). In total, 235 men (30.6%) demonstrated biopsy reclassification. Of these, 106 (45.1%) were reclassified on the basis of Gleason score upgrading (13.8% of entire cohort), and 129 (54.9%) were reclassified on the basis of number of biopsy cores or maximum core involvement with cancer (16.8% of entire cohort). Treatment was recommended for all men with Gleason score upgrading. Of the 129 men reclassified on the basis of disease volume, 38 elected to defer treatment for personal reasons or for comorbidities and thus continued on active surveillance. Withdrew or died (n = 96) No biopsy reclassification (n = 438) Active (n = 371) Untreated (n = 9) Treated (n = 67) Reclassification by GS upgrade* (n = 106) Treated (n = 97) Patients (N = 769) Active (n = 673) Biopsy reclassification (n = 235) Reclassification by volume only (n = 129) Treated (n = 91) Active (n = 38) Fig 1. Johns Hopkins Active Surveillance Program. Eighty-two men withdrew or were lost to follow-up; 14 men died of causes not related to prostate cancer. (*) Treatment is recommended to all men with Gleason score (GS) upgrading. ( ) Three of these men underwent treatment shortly after analysis. Data on treatment were unavailable for the remaining six men by American Society of Clinical Oncology JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
3 Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Variables Table 1. Study Group Demographics Treated (n 255) Not Treated (n 514) Median Range Mean SD Median Range Mean SD Age at diagnosis, years PSA at diagnosis, ng/ml Percent free PSA at diagnosis PSAD at diagnosis, ng/ml No. of cores positive for cancer at diagnosis Maximum percent core involvement with cancer at diagnosis Year of cancer diagnosis Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; PSAD, PSA density. Sixty-one treated and 113 untreated patients had percent free PSA data at diagnosis. P At the time of diagnosis, study group characteristics (PSA, percent free PSA, PSAD, and year of diagnosis) were significantly different in men who eventually underwent treatment compared with those who did not (Table 1). Earlier year of diagnosis was likely significant because in earlier years, there may have been undersampling of cancer with a six-core biopsy, whereas in later years, the standard was a 12-core biopsy or more. After enrollment, the mean time until the first surveillance biopsy was 1.3 years (standard deviation, 0.6) and time between subsequent surveillance biopsies was 1.1 year (standard deviation, 0.5). Compliance with annual surveillance biopsies (defined as undergoing biopsy within 0.5 years of designated biopsy date) was 92% for the first biopsy and 91% for the second biopsy. Over 12 years of follow-up, the total compliance with annual biopsies was 89% (range of annual compliance 79% to 100%). The median time on surveillance free of curative intervention was 6.5 years (range, 0 to 15.0 years; Fig 2). The probability of a patient remaining on active surveillance at 2, 5, and 10 years after diagnosis was 81%, 59%, and 41%, respectively. Of the 255 men who underwent curative intervention, 67 (26.3%) elected treatment in the absence of biopsy reclassification, and 188 (73.7%) underwent treatment on the basis of biopsy reclassification. Since 2009, 198 men underwent transition zone sampling as part of the surveillance biopsy, and cancer was detected in 46 (23.2%) of the transition zone biopsies. The crude numbers and proportions of men who experienced specified outcomes during surveillance are summarized in Table 2. Curative intervention (P.026) and biopsy reclassification (all causes, ie, Gleason score 6, or two cores with cancer, or 50% cancer involvement of any core; P.001) were observed in a significantly higher proportion of men who did not meet very-lowrisk entry criteria when compared with those who did. On postoperative pathology, two men who did not meet very-low-risk criteria were found to have lymph node positive disease, although lymph node positivity was not observed in any men who met all criteria. In the entire cohort, the incidence rate of curative intervention was 9.7 per 100 person-years. The rate of biopsy reclassification (all causes) was 8.9 per 100 person-years, and the rate of biopsy reclassification due to Gleason score upgrading was 4.0 per 100 personyears of follow-up. Of patients who underwent delayed curative intervention, 192 (75.3%) had sufficient post-treatment follow-up ( 1 year after treatment) for analysis of biochemical recurrence. Disease characteristics on diagnostic biopsy were not different when comparing the men included and those excluded from this analysis because of insufficient follow-up. However, men excluded because of insufficient follow-up were significantly older (mean age, 66 v 65 years; P.032) and were more recently diagnosed (mean year of diagnosis, 2003 v 2002; P.003) compared with those who were included. Of the 192 treated men with sufficient follow-up after treatment, 96 (50%) underwent radical prostatectomy (median age, 63 years; range, 45 to 71 years), and 96 underwent radiation therapy (median age, 67 years; range, 54 to 80 years; Fig 1). The median time from diagnosis to treatment was 2.0 years (range, 0.7 to 8.0 years) in patients who underwent surgery and 2.3 years (range, 0.8 to 10.2 years) in those who underwent radiation therapy. At the time of enrollment, men who eventually underwent surgery were significantly younger than those who underwent radiation (median age, 63 v 67 years; Survival Free of Outcome Biopsy reclassification (Gleason score 7) Biopsy reclassification (all) Treatment Time (years) No. at risk Biopsy reclassification (Gleason score 7) Biopsy reclassification (all) Treatment Fig 2. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival free of treatment, survival free of biopsy reclassification (all causes, ie, Gleason score 7, or two cores with cancer, and/or 50% involvement of any core with cancer), and survival free of biopsy reclassification (upgrading to Gleason score 7). Time zero was defined as the time of diagnosis. Some men chose to undergo intervention in the absence of Gleason score 7, and others chose to undergo intervention in the absence of disease reclassification by any cause by American Society of Clinical Oncology 3
4 Tosoian et al Event Table 2. Outcomes Among Men on Active Surveillance Met Criteria (n 603) Did Not Meet Criteria (n 166) No. % No. % P Incidence Rate per 100 Person-Years Curative intervention Biopsy reclassification (all) Biopsy reclassification (upgrade to Gleason score 7) Exit from program (non-death) Death (any cause) NOTE. Includes 769 patients with 2, person-years of follow-up. Comparison of crude proportions of men who did and did not meet entry criteria; Fisher s exact test. Radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. Any Gleason pattern 4 or 5, any Gleason score 7, two cores containing cancer, or 50% involvement of any core with cancer. Exit from program included all patients who underwent curative intervention, withdrew, or were lost to follow-up. Death included mortality from any cause; there were no deaths in this cohort as a result of prostate cancer. P.001), but the groups did not differ with respect to PSA, % of PSA, PSAD, number of positive biopsy cores, or maximum percentage of core involvement on diagnostic biopsy (data not shown). At the time of the final biopsy before treatment, men who underwent surgery had a significantly lower median PSA (5.6 v 6.9; P.026) when compared with those who underwent radiotherapy. However, the proportion of patients with Gleason score 7 did not differ by treatment group (33.3% v 35.4%; P.761). Median follow-up after treatment was 2.0 years for men who underwent surgery and 2.8 years for men who underwent radiation. In total, 18 (9.4%) of 192 men experienced biochemical recurrence after delayed treatment, including four (4.2%) of 96 men who underwent surgery and 14 (14.6%) of 96 men who underwent radiation therapy. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, survival free of biochemical recurrence was significantly higher for men who underwent surgery compared with those who underwent radiation therapy (P.004; Fig 3). Considering the entire cohort, no men have developed distant metastatic disease (M ) or died as a result of prostate cancer. Survival Free of Biochemical Recurrence Radiation Surgery Log-rank χ 2 = 8.31, P = Time (years) No. at risk Radiation Surgery Fig 3. Kaplan-Meier estimates of recurrence-free survival after surgery and radiation therapy. Time zero was defined as the time of intervention. DISCUSSION Detection of prostate cancer with PSA testing followed by effective treatment results in a reduction in prostate cancer mortality. 2,3,18 However, a risk associated with PSA testing is the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancers that would not have been diagnosed during life in the absence of screening. 1 Given the morbidity associated with prostate cancer treatment, it is prudent to explore alternatives aimed at preventing unnecessary intervention. Active surveillance is an alternative to immediate intervention that involves careful follow-up with the option of delayed treatment at a time when intervention will prevent harm from disease. 14,19 In men with favorable-risk disease, this approach has been associated with a prostate cancer specific mortality of less than 3% at 10 years and is therefore considered a reasonable option for some men. 12 Our approach to surveillance differs somewhat from other programs in both the selection of candidates and the criteria for intervention. 20 We have used the selection criteria for very-low-risk disease originally described by Epstein et al 15 and endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 16 and we have used surveillance biopsy findings as the trigger for intervention. In total, one in three men in our program underwent curative intervention, a rate consistent with other surveillance programs. 12,21 The reasons that patients eventually undergo intervention, however, differ between our program and others. Although 73.4% of men in our program underwent intervention because of biopsy reclassification, other programs cite PSA kinetics as a common trigger for intervention. 12,22,23 For example, PSA doubling time triggered intervention in more than one in three men in the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study 24 and nearly one in two men in the Toronto experience. 12 As previously described, PSA kinetics are not used as a trigger for intervention in our program. We believe that high-grade cancers missed at the initial biopsy pose the greatest risk to active surveillance patients in terms of a lost opportunity for cure. For this reason, men with a Gleason score of 7 are not enrolled in our surveillance program, regardless of other disease characteristics. Furthermore, we now include transition zone sampling in our follow-up biopsy protocol because of the risk of missing a significant cancer in this undersampled region. 25 We have by American Society of Clinical Oncology JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
5 Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer observed that measures such as PSA kinetics and prostate cancer gene 3(PCA3) genetic testing are not reliable for predicting the presence of high-grade cancer on an individual basis Thus, if the goal of surveillance is to identify and treat higher-risk cancers, we believe that annual biopsies may be necessary to ensure patient safety. Promisingly, our data reveal that the great majority of men on surveillance were compliant with our follow-up biopsy regimen. In the future, advances in technology such as magnetic resonance imaging could potentially reduce the need for biopsy during active surveillance through identification of high-grade cancer. 29 Unlike men who have high-grade cancer on a biopsy, we have considered all men with low-grade cancer (Gleason score 6) for surveillance at their request. Inclusion of these patients has allowed for the comparison of men with Gleason scores of 6 who did and did not meet the other criteria for very-low-risk cancer. In comparing risk groups, patients who met very-low-risk criteria were significantly less likely to be reclassified on a surveillance biopsy or to undergo curative intervention during follow-up when compared with those who did not. However, there was no difference in the rate of Gleason score upgrading on surveillance biopsy when comparing those who did and did not meet entry criteria. Thus, we cannot be sure that men meeting the criteria for very-low-risk prostate cancer will have more favorable outcomes when compared with those who did not. In men who are treated following a period on active surveillance, biochemical recurrence has been evaluated as a proxy for long-term outcomes. 12,24 At this point, our crude proportion of men with biochemical recurrence after treatment is lower than that of van den Bergh et al 24 and Klotz et al. 12 This may be the case because of previously described differences in entry criteria specific to each program and may further support our belief that active surveillance is safest for those with very-low-risk disease. With regard to our study, it is important to emphasize that although recurrence-free survival was higher in men who underwent surgery, there were important differences between the treatment groups that may account for this difference, and our study was not designed to evaluate the effectiveness of one treatment modality versus another. Instead, we have included these data so they may be discussed, when appropriate, in the context of other surveillance programs with different criteria. Recent analysis from Van den Bergh et al 24 demonstrated that there were no differences in biochemical recurrence-free survival after immediate or delayed surgery in men eligible for surveillance. Furthermore, aggregate data from published surveillance cohorts have demonstrated prostate cancer specific survival greater than 99% at a median follow-up of 43 months. 12 Nonetheless, it has been shown that even 10 years is not an adequate time frame for the evaluation of prostate cancer specific survival, 3 and additional follow-up is therefore necessary to evaluate the safety of active surveillance for patients with a greater life expectancy. Because follow-up is limited in active surveillance programs, we believe that metastatic disease-free survival may be a meaningful end point for analysis. There are several limitations of this study that deserve mention. First, given the lengthy natural history of low-grade prostate cancer, our follow-up interval may not be sufficient to rule out adverse outcomes in some patients after additional follow-up. Second, because of limited follow-up, we used biochemical recurrence after treatment as a proxy for long-term outcomes, although this is not a surrogate for cancer-specific survival. Thus, caution must be used in drawing conclusions on the basis of this end point. Third, our patient population was interested in alternatives to active treatment and was therefore highly motivated to return for follow-up examinations. This cohort may not be representative of other active surveillance populations that may have less stringent selection and follow-up criteria. In conclusion, recognizing the limitations of predicting outcomes in men diagnosed with prostate cancer today, active surveillance with curative intent appears to be a reasonable alternative to immediate intervention for carefully selected older men. Limiting surveillance to patients with the lowest risk category of disease may reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes. Nonetheless, patients considering surveillance should be counseled on the possibility that delayed intervention may compromise the opportunity for cure in some cases. AUTHORS DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The author(s) indicated no potential conflicts of interest. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS Conception and design: H. Ballentine Carter Financial support: H. Ballentine Carter Administrative support: H. Ballentine Carter Provision of study materials or patients: Alan W. Partin, H. Ballentine Carter Collection and assembly of data: Jeffrey J. Tosoian, Patricia Landis, Alan W. Partin, H. Ballentine Carter Data analysis and interpretation: Jeffrey J. Tosoian, Bruce J. Trock, Zhaoyong Feng, Jonathan I. Epstein, Patrick C. Walsh, H. Ballentine Carter Manuscript writing: All authors Final approval of manuscript: All authors REFERENCES 1. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al: Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: Estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: , Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al: Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360: , Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al: Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised populationbased prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 11: , Welch HG, Black WC: Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 102: , Cooperberg MR, Moul JW, Carroll PR: The changing face of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 23: , Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Garmo H, et al: Prognostic markers under watchful waiting and radical prostatectomy. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 20: , Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, et al: Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: An update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol 178: , 2007; discussion Khatami A, Ali K, Aus G, et al: PSA doubling time predicts the outcome after active surveillance in screening-detected prostate cancer: Results from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Sweden section. Int J Cancer 120: , Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S, et al: Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: The Miami experience. BJU Int 101: , 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 54: , van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, et al: Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance by American Society of Clinical Oncology 5
6 Tosoian et al who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol 55:1-8, 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 28: , Harlan SR, Cooperberg MR, Elkin EP, et al: Time trends and characteristics of men choosing watchful waiting for initial treatment of localized prostate cancer: Results from CaPSURE. J Urol 170: , Carter HB, Walsh PC, Landis P, et al: Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: Preliminary results. J Urol 167: , Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, et al: Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 271: , Mohler J, Bahnson RR, Boston B, et al: NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: Prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 8: , Roach M 3rd, Hanks G, Thames H Jr, et al: Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: Recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 65: , Chu KC, Tarone RE, Freeman HP: Trends in prostate cancer mortality among black men and white men in the United States. Cancer 97: , Choo R, Klotz L, Danjoux C, et al: Feasibility study: Watchful waiting for localized low to intermediate grade prostate carcinoma with selective delayed intervention based on prostate specific antigen, histological and/or clinical progression. J Urol 167: , Klotz L: Active surveillance for prostate cancer: A review. Curr Urol Rep 11: , van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, et al: Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes? Cancer 116: , Eggener SE, Mueller A, Berglund RK, et al: A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 181: , Dall Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, et al: Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 112: , van den Bergh RC, Vasarainen H, van der Poel HG, et al: Short-term outcomes of the prospective multicentre Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance study. BJU Int 105: , Duffield AS, Lee TK, Miyamoto H, et al: Radical prostatectomy findings in patients in whom active surveillance of prostate cancer fails. J Urol 182: , Tseng KS, Landis P, Epstein JI, et al: Risk stratification of men choosing surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 183: , Ross AE, Loeb S, Landis P, et al: Prostatespecific antigen kinetics during follow-up are an unreliable trigger for intervention in a prostate cancer surveillance program. J Clin Oncol 28: , Tosoian JJ, Loeb S, Kettermann A, et al: Accuracy of PCA3 measurement in predicting shortterm biopsy progression in an active surveillance program. J Urol 183: , Fradet V, Kurhanewicz J, Cowan JE, et al: Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: Role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 256: , by American Society of Clinical Oncology JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
J Clin Oncol 28: by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION
VOLUME 28 NUMBER 1 JANUARY 1 2010 JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Clinical Results of Long-Term Follow-Up of a Large, Active Surveillance Cohort With Localized Prostate Cancer
More informationSince the beginning of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era in the. Characteristics of Insignificant Clinical T1c Prostate Tumors
2001 Characteristics of Insignificant Clinical T1c Prostate Tumors A Contemporary Analysis Patrick J. Bastian, M.D. 1 Leslie A. Mangold, B.A., M.S. 1 Jonathan I. Epstein, M.D. 2 Alan W. Partin, M.D., Ph.D.
More informationAssociation of [ 2]proPSA with Biopsy Reclassification During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer
Association of [ 2]proPSA with Biopsy Reclassification During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Jeffrey J. Tosoian,*, Stacy Loeb,*, Zhaoyong Feng, Sumit Isharwal, Patricia Landis, Debra J. Elliot,
More informationLocal Recommendations for Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer
February 15 Local Recommendations for Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer Chris Dawson Urology Lead Clinician February 2015 www.pchurology.co.uk Summary and Recommendations 1. There is no single set
More informationUrological Society of Australia and New Zealand PSA Testing Policy 2009
Executive summary Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand PSA Testing Policy 2009 1. Prostate cancer is a major health problem and is the second leading cause of male cancer deaths in Australia
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 63 (2013)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 63 (2013) 101 107 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Laurence Klotz on pp. 108 110 of this issue
More informationUntreated Gleason Grade Progression on Serial Biopsies during Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Clinical Course and Pathological Outcomes
Untreated Gleason Grade Progression on Serial Biopsies during Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Clinical Course and Pathological Outcomes A. A. Hussein,* C. J. Welty,* N. Ameli,* J. E. Cowan, M. Leapman,*
More informationEarly Experience With Active Surveillance in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated
www.kjurology.org http://dx.doi.org/.4/kju.4...67 Original Article Urological Oncology http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=.4/kju.4...67&domain=pdf&date_stamp=47 Early Experience With Active Surveillance
More informationSommerakademie Munich, June
Active surveillance: Shrinking the grey zone Sommerakademie Munich, June 30 2016 Active surveillance Overview of 20 year history Laurence Klotz, MD, CM Professor of Surgery Sunnybrook Heatlh Sciences Centre
More informationSorveglianza Attiva update
Sorveglianza Attiva update Dr. Sergio Villa Dr. Riccardo Valdagni www.thelancet.com Published online August 7, 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60525-0 the main weakness of screening is a high
More informationLong-Term Follow-Up of a Large Active Surveillance Cohort of Patients With Prostate Cancer
Published Ahead of Print on December 15, 1 as 1.1/JCO.1.55.119 The latest version is at http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/doi/1.1/jco.1.55.119 JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Long-Term
More informationJ Clin Oncol 29: by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION
VOLUME NUMBER 20 JULY 10 2011 JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Changes in Prostate Cancer Grade on Serial Biopsy in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance Sima P. Porten, Jared M. Whitson,
More informationPROSTATE CANCER SURVEILLANCE
PROSTATE CANCER SURVEILLANCE ESMO Preceptorship on Prostate Cancer Singapore, 15-16 November 2017 Rosa Nadal National Cancer Institute, NIH Bethesda, USA DISCLOSURE No conflicts of interest to declare
More informationExpanded criteria for active surveillance in prostate cancer: a review of the current data
Review Article Expanded criteria for active surveillance in prostate cancer: a review of the current data Cameron Jones 1, Mina M. Fam 2, Benjamin J. Davies 2 1 University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine,
More informationNIH Public Access Author Manuscript World J Urol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 February 1.
NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Published in final edited form as: World J Urol. 2011 February ; 29(1): 11 14. doi:10.1007/s00345-010-0625-4. Significance of preoperative PSA velocity in men with low
More informationACTIVE SURVEILLANCE OR WATCHFUL WAITING
Prostate Cancer ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE OR WATCHFUL WAITING María Teresa Bourlon, MD MS Head, Urologic Oncology Clinic Hemato-Oncology Department Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador
More informationCONTEMPORARY UPDATE OF PROSTATE CANCER STAGING NOMOGRAMS (PARTIN TABLES) FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM
RAPID COMMUNICATION CME ARTICLE CONTEMPORARY UPDATE OF PROSTATE CANCER STAGING NOMOGRAMS (PARTIN TABLES) FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM ALAN W. PARTIN, LESLIE A. MANGOLD, DANA M. LAMM, PATRICK C. WALSH, JONATHAN
More informationEarly outcomes of active surveillance for localized prostate cancer
Original Article ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE FOR LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER HARDIE et al. Early outcomes of active surveillance for localized prostate cancer CLAIRE HARDIE, CHRIS PARKER, ANDREW NORMAN*, ROS EELES,
More informationUnderstanding the Performance of Active Surveillance Selection Criteria in Diverse Urology Practices
Understanding the Performance of Active Surveillance Selection Criteria in Diverse Urology Practices Scott R. Hawken,* Paul R. Womble,* Lindsey A. Herrel, Zaojun Ye, Susan M. Linsell, Patrick M. Hurley,
More informationDong Hoon Lee, Ha Bum Jung, Seung Hwan Lee, Koon Ho Rha, Young Deuk Choi, Sung Jun Hong, Seung Choul Yang and Byung Ha Chung *
Jpn J Clin Oncol 2012;42(11)1079 1085 doi:10.1093/jjco/hys147 Advance Access Publication 17 September 2012 Comparison of Pathological Outcomes of Active Surveillance Candidates Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy
More informationActive Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 62 (2012) 976 983 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Collaborative Review Prostate Cancer Editorial by Gurdarshan S. Sandhu
More informationPSA Doubling Time Versus PSA Velocity to Predict High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
european urology 54 (2008) 1073 1080 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer PSA Doubling Time Versus PSA Velocity to Predict High-Risk Prostate Cancer:
More informationACTIVE SURVEILLANCE FOR PROSTATE CANCER
ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE FOR PROSTATE CANCER Dr. Michael J Metcalfe PGY-2 Department of Urological Sciences April 25, 2012 CASE RM 65 year old active Caucasian male, married. PSA= 7.0 T2a Gleason 3+3=6 2/6
More informationProstate Cancer: 2010 Guidelines Update
Prostate Cancer: 2010 Guidelines Update James L. Mohler, MD Chair, NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel Associate Director for Translational Research, Professor and Chair, Department of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer
More informationPre-test. Prostate Cancer The Good News: Prostate Cancer Screening 2012: Putting the PSA Controversy to Rest
Pre-test Matthew R. Cooperberg, MD, MPH UCSF 40 th Annual Advances in Internal Medicine Prostate Cancer Screening 2012: Putting the PSA Controversy to Rest 1. I do not offer routine PSA screening, and
More informationOriginal Article The implications of prostate-specific antigen density to predict clinically significant prostate cancer in men 50 years
Am J Clin Exp Urol 2014;2(4):332-336 www.ajceu.us /ISSN:2330-1910/AJCEU0002941 Original Article The implications of prostate-specific antigen density to predict clinically significant prostate cancer in
More informationConceptual basis for active surveillance
Conceptual basis for active surveillance 1. Screening results in overdiagnosis 2. Clinically insignificant disease can be identified 3. All treatments have significant side effects and cost. 4. Delayed
More informationElsevier Editorial System(tm) for European Urology Manuscript Draft
Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for European Urology Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: EURUROL-D-13-00306 Title: Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence and Pelvic Floor Muscle Training: A Defining Problem Article
More informationDisease-specific death and metastasis do not occur in patients with Gleason score 6 at radical prostatectomy
Disease-specific death and metastasis do not occur in patients with at radical prostatectomy Charlotte F. Kweldam, Mark F. Wildhagen*, Chris H. Bangma* and Geert J.L.H. van Leenders Departments of Pathology,
More informationPROSTATE CANCER SCREENING: AN UPDATE
PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING: AN UPDATE William G. Nelson, M.D., Ph.D. Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins American Association for Cancer Research William G. Nelson, M.D., Ph.D. Disclosures
More informationAUA Update Series. Lesson 33 Volume Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Patient Selection and Management
AUA Update Series Lesson 33 Volume 27 2008 Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Patient Selection and Management Learning Objective: At the conclusion of this continuing medical education activity,
More informationDong Hoon Lee, Kyo Chul Koo, Seung Hwan Lee, Koon Ho Rha, Young Deuk Choi, Sung Joon Hong and Byung Ha Chung
Jpn J Clin Oncol 2013;43(5)553 558 doi:10.1093/jjco/hyt041 Advance Access Publication 11 April 2013 Low-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Without Visible Tumor (T1c) On Multiparametric MRI Could Qualify for
More informationNational Trends in the Management of Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer in the United States
National Trends in the Management of Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer in the United States Adam B. Weiner, Sanjay G. Patel, Ruth Etzioni and Scott E. Eggener* From the Pritzker School of Medicine
More informationElevated PSA. Dr.Nesaretnam Barr Kumarakulasinghe Associate Consultant Medical Oncology National University Cancer Institute, Singapore 9 th July 2017
Elevated PSA Dr.Nesaretnam Barr Kumarakulasinghe Associate Consultant Medical Oncology National University Cancer Institute, Singapore 9 th July 2017 Issues we will cover today.. The measurement of PSA,
More informationUnderstanding the risk of recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer. Aditya Bagrodia, MD
Understanding the risk of recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer Aditya Bagrodia, MD Aditya.bagrodia@utsouthwestern.edu 423-967-5848 Outline and objectives Prostate cancer demographics
More informationOutcomes Following Negative Prostate Biopsy for Patients with Persistent Disease after Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer
Clinical Urology Post-radiotherapy Prostate Biopsy for Recurrent Disease International Braz J Urol Vol. 36 (1): 44-48, January - February, 2010 doi: 10.1590/S1677-55382010000100007 Outcomes Following Negative
More informationRisk Migration ( ct2c=high)
Risk Migration ( ctc=high) Prostate Cancer Over- Detection, but Selective Treatment Active Surveillance Peter R. Carroll, MD, MPH Department of Urology University of California, San Francisco February,
More informationJ Clin Oncol by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Active Surveillance in Younger Men With Prostate Cancer Michael S. Leapman, Janet E. Cowan, Hao G. Nguyen, Katsuto K. Shinohara, Nannette Perez,
More informationPredicting the Probability of Deferred Radical Treatment for Localised Prostate Cancer Managed by Active Surveillance
european urology 54 (2008) 1297 1305 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Predicting the Probability of Deferred Radical Treatment for Localised
More informationHealth Screening Update: Prostate Cancer Zamip Patel, MD FSACOFP Convention August 1 st, 2015
Health Screening Update: Prostate Cancer Zamip Patel, MD FSACOFP Convention August 1 st, 2015 Outline Epidemiology of prostate cancer Purpose of screening Method of screening Contemporary screening trials
More informationOncology: Prostate/Testis/Penis/Urethra. Prostate Specific Antigen Testing Among the Elderly When To Stop?
Oncology: Prostate/Testis/Penis/Urethra Prostate Specific Antigen Testing Among the Elderly When To Stop? Edward M. Schaeffer,*, H. Ballentine Carter, Anna Kettermann, Stacy Loeb, Luigi Ferrucci, Patricia
More informationControversies in Prostate Cancer Screening
Controversies in Prostate Cancer Screening William J Catalona, MD Northwestern University Chicago Disclosure: Beckman Coulter, a manufacturer of PSA assays, provides research support PSA Screening Recommendations
More informationPCa Commentary. Executive Summary: The "PCa risk increased directly with increasing phi values."
1101 Madison Street Suite 1101 Seattle, WA 98104 P 206-215-2490 www.seattleprostate.com PCa Commentary Volume 77 September October 2012 CONTENT Page The Prostate 1 Health Index Active Surveillance 2 A
More informationInt. J. Cancer: 120, (2006)
Int. J. Cancer: 120, 170 174 (2006) ' 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc. PSA doubling time predicts the outcome after active surveillance in screening-detected prostate cancer: Results from the European randomized
More informationProstate Cancer Who needs active surveillance?
Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie Direktor: Prof. Dr. H. Riedmiller Prostate Cancer Who needs active surveillance? Klinische und molekulare Charakterisierung des Hoch-Risiko-Prostatakarzinoms.
More informationProstate Cancer Mortality following Active Surveillance versus Immediate Radical Prostatectomy
Cancer Therapy: Clinical Clinical Cancer Research Prostate Cancer Mortality following Active Surveillance versus Immediate Radical Prostatectomy Jing Xia 1, Bruce J. Trock 4, Matthew R. Cooperberg 6, Roman
More informationPercent Gleason pattern 4 in stratifying the prognosis of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer
Review Article Percent Gleason pattern 4 in stratifying the prognosis of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer Meenal Sharma 1, Hiroshi Miyamoto 1,2,3 1 Department of Pathology and Laboratory
More informationThe Role of Biopsy Core Number in Selecting Prostate Cancer Patients for Active Surveillance
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 56 (2009) 891 898 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Nazareno Suardi on pp. 899 900 of this issue
More informationBest Papers. F. Fusco
Best Papers UROLOGY F. Fusco Best papers - 2015 RP/RT Oncological outcomes RP/RT IN ct3 Utilization trends RP/RT Complications Evolving role of elnd /Salvage LND This cohort reflects the current clinical
More informationDetection & Risk Stratification for Early Stage Prostate Cancer
Detection & Risk Stratification for Early Stage Prostate Cancer Andrew J. Stephenson, MD, FRCSC, FACS Chief, Urologic Oncology Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute Cleveland Clinic Risk Stratification:
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 62 (2012)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 62 (2012) 745 752 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Allison S. Glass, Matthew R. Cooperberg and
More informationProstate Cancer Screening: Con. Laurence Klotz Professor of Surgery, Sunnybrook HSC University of Toronto
Prostate Cancer Screening: Con Laurence Klotz Professor of Surgery, Sunnybrook HSC University of Toronto / Why not PSA screening? Overdiagnosis Overtreatment Risk benefit ratio unfavorable Flaws of PSA
More informationReducing overtreatment of prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy in Eastern Ontario: a population-based cohort study
Reducing overtreatment of prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy in Eastern Ontario: a population-based cohort study Luke Witherspoon MD MSc, Johnathan L. Lau BSc, Rodney H. Breau MD MSc, Christopher
More informationPredictive role of free prostate specific antigen in a prospective active surveillance program (PRIAS)
World J Urol (2015) 33:1735 1740 DOI 10.1007/s00345-015-1542-3 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Predictive role of free prostate specific antigen in a prospective active surveillance program (PRIAS) Hanna Vasarainen 1
More informationProstate Cancer Genomics When To Treat and With What? Ashley E. Ross, M.D., Ph.D. Texas Urology Specialists August 2017
Prostate Cancer Genomics When To Treat and With What? Ashley E. Ross, M.D., Ph.D. Texas Urology Specialists August 2017 Relevant Disclosures Advisory role, ownership interest, previous unrestricted grant
More informationVALUE AND ROLE OF PSA AS A TUMOUR MARKER OF RESPONSE/RELAPSE
Session 3 Advanced prostate cancer VALUE AND ROLE OF PSA AS A TUMOUR MARKER OF RESPONSE/RELAPSE 1 PSA is a serine protease and the physiological role is believed to be liquefying the seminal fluid PSA
More informationInformation Content of Five Nomograms for Outcomes in Prostate Cancer
Anatomic Pathology / NOMOGRAMS IN PROSTATE CANCER Information Content of Five Nomograms for Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Tarek A. Bismar, MD, 1 Peter Humphrey, MD, 2 and Robin T. Vollmer, MD 3 Key Words:
More informationSelective Detection of Histologically Aggressive Prostate Cancer
Selective Detection of Histologically Aggressive Prostate An Early Detection Research Network Prediction Model to Reduce Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies With Validation in the Prostate Prevention Trial Stephen
More informationTo be covered. Screening, early diagnosis, and treatment including Active Surveillance for prostate cancer: where is Europe heading for?
To be covered Screening, early diagnosis, and treatment including Active Surveillance for prostate cancer: where is Europe heading for? Europa Uomo meeting Stockholm 29 Chris H.Bangma Rotterdam, The Netherlands
More informationProviding Treatment Information for Prostate Cancer Patients
Providing Treatment Information for Prostate Cancer Patients For all patients with localized disease on biopsy For all patients with adverse pathology after prostatectomy See what better looks like Contact
More informationPreoperative Gleason score, percent of positive prostate biopsies and PSA in predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy
JBUON 2013; 18(4): 954-960 ISSN: 1107-0625, online ISSN: 2241-6293 www.jbuon.com E-mail: editorial_office@jbuon.com ORIGINAL ARTICLE Gleason score, percent of positive prostate and PSA in predicting biochemical
More informationRelationship between initial PSA density with future PSA kinetics and repeat biopsies in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance
ORIGINAL ARTICLE (2011) 14, 53 57 & 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 1365-7852/11 www.nature.com/pcan Relationship between initial PSA density with future PSA kinetics and repeat biopsies
More informationProstate Cancer. Axiom. Overdetection Is A Small Issue. Reducing Morbidity and Mortality
Overdetection Is A Small Issue (in the context of decreasing prostate cancer mortality rates and with appropriate, effective, and high-quality treatment) Prostate Cancer Arises silently Dwells in a curable
More informationBIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE POST RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE POST RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY AZHAN BIN YUSOFF AZHAN BIN YUSOFF 2013 SCENARIO A 66 year old man underwent Robotic Radical Prostatectomy for a T1c Gleason 4+4, PSA 15 ng/ml prostate
More informationActive surveillance: Shrinking the grey zone. Sommerakademi e Munich, June rd FOIUS Tel Aviv, July 2016
Active surveillance: Shrinking the grey zone Active surveillance: 3 rd FOIUS Tel Aviv, July 2016 Shrinking the grey zone Sommerakademi e Munich, June 30 2016 Active Surveillance for low risk PCa What has
More informationProstate-Specific Antigen Testing of Older Men
Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing of Older Men H. Ballentine Carter, Patricia K. Landis, E. Jeffrey Metter, Lee A. Fleisher, Jay D. Pearson Background: Elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels
More informationThe Impact of MRI-TRUS Cognitively Targeted Biopsy on the Incidence of Pathologic Upgrading After Radical Prostatectomy
Original Article World J Nephrol Urol. 2018;7(1):12-16 The Impact of MRI-TRUS Cognitively Targeted Biopsy on the Incidence of Pathologic Upgrading After Radical Prostatectomy Ragheed Saoud a, Albert El-Haj
More informationScreening and Risk Stratification of Men for Prostate Cancer Metastasis and Mortality
Screening and Risk Stratification of Men for Prostate Cancer Metastasis and Mortality Sanoj Punnen, MD, MAS Assistant Professor of Urologic Oncology University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine and Sylvester
More informationActive surveillance for prostate cancer: patient selection and management
UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY Active surveillance for prostate cancer: patient selection and management L. Klotz md ABSTRACT Screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (psa) has been appealing.
More informationORIGINAL INVESTIGATION. Impact of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Among US Veterans. having prostate cancer, assessment
ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION Impact of Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Among US Veterans Edward M. Uchio, MD; Mihaela Aslan, PhD; Carolyn K. Wells, MPH; Juan Calderone, MD; John Concato, MD, MS, MPH
More informationMR-US Fusion Guided Biopsy: Is it fulfilling expectations?
MR-US Fusion Guided Biopsy: Is it fulfilling expectations? Kenneth L. Gage MD, PhD Assistant Member Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology 4 th Annual New Frontiers in Urologic Oncology
More informationHigh Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Should Start with RT
High Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Should Start with RT Jason A. Efstathiou, M.D., D.Phil. Assistant Professor of Radiation Oncology Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School 10
More informationOutcomes With "Watchful Waiting" in Prostate Cancer in US Now So Good, Active Treatment May Not Be Better
1 sur 5 19/09/2009 07:02 www.medscape.com From Medscape Medical News Outcomes With "Watchful Waiting" in Prostate Cancer in US Now So Good, Active Treatment May Not Be Better Zosia Chustecka September
More informationProstate Cancer Screening Guidelines in 2017
Prostate Cancer Screening Guidelines in 2017 Pocharapong Jenjitranant, M.D. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Prostate
More informationActive Surveillance (AS) is an expectant management. Health Services Research
Factors Influencing Selection of Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer Health Services Research Jianyu Liu, Paul R. Womble, Selin Merdan, David C. Miller, James E. Montie, Brian T. Denton on
More informationThe 4Kscore A Precision Test for Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer. Reduce Unnecessary Invasive Procedures And Healthcare Costs
The 4Kscore A Precision Test for Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer Reduce Unnecessary Invasive Procedures And Healthcare Costs PSA Lacks Specificity for Aggressive Prostate Cancer Abnormal PSA leads to
More informationOriginal Article. Key Words: Prostate neoplasms ㆍ Magnetic resonance imaging ㆍ Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System ㆍ Prostatectomy INTRODUCTION
Korean J Urol Oncol 2017;15(2):6671 https://doi.org/10.2265/kjuo.2017.15.2.66 Original Article Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Prostate ImagingReporting and Data System Version 2 to Predict Clinically
More informationYiannis Philippou 1, Hary Raja 2 and Vincent J. Gnanapragasam 2*
Philippou et al. BMC Urology (2015) 15:52 DOI 10.1186/s12894-015-0049-y RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Active surveillance of prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey of urologists, clinical oncologists and
More informationBAYESIAN JOINT LONGITUDINAL-DISCRETE TIME SURVIVAL MODELS: EVALUATING BIOPSY PROTOCOLS IN ACTIVE-SURVEILLANCE STUDIES
BAYESIAN JOINT LONGITUDINAL-DISCRETE TIME SURVIVAL MODELS: EVALUATING BIOPSY PROTOCOLS IN ACTIVE-SURVEILLANCE STUDIES Lurdes Y. T. Inoue, PhD Professor Department of Biostatistics University of Washington
More informationOutcomes of Radical Prostatectomy in Thai Men with Prostate Cancer
Original Article Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy in Thai Men with Prostate Cancer Sunai Leewansangtong, Suchai Soontrapa, Chaiyong Nualyong, Sittiporn Srinualnad, Tawatchai Taweemonkongsap and Teerapon
More informationValidation of the 2015 Prostate Cancer Grade Groups for Predicting Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes in a Shared Equal-Access Health System
Original Article Validation of the 2015 Prostate Cancer Grade Groups for Predicting Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes in a Shared Equal-Access Health System Ariel A. Schulman, MD 1 ; Lauren E. Howard, MS 2
More informationWhere are we with PSA screening?
Where are we with PSA screening? Faculty/Presenter Disclosure Rela%onships with commercial interests: None Disclosure of Commercial Support This program has received no financial support. This program
More informationPrognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer
BJU International (22), 89, 538 542 Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer L. EGEVAD, T. GRANFORS*, L. KARLBERG*, A. BERGH and P. STATTIN Department of Pathology and Cytology, Karolinska
More informationin 32%, T2c in 16% and T3 in 2% of patients.
BJUI Gleason 7 prostate cancer treated with lowdose-rate brachytherapy: lack of impact of primary Gleason pattern on biochemical failure Richard G. Stock, Joshua Berkowitz, Seth R. Blacksburg and Nelson
More informationActive Surveillance for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Short Review
www.kjurology.org DOI:10.4111/kju.2010.51.10.665 Review Article Active Surveillance for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Short Review Nathan Lawrentschuk 1,2, Laurence Klotz 1 1 Department of Urology,
More informationChapter 6. Long-Term Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy for Clinically Localized Prostate Adenocarcinoma. Abstract
Chapter 6 Long-Term Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy for Clinically Localized Prostate Adenocarcinoma Vijaya Raj Bhatt 1, Carl M Post 2, Sumit Dahal 3, Fausto R Loberiza 4 and Jue Wang 4 * 1 Department
More informationPSA Screening and Prostate Cancer. Rishi Modh, MD
PSA Screening and Prostate Cancer Rishi Modh, MD ABOUT ME From Tampa Bay Went to Berkeley Prep University of Miami for Undergraduate - 4 years University of Miami for Medical School - 4 Years University
More informationFollow-up of Prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prostate Cancer
The new england journal of medicine Original Article Follow-up of Prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prostate Cancer Timothy J. Wilt, M.D., M.P.H., Karen M. Jones, M.S., Michael J. Barry, M.D.,
More informationAdam Raben M.D. Helen F Graham Cancer Center
Adam Raben M.D. Helen F Graham Cancer Center Is the biopsy sample representative of the extent of the disease in your patient with clinically low-risk prostate cancer? BIOPSY RP registry (n=8095) 3+3=6
More informationProstate Cancer: from Beginning to End
Prostate Cancer: from Beginning to End Matthew D. Katz, M.D. Assistant Professor Urologic Oncology Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer
More informationActive Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: How to Do It Right
Review Article [1] May 15, 2017 Oncology Journal [2], Prostate Cancer [3] By Juan D. Garisto, MD [4] and Laurence Klotz, MD, FRCSC, CM [5] In this review of active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate
More informationProstate Cancer Local or distant recurrence?
Prostate Cancer Local or distant recurrence? Diagnostic flowchart Vanessa Vilas Boas Urologist VFX Hospital FEBU PSA - only recurrence PSA recurrence: 27-53% of all patients undergoing treatment with curative
More informationProstate Cancer Incidence
Prostate Cancer: Prevention, Screening and Treatment Philip Kantoff MD Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Professor of fmedicine i Harvard Medical School Prostate Cancer Incidence # of patients 350,000 New Cases
More informationHelping you make better-informed decisions 1-5
Helping you make better-informed decisions 1-5 The only test that provides an accurate assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness A prognostic medicine product for prostate cancer. A common diagnosis
More informationManaging Prostate Cancer in General Practice
Managing Prostate Cancer in General Practice Tuesday 18 th September 2018 Presenters: Prof Jon Emery Assoc Prof Declan Murphy The education has been developed in partnership with Cancer Council Victoria,
More information10/2/2018 OBJECTIVES PROSTATE HEALTH BACKGROUND THE PROSTATE HEALTH INDEX PHI*: BETTER PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION
THE PROSTATE HEALTH INDEX PHI*: BETTER PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION Lenette Walters, MS, MT(ASCP) Medical Affairs Manager Beckman Coulter, Inc. *phi is a calculation using the values from PSA, fpsa and p2psa
More informationThe Role of the Pathologist Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer
The Role of the Pathologist Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Thomas M. Wheeler, M.D. W. L. Moody, Jr., Professor and Chair Department of Pathology & Immunology Baylor College of Medicine Houston,
More informationActive Surveillance for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Opinions of North American Genitourinary Oncology Expert Radiation Oncologists
Accepted Manuscript Active Surveillance for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Opinions of North American Genitourinary Oncology Expert Radiation Oncologists Shearwood McClelland, III, MD, Kiri
More informationeuropean urology 51 (2007)
european urology 51 (2007) 366 374 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Overall and Disease-Specific Survival of Patients with Screen-Detected Prostate
More informationIntroduction. Key Words: high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, HGPIN, radical prostatectomy, prostate biopsy, insignificant prostate cancer
Prostate cancer after initial high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and benign prostate biopsy Premal Patel, MD, 1 Jasmir G. Nayak, MD, 1,2 Zlatica Biljetina, MD, 4 Bryan Donnelly, MD 3, Kiril
More information