Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Active surveillance of prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey of urologists, clinical oncologists and urology nurse specialists across three cancer networks in the United Kingdom

Authors: Yiannis Philippou, Hary Raja, Vincent J. Gnanapragasam

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Active surveillance is considered a mainstream strategy in the management of patients with low-risk prostate cancer. A mission-critical step in implementing a robust active surveillance program and plan its resource and service requirements, is to gauge its current practice across the United Kingdom. Furthermore it is imperative to determine the existing practices in the context of the recommendations suggested by the recent National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance on active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Methods

An internet questionnaire was circulated to urologists, clinical oncologists and urology nurse specialists across three geographically distinct cancer networks. Twenty five questions across four domains were assessed. (i) hospital resources (staff and clinical areas) utilised for active surveillance (ii) enrolment criteria (iii) follow up (iv) criteria that trigger conversion to active treatment.

Results

We received 35 responses, 20 of which were from urologists. The survey data suggests that there is marked heterogeneity in enrolment criteria with patients having features of intermediate-risk prostate cancer often recruited into Active Surveillance programs. Only 60 % of our respondents use multiparametric MRI routinely to assess patient suitability for active surveillance. In addition, marked variation exists in how patients are followed up with regard to PSA testing intervals and timing of repeat biopsies. Only 40 % undertake a repeat biopsy at 12 months. Tumour upgrading on repeat biopsy, an increase in tumour volume or percentage of core biopsies involved would prompt a recommendation for treatment amongst most survey respondents. In addition allocation of resources and services for active surveillance is poor. Currently there are no dedicated active surveillance clinics, which are well-structured, -resourced and -supported for regular patient counselling and follow up.

Conclusion

This variability in enrolment criteria and follow up is also demonstrated in international and national series of active surveillance. Resources are not currently in place across the UK to support an active surveillance program and a national discussion and debate to plan resources is much required so that it can become a mainstream therapeutic strategy.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Thompson I, Trasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. AUA Prostate Cancer Clinical Guideline Update Panel. Guideline for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;177:2106–31.CrossRefPubMed Thompson I, Trasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. AUA Prostate Cancer Clinical Guideline Update Panel. Guideline for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;177:2106–31.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EUA guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol. 2011;59:61–71.CrossRefPubMed Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EUA guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol. 2011;59:61–71.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:203–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:203–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, Caroll PR, Carter HB, Cooperberg MR, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;62:976–83.CrossRefPubMed Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, Caroll PR, Carter HB, Cooperberg MR, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;62:976–83.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320–8.CrossRefPubMed Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Garmo H, Stark JR, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1708–17.CrossRefPubMed Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Garmo H, Stark JR, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1708–17.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Bul M, van den Bergh RC, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Vasarainen H, Bangma CH, et al. Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;110:1672–7.CrossRefPubMed Bul M, van den Bergh RC, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Vasarainen H, Bangma CH, et al. Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;110:1672–7.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Dall’Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Stauf F, Cooperberg MR, et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer. 2008;112:2664–70.CrossRefPubMed Dall’Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Stauf F, Cooperberg MR, et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer. 2008;112:2664–70.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, 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;58:831–5.CrossRefPubMed Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, 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;58:831–5.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Ercole B, Marietti SR, Fine J, Albertsen PC. Outcomes following active surveillance of men with localized prostate cancer diagnosed in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2008;180:1336–9.CrossRefPubMed Ercole B, Marietti SR, Fine J, Albertsen PC. Outcomes following active surveillance of men with localized prostate cancer diagnosed in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2008;180:1336–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference 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;28:126–31.CrossRefPubMed 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;28:126–31.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Ischia JJ, Pang CY, Tay YK, Suen CF, Aw HC, Frydenberg M. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: an Australian experience. BJU Int. 2012;109:40–3.CrossRefPubMed Ischia JJ, Pang CY, Tay YK, Suen CF, Aw HC, Frydenberg M. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: an Australian experience. BJU Int. 2012;109:40–3.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Thomsen FB, Roder MA, Hvarness H, Iversen P, Brasso K. Active surveillance can reduce overtreatment in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Dan Med J. 2013;60:A4575.PubMed Thomsen FB, Roder MA, Hvarness H, Iversen P, Brasso K. Active surveillance can reduce overtreatment in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Dan Med J. 2013;60:A4575.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Selvadurai ED, Singhera M, Thomas K, Mohammed K, Woode-Amissah R, Horwich A, et al. Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2013;64:981–7.CrossRefPubMed Selvadurai ED, Singhera M, Thomas K, Mohammed K, Woode-Amissah R, Horwich A, et al. Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2013;64:981–7.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW, et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2185–90.CrossRefPubMed Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW, et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2185–90.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Active surveillance of prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey of urologists, clinical oncologists and urology nurse specialists across three cancer networks in the United Kingdom
Authors
Yiannis Philippou
Hary Raja
Vincent J. Gnanapragasam
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-015-0049-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Urology 1/2015 Go to the issue