Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Urology Reports
Published in: Current Urology Reports 2/2012

01-04-2012 | Prostate Cancer (R Reiter, Section Editor)

Active Surveillance for Favorable-risk Prostate Cancer: Background, Patient Selection, Triggers for Intervention, and Outcomes

Author: Laurence Klotz

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 2/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

With the advent of increasingly sensitive and widely used diagnostic testing, cancer overdiagnosis in particular has emerged as a problem in multiple organ sites. This has the greatest ramifications in the case of prostate cancer because of the very high incidence of latent prostate cancer in aging men, the availability of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, and the long-term effects of definitive therapy. The condition of most men with favorable-risk prostate cancer is far removed from the consequences of a rampaging, aggressive disease. Most of these men are not destined to die of their disease, even in the absence of treatment. Unfortunately, most of these patients are treated radically and are exposed to the risk of significant side effects. Therefore, a selective approach to treatment is appealing. The concept is to identify the subset that harbor more aggressive disease early enough that curative therapy is still a possibility, thereby allowing the others to enjoy improved quality of life, free from the side effects of treatment. This review article summarizes the evidence supporting active surveillance, and the current approach to this management strategy, including the roles of serial biopsy, PSA kinetics, and MR imaging.
Literature
1.
2.
Bray F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Forman D, Auvinen A. Prostate cancer incidence and mortality trends in 37 European countries: an overview. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(17):3040–52.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320–8.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al. Mortality results from the Gotebörg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:725–32.PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
Greene KK, Albertsen PC, Babaian RJ, et al. PSA best practice statement: 2009 update. J Urol. 2009;182:2232–41.PubMedCrossRef
7.
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):126–31.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Eggener S, Scardino P, Walsh P, et al. 20 year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;85(3):869–75.CrossRef
9.
Kabalin JN, McNeal JE, Price HM, Freiha FS, Stamey TA. Unsuspected adenocarcinoma of the prostate in patients undergoing cystoprostatectomy for other causes: incidence, histology and morphometric observations. J Urol. 1989;141(5):1091–4.PubMed
10.
Wolters T, Roobol M, Schröder F, van der Kwast T. 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;185:121–5.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:374–83.PubMedCrossRef
12.
RP vs WW in Early PCa Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L NEJM 364;18, May 5 2011
13.
14.
Johansson JE, Holmberg L, Johansson S, Bergström R, Adami HO. Fifteen-year survival in prostate cancer. A prospective, population-based study in Sweden. JAMA. 1997;277(6):467–71.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Van As NJ, Parker C. Active surveillance with selective radical treatment for localized prostate cancer. Cancer J. 2007;13(5):289–94.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, Metter EJ, Landis P, Walsh PC, et al. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2359–65.PubMedCrossRef
17.
van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Aus G, Hugosson J, Rannikko AS, et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol. 2008 Sep 17
18.
Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S, Ayyathurai R, Kava B, Manoharan M. Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the Miami experience. BJU Int. 2007 Sep 10; [Epub ahead of print]
19.
Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, de Vries SH, Wolters T, Gosselaar C, van Leenders GJ, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol. 2007;51(5):1244–50.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Khatami A, Hugusson PSA DT and surveillance: Int J Cancer 2006; 120, 170–174.
21.
van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, Aus G, Pihl CG, Wolters T, et al. Swedish and Dutch sections of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes? Cancer. 2010;116(5):1281–90.PubMedCrossRef
22.
van den Bergh RC, Vasarainen H, van der Poel HG, Vis-Maters JJ, Rietbergen JB, Pickles T, et al. Bangma CHShort-term outcomes of the prospective multicentre ‘Prostate Cancer Research International: active surveillance’ study. BJU Int. 2010;105(7):956–62.PubMedCrossRef
23.
van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Aus G, Hugosson J, Rannikko AS, et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol. 2009;55(1):1–8.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Oliveira IS, Pontes-Junior J, Abe DK, Crippa A, Dall'oglio MF, Nesralah AJ, et al. Undergrading and understaging in patients with clinically insignificant prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 2010;36(3):292–9.PubMed
25.
Kane CJ, Im R, Amling CL, Presti JC Jr, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, et al.; SEARCH Database Study Group. Outcomes after radical prostatectomy among men who are candidates for active surveillance: results from the SEARCH database. Urology. 2010 Apr 13.
26.
Raventós CX, Orsola A, de Torres I, Cecchini L, Trilla E, Planas J, et al. Preoperative prediction of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens: the role of prostate volume and the number of positive cores. Urol Int. 2010;84(2):153–8.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Ploussard G, Salomon L, Xylinas E, Allory Y, Vordos D, Hoznek A, et al. Pathological findings and prostate specific antigen outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men eligible for active surveillance–does the risk of misclassification vary according to biopsy criteria? J Urol. 2010;183(2):539–44.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Thaxton CS, Loeb S, Roehl KA, Kan D, Catalona WJ. Treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for 3 published active surveillance protocols. Urology. 2010;75(2):414–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Smaldone MC, Cowan JE, Carroll PR, Davies BJ. Eligibility for active surveillance and pathological outcomes for men undergoing radical prostatectomy in a large, community based cohort. J Urol. 2010;183(1):138–43.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Davis JW, Kim J, Ward JF, Wang X, Nakanishi H, Babaian RJ, et al. Radical prostatectomy findings in patients predicted to have low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer diagnosed by extended-core biopsies: an analysis of volume and zonal distribution of tumour foci.
31.
Duffield AS, Lee TK, Miyamoto H, Carter HB, Epstein JI. Radical prostatectomy findings in patients in whom active surveillance of prostate cancer fails. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2274–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Mufarrij P, Sankin A, Godoy G, Lepor H. Pathologic outcomes of candidates for active surveillance undergoing radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2010 May 20. [Epub ahead of print]
33.
Loblaw A, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Vesprini D, et al. Comparing prostate specific antigen triggers for intervention in men with stable prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol. 2010;184(5):1942–6.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Ross AE, Loeb S, Landis P, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Kettermann A, et al. Prostate-specific antigen kinetics during follow-up are an unreliable trigger for intervention in a prostate cancer surveillance program. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(17):2810–6.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Vickers A. Systematic review of pretreatment PSA velocity and doubling time As PCA predictors. J Clin Oncol. 2008;27:398–403.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Delongchamps NB, Beuvon F, Eiss D, Flam T, Muradyan N, Zerbib M et al. Multiparametric MRI is helpful to predict tumor focality, stage, and size in patients diagnosed with unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 14:232–237
37.
Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO, De Visschere PJ, Fonteyne VH, Verbaeys AC, Oosterlinck W. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the assessment of high grade prostate carcinoma in patients with elevated PSA: A single-institution experience of 356 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2009 Sep 7
38.
Fütterer JJ, Barentsz J, Heijmijnk ST. Imaging modalities for prostate cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2009;9(7):923–37.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Zhang L, Loblaw A, Klotz L. Modeling prostate specific antigen kinetics in patients on active surveillance. J Urol. 2006;176(4 Pt 1):1392–7.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Helpap B, Egevad L. Modified Gleason grading. An updated review. Histol Histopathol. 2009;24(5):661–6.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Active Surveillance for Favorable-risk Prostate Cancer: Background, Patient Selection, Triggers for Intervention, and Outcomes
Author
Laurence Klotz
Publication date
01-04-2012
Publisher
Current Science Inc.
Published in
Current Urology Reports / Issue 2/2012
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-012-0242-4

Other articles of this Issue 2/2012

Current Urology Reports 2/2012 Go to the issue

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Role and Extent of Lymphadenectomy During Radical Cystectomy for Invasive Bladder Cancer

Prostate Cancer (R Reiter, Section Editor)

Focal Therapy of Prostate Cancer: Evidence-based Analysis for Modern Selection Criteria

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Biomolecular Predictors of Urothelial Cancer Behavior and Treatment Outcomes

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Restaging Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor for High-risk Stage Ta and T1 Bladder Cancer

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Recent Advances in Treatment of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Invasive Bladder Cancer