Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Tumor Biology 5/2011

01-10-2011 | Review

Active surveillance in prostate cancer: the need to standardize

Authors: Xavier Filella, Juan Alcover, Rafael Molina

Published in: Tumor Biology | Issue 5/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Active surveillance has been proposed as an option for patients with low-risk prostate cancer in order to reduce the effects caused by overdiagnosis. Delaying treatment and applying it only if there is evidence of progression requires a careful identification of these patients. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum levels lower than 10 μg/L and Gleason score lower than 7 are the main criteria used to select patients for active surveillance based on experience accumulated in the last two decades. In the selection of patients with active surveillance two points are taken into consideration: (a) Gleason score changes introduced by the Consensus Conference of 2005; (b) differences between assays in the measurement of PSA serum levels, in the selection of patients for active surveillance. Improving the accuracy of patient’s selection for active surveillance requires that Gleason score reassignment must be taken into account, as well as the harmonization between PSA assays. The use of incorrect results leads to misclassification of patients, undermining the goals of active surveillance.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.PubMedCrossRef Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Yatani R, Chigusa I, Akazaki K, Stemmermann GN, Welsh RA, Correa P. Geographic pathology of latent prostatic carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 1982;29:611–6.PubMedCrossRef Yatani R, Chigusa I, Akazaki K, Stemmermann GN, Welsh RA, Correa P. Geographic pathology of latent prostatic carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 1982;29:611–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Klotz L. Low-risk prostate cancer can and should often be managed with active surveillance and selective delayed intervention. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2008;5:2–3.PubMedCrossRef Klotz L. Low-risk prostate cancer can and should often be managed with active surveillance and selective delayed intervention. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2008;5:2–3.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Galper SL, Chen MH, Catalona WJ, Roehl KA, Richie JP, D’Amico AV. Evidence to support a continued stage migration and decrease in prostate cancer specific mortality. J Urol. 2006;175:907–12.PubMedCrossRef Galper SL, Chen MH, Catalona WJ, Roehl KA, Richie JP, D’Amico AV. Evidence to support a continued stage migration and decrease in prostate cancer specific mortality. J Urol. 2006;175:907–12.PubMedCrossRef
5.
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.PubMedCrossRef 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.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM, di Tommaso D, Boer R, Gann PH, et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer Incidente Trenes. J Nat Cancer Inst. 2002;94:981–90.PubMed Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM, di Tommaso D, Boer R, Gann PH, et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer Incidente Trenes. J Nat Cancer Inst. 2002;94:981–90.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Johansson JE, Andrén O, Andersson SO, Dickman PW, Holmberg L, Magnuson A, et al. Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2004;291:2713–9.PubMedCrossRef Johansson JE, Andrén O, Andersson SO, Dickman PW, Holmberg L, Magnuson A, et al. Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2004;291:2713–9.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Abrahamsson PA, Artibani W, Chapple CR, Wirth M. European Association of Urology position statement on screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;56:270–1.PubMedCrossRef Abrahamsson PA, Artibani W, Chapple CR, Wirth M. European Association of Urology position statement on screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;56:270–1.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bastian PJ, Carter BH, Bjartell A, Seitz M, Stanislaus P, Montorsi F, et al. Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: from definition to clinical implications. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1321–32.PubMedCrossRef Bastian PJ, Carter BH, Bjartell A, Seitz M, Stanislaus P, Montorsi F, et al. Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: from definition to clinical implications. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1321–32.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathological stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason Score (Partin Tables) Based on Cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology. 2007;69:1095–101.PubMedCrossRef Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathological stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason Score (Partin Tables) Based on Cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology. 2007;69:1095–101.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Choo R, DeBoer G, Klotz L, Danjoux C, Morton GC, Rakovitch E, et al. PSA doubling time of prostate carcinoma managed with watchful observation alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50:615–20.PubMedCrossRef Choo R, DeBoer G, Klotz L, Danjoux C, Morton GC, Rakovitch E, et al. PSA doubling time of prostate carcinoma managed with watchful observation alone. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50:615–20.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Choo R, Klotz L, Danjoux C, Morton GC, DeBoer G, Szumacher E, 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. 2002;167:1664–9.PubMedCrossRef Choo R, Klotz L, Danjoux C, Morton GC, DeBoer G, Szumacher E, 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. 2002;167:1664–9.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chun FK, Haese A, Ahyai SA, Walz J, Suardi N, Capitanio U, et al. Critical assessment of tools to predict clinically insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in contemporary men. Cancer. 2008;113:701–9.PubMedCrossRef Chun FK, Haese A, Ahyai SA, Walz J, Suardi N, Capitanio U, et al. Critical assessment of tools to predict clinically insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in contemporary men. Cancer. 2008;113:701–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Martin RM, Turner EL, Neal DE, Donovan JL. Latest results from the UK trials evaluating prostate cancer screening and treatment: the CAP and ProtecT studies. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:3095–101.PubMedCrossRef Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Martin RM, Turner EL, Neal DE, Donovan JL. Latest results from the UK trials evaluating prostate cancer screening and treatment: the CAP and ProtecT studies. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:3095–101.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference van den Bergh RCN, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schröder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS Study. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1560–3.PubMedCrossRef van den Bergh RCN, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schröder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS Study. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1560–3.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: patient selection and management. Curr Oncol. 2010;17 Suppl 2:S11–7.PubMed Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: patient selection and management. Curr Oncol. 2010;17 Suppl 2:S11–7.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol. 2011;59:61–71.PubMedCrossRef Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol. 2011;59:61–71.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Ghani KR, Grigor K, Tulloch DN, Bollina PR, McNeill SA. PSA doubling time of prostate carcinoma managed with watchful observation alone. Eur Urol. 2005;47:196–201.PubMedCrossRef Ghani KR, Grigor K, Tulloch DN, Bollina PR, McNeill SA. PSA doubling time of prostate carcinoma managed with watchful observation alone. Eur Urol. 2005;47:196–201.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, Penson DF, Kowalczyk PDH, Sanders MM, et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1248–53.PubMedCrossRef Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, Penson DF, Kowalczyk PDH, Sanders MM, et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1248–53.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB, Elevad LL, the ISUP Grading Comité. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228–42.PubMedCrossRef Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB, Elevad LL, the ISUP Grading Comité. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228–42.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Chan TY, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Epstein JL. Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3 + 4 versus Gleason score 4 + 3 tumor at radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2000;56:823–7.PubMedCrossRef Chan TY, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Epstein JL. Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3 + 4 versus Gleason score 4 + 3 tumor at radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2000;56:823–7.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Herman CM, Kattan MW, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progresión in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:657–60.PubMedCrossRef Herman CM, Kattan MW, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progresión in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:657–60.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Lau WK, Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Weaver AL, Sebo TJ, Zincke H. Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4. J Urol. 2001;166:1692–7.PubMedCrossRef Lau WK, Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Weaver AL, Sebo TJ, Zincke H. Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4. J Urol. 2001;166:1692–7.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Wright JL, Salinas CA, Lin DW, Kolb S, Koopmeiners J, Feng Z, et al. Prostate cancer specific mortality and Gleason 7 disease differences in prostate cancer outcomes between cases with Gleason 4 _ 3 and Gleason 3 _ 4 tumors in a population based cohort. J Urol. 2009;182:2702–7.PubMedCrossRef Wright JL, Salinas CA, Lin DW, Kolb S, Koopmeiners J, Feng Z, et al. Prostate cancer specific mortality and Gleason 7 disease differences in prostate cancer outcomes between cases with Gleason 4 _ 3 and Gleason 3 _ 4 tumors in a population based cohort. J Urol. 2009;182:2702–7.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Klotz L. Low-risk prostate cancer can and should often be managed with active surveillance and selective delayed intervention. Nat Clin Parcticae Urol. 2008;5:2–3.CrossRef Klotz L. Low-risk prostate cancer can and should often be managed with active surveillance and selective delayed intervention. Nat Clin Parcticae Urol. 2008;5:2–3.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Semjonow A, Brandt B, Oberpenning F, Roth S, Hertle L. Discordance Prostate Suppl. 1996;7:3–16.CrossRef Semjonow A, Brandt B, Oberpenning F, Roth S, Hertle L. Discordance Prostate Suppl. 1996;7:3–16.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Jarrigue V. The need for a lower total PSA cut-off value with PSA assays calibrated to the new WHO standard. Clinical Laboratory International April 2007. Jarrigue V. The need for a lower total PSA cut-off value with PSA assays calibrated to the new WHO standard. Clinical Laboratory International April 2007.
28.
go back to reference Jansen FH, Roobol M, Bangma CH, van Schaik RH. Clinical impact of new prostate-specific antigen WHO standardization on biopsy rates and cancer detection. Clin Chem. 2008;54:1999–2006.PubMedCrossRef Jansen FH, Roobol M, Bangma CH, van Schaik RH. Clinical impact of new prostate-specific antigen WHO standardization on biopsy rates and cancer detection. Clin Chem. 2008;54:1999–2006.PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Stephan C, Klaas M, Müller C, Schnorr D, Loening SA, Jung K. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate-specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update. Clin Chem. 2006;52:59–64.PubMedCrossRef Stephan C, Klaas M, Müller C, Schnorr D, Loening SA, Jung K. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate-specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update. Clin Chem. 2006;52:59–64.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Stephan C, Kramer J, Meyer HA, Kristiansen G, Ziemer S, Deger S, 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. 2007;99:1427–31.PubMedCrossRef Stephan C, Kramer J, Meyer HA, Kristiansen G, Ziemer S, Deger S, 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. 2007;99:1427–31.PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Slev PR, La’ulu SL, Roberts WL. Intermethod differences in results for total PSA, free PSA, and percentage of free PSA. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;129:952–8.PubMedCrossRef Slev PR, La’ulu SL, Roberts WL. Intermethod differences in results for total PSA, free PSA, and percentage of free PSA. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;129:952–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Sturgeon C, Dati F, Duffy MJ, Hasholzner U, Klapdor R, Lamerz R, et al. Quality requirements and control: EGTM recommendations. European Group on Tumour Markers. Anticancer Res. 1999;19:2791–4. Sturgeon C, Dati F, Duffy MJ, Hasholzner U, Klapdor R, Lamerz R, et al. Quality requirements and control: EGTM recommendations. European Group on Tumour Markers. Anticancer Res. 1999;19:2791–4.
Metadata
Title
Active surveillance in prostate cancer: the need to standardize
Authors
Xavier Filella
Juan Alcover
Rafael Molina
Publication date
01-10-2011
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Tumor Biology / Issue 5/2011
Print ISSN: 1010-4283
Electronic ISSN: 1423-0380
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-011-0193-2

Other articles of this Issue 5/2011

Tumor Biology 5/2011 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine