Korean J Urol.  2010 Oct;51(10):665-670.

Active Surveillance for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Short Review

• Lawrentschuk N
• Klotz L

Abstract

Active surveillance is becoming a more widely accepted management strategy in men with low-risk localized prostate cancer. This is in recognition of the knowledge that most men with such cancer are likely to die from other causes. The obvious benefits of active surveillance are reduced morbidity by delaying or avoiding radical gland therapy. These advantages should be balanced against appropriate selection criteria and triggers for moving to radical therapy while on active surveillance. The optimal method by which to identify the small number of men who will progress by use of clinical, biopsy, and imaging data is yet to be defined. Nevertheless, active surveillance is an appealing management option in selected men with prostate cancer and represents a solution to the significant problem of the overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant disease that accompanies prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening.

Keyword

Needle biopsy; Outcome assessment; Prostate neoplasms; Prostate-specific antigen; Review

MeSH Terms

Biopsy
Biopsy, Needle
Humans
Male
Mass Screening
Patient Selection
Prostate
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatic Neoplasms
Prostate-Specific Antigen

Reference

1. 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. 167:1664–1669.

2. Klotz L, Nam R. Active surveillance with selective delayed intervention for favourable risk prostate cancer: clinical experience and a "number needed to treat" analysis. Eur Urol Suppl. 2006. 5:479–486.

3. Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, Sandler HM, Northouse L, Hembroff L, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med. 2008. 358:1250–1261.

4. Klotz L. Active surveillance for favorable risk prostate cancer: what are the results, and how safe is it? Semin Radiat Oncol. 2008. 18:2–6.

5. Lindner U, Weersink RA, Haider MA, Gertner MR, Davidson SR, Atri M, et al. Image guided photothermal focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: phase I trial. J Urol. 2009. 182:1371–1377.

6. Klotz L. Active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancer: who, how and why? Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2007. 4:692–698.

7. Bacon CG, Giovannucci E, Testa M, Kawachi I. The impact of cancer treatment on quality of life outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2001. 166:1804–1810.

8. Galbraith ME, Ramirez JM, Pedro LW. Quality of life, health outcomes, and identity for patients with prostate cancer in five different treatment groups. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2001. 28:551–560.

9. Litwin MS, Lubeck DP, Spitalny GM, Henning JM, Carroll PR. Mental health in men treated for early stage prostate carcinoma: a posttreatment, longitudinal quality of life analysis from the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor. Cancer. 2002. 95:54–60.

10. Arredondo SA, Downs TM, Lubeck DP, Pasta DJ, Silva SJ, Wallace KL, et al. Watchful waiting and health related quality of life for patients with localized prostate cancer: data from CaPSURE. J Urol. 2004. 172:1830–1834.

11. Steineck G, Helgesen F, Adolfsson J, Dickman PW, Johansson JE, Norlén BJ, et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N Engl J Med. 2002. 347:790–796.

12. Dall'Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, Davies BJ, Albertsen PC, Klotz LH, et al. Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer. 2008. 112:1650–1659.

13. Barocas DA, Cowan JE, Smith JA Jr, Carroll PR. What percentage of patients with newly diagnosed carcinoma of the prostate are candidates for surveillance? An analysis of the CaPSURE database. J Urol. 2008. 180:1330–1334.

14. 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. 55:1–8.

15. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer V.3.2010. 2010.

16. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Abbou C. Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. 2007. European Association of Urology.

17. Lee SE, Kim DS, Lee WK, Park HZ, Lee CJ, Doo SH, et al. Application of the Epstein criteria for prediction of clinically insignificant prostate cancer in Korean men. BJU Int. 2010. 105:1526–1530.

18. 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. 2009. 28:126–131.

19. Carter HB, Walsh PC, Landis P, Epstein JI. Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: preliminary results. J Urol. 2002. 167:1231–1234.

20. 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. 178:2359–2364.

21. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Shiraishi T, Ogawa O, Suzukamo Y, Fukuhara S, et al. Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for active surveillance in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008. 38:122–128.

22. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Aus G, Hugosson J, Rannikko AS, et al. Gleason score 7 screen-detected prostate cancers initially managed expectantly: outcomes in 50 men. BJU Int. 2009. 103:1472–1477.

23. Chodak GW, Thisted RA, Gerber GS, Johansson JE, Adolfsson J, Jones GW, et al. Results of conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1994. 330:242–248.

24. van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, Aus G, Pihl CG, Wolters T, et al. Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes? Cancer. 2010. 116:1281–1290.

25. 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. 112:2664–2670.

26. Raz O, Haider M, Trachtenberg J, Leibovici D, Lawrentschuk N. MRI for men undergoing active- surveillance or with rising PSA and negative biopsies. Nat Rev Urol. 2010. 7:543–551.

27. Franiel T, Lüdemann L, Taupitz M, Rost J, Asbach P, Beyersdorff D. Pharmacokinetic MRI of the prostate: parameters for differentiating low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer. Rofo. 2009. 181:536–542.

28. Lawrentschuk N, Haider MA, Daljeet N, Evans A, Toi A, Finelli A, et al. 'Prostatic evasive anterior tumours': the role of magnetic resonance imaging. BJU Int. 2010. 105:1231–1236.

29. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Pucar D, Kuroiwa K, Chen HN, et al. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int. 2007. 99:786–793.

30. Auprich M, Haese A, Walz J, Pummer K, de la Taille A, Graefen M, et al. External validation of urinary PCA3-based nomograms to individually predict prostate biopsy outcome. Eur Urol. 2010. Epub ahead of print.

31. Sokoll LJ, Ellis W, Lange P, Noteboom J, Elliott DJ, Deras IL, et al. A multicenter evaluation of the PCA3 molecular urine test: pre-analytical effects, analytical performance, and diagnostic accuracy. Clin Chim Acta. 2008. 389:1–6.

32. Krakowsky Y, Loblaw A, Klotz L. Prostate cancer death of men treated with initial active surveillance: clinical and biochemical characteristics. J Urol. 2010. 184:131–135.

33. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Miller GJ, Ford LG, et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003. 349:215–224.

34. Andriole GL, Bostwick DG, Brawley OW, Gomella LG, Marberger M, Montorsi F, et al. Effect of dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010. 362:1192–1202.

35. Fleshner N, Gomella LG, Cookson MS, Finelli A, Evans A, Taneja SS, et al. Delay in the progression of low-risk prostate cancer: rationale and design of the Reduction by Dutasteride of Clinical Progression Events in Expectant Management (REDEEM) trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007. 28:763–769.

36. Klotz L, Kibel A, Sanda M. NCT00499174. Observation or Radical Treatment in Patients With Prostate Cancer. 2007. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov.

37. Hamdy F. NCT00632983. Active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, or radiation therapy in treating patients with loocalized prostate cancer. 2008. US national institutes of health, clinical trials.gov.

38. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schröder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol. 2007. 52:1560–1563.