Korean J Urol.  2013 Jul;54(7):417-425.

Divorcing Diagnosis From Treatment: Contemporary Management of Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

• Glass AS
• Punnen S
• Cooperberg MR

Abstract

Today, the majority of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer will present with low-risk features of the disease. Because prostate cancer often takes an insidious course, it is debated whether the majority of these men require radical treatment and the accompanying derangement of quality of life domains imposed by surgery, radiation, and hormonal therapy. Investigators have identified various selection criteria for "insignificant disease," or that which can be monitored for disease progression while safely delaying radical treatment. In addition to the ideal definition of low risk, a lack of randomized trials comparing the various options for treatment in this group of men poses a great challenge for urologists. Early outcomes from active surveillance cohorts support its use in carefully selected men with low-risk disease features, but frequent monitoring is required. Patient selection and disease monitoring methods will require refinement that will likely be accomplished through the increased use of biomarkers and specialized imaging techniques.

Keyword

Diagnosis; Disease management; Prostate neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Biomarkers
Cohort Studies
Disease Management
Disease Progression
Humans
Male
Patient Selection
Prostate
Prostatic Neoplasms
Quality of Life
Research Personnel

Reference

1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010. 127:2893–2917.

2. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013. 63:11–30.

3. Curado MP, Edwards B, Shin HR, Storm H, Ferlay J, Heanue M, et al. Scientific Publication No. 160. Cancer incidence in five continents. 2008. Vol IX. Lyon: IARC.

4. Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Szabo A, Falcon S, Wegelin J, et al. Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality decline. Cancer Causes Control. 2008. 19:175–181.

5. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol. 2007. 178(3 Pt 2):S14–S19.

6. Welch HG, Black WC. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010. 102:605–613.

7. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Wever E, Gulati R, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009. 101:374–383.

8. Greene KL, Cowan JE, Cooperberg MR, Meng MV, DuChane J, Carroll PR, et al. Who is the average patient presenting with prostate cancer? Urology. 2005. 66:5 Suppl. 76–82.

9. Schroder 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. 360:1320–1328.

10. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med. 2009. 360:1310–1319.

11. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Khatami A, Lodding P, et al. Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010. 11:725–732.

12. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010. 28:1117–1123.

13. Heijnsdijk EA, Wever EM, Auvinen A, Hugosson J, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Quality-of-life effects of prostate-specific antigen screening. N Engl J Med. 2012. 367:595–605.

14. 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. 367:203–213.

15. 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. 364:1708–1717.

16. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: progress and promise. J Clin Oncol. 2011. 29:3669–3676.

17. Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, Boston B, Busby JE, D'Amico AV, et al. Prostate cancer, Version 3.2012: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012. 10:1081–1087.

18. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998. 280:969–974.

19. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998. 90:766–771.

20. Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, Litwin MS, Latini DM, Du Chane J, et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005. 173:1938–1942.

21. May M, Knoll N, Siegsmund M, Fahlenkamp D, Vogler H, Hoschke B, et al. Validity of the CAPRA score to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy. Results from a european multicenter survey of 1,296 patients. J Urol. 2007. 178:1957–1962.

22. Zhao KH, Hernandez DJ, Han M, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Partin AW. External validation of University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score. Urology. 2008. 72:396–400.

23. Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI, Cagiannos I, Hammerer PG, Haese A, Palisaar J, et al. A validation of two preoperative nomograms predicting recurrence following radical prostatectomy in a cohort of European men. Urol Oncol. 2002. 7:141–146.

24. Greene KL, Meng MV, Elkin EP, Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Kattan MW, et al. Validation of the Kattan preoperative nomogram for prostate cancer recurrence using a community based cohort: results from cancer of the prostate strategic urological research endeavor (capsure). J Urol. 2004. 171(6 Pt 1):2255–2259.

25. Korets R, Motamedinia P, Yeshchina O, Desai M, McKiernan JM. Accuracy of the Kattan nomogram across prostate cancer risk-groups. BJU Int. 2011. 108:56–60.

26. Tosoian JJ, Johnbull E, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Partin AW, et al. Pathologic outcomes in men with low-risk and very low-risk prostate cancer: implications on the practice of active surveillance. J Urol. 2013. 04. 30. [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.071.

27. Chung JS, Choi HY, Song HR, Byun SS, Seo Si, Song C, et al. Preoperative nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension in Korean men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. J Korean Med Sci. 2010. 25:1443–1448.

28. Mitsuzuka K, Narita S, Koie T, Kaiho Y, Tsuchiya N, Yoneyama T, et al. Pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk prostate cancer meeting the Prostate Cancer International: Active Surveillance criteria. BJU Int. 2013. 111:914–920.

29. Lee DH, Jung HB, Lee SH, Rha KH, Choi YD, Hong SJ, et al. Comparison of pathological outcomes of active surveillance candidates who underwent radical prostatectomy using contemporary protocols at a high-volume Korean center. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2012. 42:1079–1085.

30. Roach M 3rd, Hanks G, Thames H Jr, Schellhammer P, Shipley WU, Sokol GH, 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. 2006. 65:965–974.

31. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Dotan ZA, Bianco FJ Jr, Lilja H, et al. Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol. 2006. 24:3973–3978.

32. Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenberger MA, Chan DW, Pearson JD, Walsh PC. Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 1999. 281:1591–1597.

33. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007. 177:2106–2131.

34. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason MD, et al. Guidelines on prostate cancer [Internet]. 2013. cited 2013 May 1. Arnhem: European Association of Urology;Available from: http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/09_Prostate_Cancer_LR.pdf.

35. Barocas DA, Cowan JE, Smith JA Jr, Carroll PR. CaPSURE Investigators. 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.

36. 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.

37. 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. 29:2185–2190.

38. Klotz L. Active surveillance with selective delayed intervention for favorable risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2006. 24:46–50.

39. 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. 28:126–131.

40. 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.

41. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, Reese AC, Zaid HB, Porten SP, et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011. 29:228–234.

42. van As NJ, Parker CC. Active surveillance with selective radical treatment for localized prostate cancer. Cancer J. 2007. 13:289–294.

43. van As NJ, Norman AR, Thomas K, Khoo VS, Thompson A, Huddart RA, et al. Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2008. 54:1297–1305.

44. 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. 2008. 101:165–169.

45. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Acosta K, Kava B, Manoharan M. Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment. Eur Urol. 2010. 58:831–835.

46. Patel MI, DeConcini DT, Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Wheeler T, Scardino PT. An analysis of men with clinically localized prostate cancer who deferred definitive therapy. J Urol. 2004. 171:1520–1524.

47. Adamy A, Yee DS, Matsushita K, Maschino A, Cronin A, Vickers A, et al. Role of prostate specific antigen and immediate confirmatory biopsy in predicting progression during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2011. 185:477–482.

48. 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. 51:1244–1250.

49. 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.

50. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA. 1994. 271:368–374.

51. 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. 182:2274–2278.

52. Warlick C, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Carter HB. Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006. 98:355–357.

53. Latini DM, Hart SL, Knight SJ, Cowan JE, Ross PL, Duchane J, et al. The relationship between anxiety and time to treatment for patients with prostate cancer on surveillance. J Urol. 2007. 178(3 Pt 1):826–831.

54. Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD, Barry MJ, Kantoff PW, Stewart ST, et al. Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis. JAMA. 2010. 304:2373–2380.

55. 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. 28:2810–2816.

56. Whitson JM, Porten SP, Hilton JF, Cowan JE, Perez N, Cooperberg MR, et al. The relationship between prostate specific antigen change and biopsy progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2011. 185:1656–1660.

57. Donovan JL, Lane JA, Peters TJ, Brindle L, Salter E, Gillatt D, et al. Development of a complex intervention improved randomization and informed consent in a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009. 62:29–36.

58. 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. 46:3095–3101.

59. Wilt TJ. SPCG-4: a needed START to PIVOTal data to promote and protect evidence-based prostate cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008. 100:1123–1125.

60. Tewari AK, Patel ND, Leung RA, Yadav R, Vaughan ED, El-Douaihy Y, et al. Visual cues as a surrogate for tactile feedback during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: posterolateral margin rates in 1340 consecutive patients. BJU Int. 2010. 106:528–536.

61. Lee EK, Baack J, Duchene DA. Survey of practicing urologists: robotic versus open radical prostatectomy. Can J Urol. 2010. 17:5094–5098.

62. Dorin RP, Daneshmand S, Lassoff MA, Cai J, Skinner DG, Lieskovsky G. Long-term outcomes of open radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen era. Urology. 2012. 79:626–631.

63. Busch J, Stephan C, Herold A, Erber B, Kempkensteffen C, Hinz S, et al. Long-term oncological and continence outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-centre experience. BJU Int. 2012. 110(11 Pt C):E985–E990.

64. Menon M, Bhandari M, Gupta N, Lane Z, Peabody JO, Rogers CG, et al. Biochemical recurrence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of 1384 patients with a median 5-year follow-up. Eur Urol. 2010. 58:838–846.

65. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, Han M, Partin AW, Trock BJ, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011. 185:869–875.

66. Zelefsky MJ, Eastham JA, Cronin AM, Fuks Z, Zhang Z, Yamada Y, et al. Metastasis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparison of clinical cohorts adjusted for case mix. J Clin Oncol. 2010. 28:1508–1513.

67. Jonler M, Madsen FA, Rhodes PR, Sall M, Messing EM, Bruskewitz RC. A prospective study of quantification of urinary incontinence and quality of life in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology. 1996. 48:433–440.

68. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012. 62:405–417.

69. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2009. 55:1037–1063.

70. Peeters ST, Heemsbergen WD, Koper PC, van Putten WL, Slot A, Dielwart MF, et al. Dose-response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy. J Clin Oncol. 2006. 24:1990–1996.

71. Pollack A, Zagars GK, Starkschall G, Antolak JA, Lee JJ, Huang E, et al. Prostate cancer radiation dose response: results of the M. D. Anderson phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002. 53:1097–1105.

72. Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L, Starkschall G, Huang EH, Cheung MR, et al. Long-term results of the M. D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008. 70:67–74.

73. Jacobs BL, Zhang Y, Skolarus TA, Wei JT, Montie JE, Miller DC, et al. Comparative effectiveness of external-beam radiation approaches for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2012. 07. 06. [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.055.

74. Merrick GS, Butler WM, Wallner KE, Galbreath RW, Adamovich E. Permanent interstitial brachytherapy in younger patients with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer. Urology. 2004. 64:754–759.

75. Shah C, Lanni TB Jr, Ghilezan MI, Gustafson GS, Marvin KS, Ye H, et al. Brachytherapy provides comparable outcomes and improved cost-effectiveness in the treatment of low/intermediate prostate cancer. Brachytherapy. 2012. 11:441–445.

76. Snyder KM, Stock RG, Hong SM, Lo YC, Stone NN. Defining the risk of developing grade 2 proctitis following 125I prostate brachytherapy using a rectal dose-volume histogram analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001. 50:335–341.

77. Talcott JA, Clark JA, Stark PC, Mitchell SP. Long-term treatment related complications of brachytherapy for early prostate cancer: a survey of patients previously treated. J Urol. 2001. 166:494–499.

78. Freeman DE, King CR. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer: five-year outcomes. Radiat Oncol. 2011. 6:3.

79. Moul JW, Kibel AS, Roach M 3rd, Dreicer R. Indications and practice with androgen deprivation therapy. Urology. 2011. 78:5 Suppl. S478–S481.

80. Jones CU, Hunt D, McGowan DG, Amin MB, Chetner MP, Bruner DW, et al. Radiotherapy and short-term androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011. 365:107–118.

81. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Penson DF, Barrows G, Fine J. 13-year outcomes following treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer in a population based cohort. J Urol. 2007. 177:932–936.

82. Kibel AS, Ciezki JP, Klein EA, Reddy CA, Lubahn JD, Haslag-Minoff J, et al. Survival among men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2012. 187:1259–1265.

83. Cooperberg MR, Vickers AJ, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Comparative risk-adjusted mortality outcomes after primary surgery, radiotherapy, or androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010. 116:5226–5234.

84. Johansson E, Steineck G, Holmberg L, Johansson JE, Nyberg T, Ruutu M, et al. Long-term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011. 12:891–899.

85. Cooperberg MR, Ramakrishna NR, Duff SB, Hughes KE, Sadownik S, Smith JA, et al. Primary treatments for clinically localised prostate cancer: a comprehensive lifetime cost-utility analysis. BJU Int. 2013. 111:437–450.

86. Allen AM, Pawlicki T, Dong L, Fourkal E, Buyyounouski M, Cengel K, et al. An evidence based review of proton beam therapy: the report of ASTRO's emerging technology committee. Radiother Oncol. 2012. 103:8–11.

87. Jacobs BL, Zhang Y, Skolarus TA, Hollenbeck BK. Growth of high-cost intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer raises concerns about overuse. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012. 31:750–759.

88. Bussemakers MJ, van Bokhoven A, Verhaegh GW, Smit FP, Karthaus HF, Schalken JA, et al. DD3: a new prostate-specific gene, highly overexpressed in prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 1999. 59:5975–5979.

89. Deras IL, Aubin SM, Blase A, Day JR, Koo S, Partin AW, et al. PCA3: a molecular urine assay for predicting prostate biopsy outcome. J Urol. 2008. 179:1587–1592.

90. Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, van Leeuwen P, Wolters T, van den Bergh RC, van Leenders GJ, et al. Performance of the prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) gene and prostate-specific antigen in prescreened men: exploring the value of PCA3 for a first-line diagnostic test. Eur Urol. 2010. 58:475–481.

91. Nakanishi H, Groskopf J, Fritsche HA, Bhadkamkar V, Blase A, Kumar SV, et al. PCA3 molecular urine assay correlates with prostate cancer tumor volume: implication in selecting candidates for active surveillance. J Urol. 2008. 179:1804–1809.

92. Ploussard G, Durand X, Xylinas E, Moutereau S, Radulescu C, Forgue A, et al. Prostate cancer antigen 3 score accurately predicts tumour volume and might help in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2011. 59:422–429.

93. Tosoian JJ, Loeb S, Kettermann A, Landis P, Elliot DJ, Epstein JI, et al. Accuracy of PCA3 measurement in predicting short-term biopsy progression in an active surveillance program. J Urol. 2010. 183:534–538.

94. Lin DW, Newcomb LF, Brown EC, Brooks JD, Carroll PR, Feng Z, et al. Urinary TMPRSS2: Use of ERG and PCA3 to predict tumor volume and Gleason grade in an active surveillance cohort results from the Canary/EDRN Prostate Active Surveillance Study. 2012. In : 2012 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium; 2012 Feb 2-4; San Francisco, USA. Alexandria: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).

95. Whelan C, Kawachi M, Smith DD, Linehan J, Babilonia G, Mejia R, et al. EPS biomarkers improve stratification of NCCN active surveillance candidates: performance of secretion capacity and TMPRSS2:ERG models. J Urol. 2013. 05. 10. [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.019.

96. Shariat SF, Walz J, Roehrborn CG, Zlotta AR, Perrotte P, Suardi N, et al. External validation of a biomarker-based preoperative nomogram predicts biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2008. 26:1526–1531.

97. Lasselin J, Drouin SJ, Champy CM, Leon P, Casenave J, Cussenot O, et al. Influence of plasmatic testosterone during natural history of prostate cancer: a review. Prog Urol. 2013. 23:438–443.

98. Newcomb LF, Brooks JD, Carroll PR, Feng Z, Gleave ME, Nelson PS, et al. Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study: design of a multi-institutional active surveillance cohort and biorepository. Urology. 2010. 75:407–413.

99. Morgan VA, Riches SF, Thomas K, Vanas N, Parker C, Giles S, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring prostate cancer progression in patients managed by active surveillance. Br J Radiol. 2011. 84:31–37.

100. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Akin O, Yu C, Zakian KL, Udo K, et al. Preoperative nomograms incorporating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prediction of insignificant prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012. 109:1315–1322.