Home
February 2010 March 2010 April 2010
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 9 1 2 3 4 5 6
Week 10 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Week 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Week 12 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Week 13 28 29 30 31
Reach urologists

Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes? - Abstract Show Comments PDF Print E-mail
  
Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Strategies of active surveillance (AS) of low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer have emerged, because the balance between survival outcomes and quality of life issues when radically treating these malignancies is disputable. Delay before radical treatment caused by active surveillance may be associated with an impaired chance of curability.

Men diagnosed with low-risk (T1c/T2; prostate-specific antigen [PSA] = < 10.0; PSA density, < 0.2 ng/mL; Gleason score, 3 + 3=6; 1-2 positive biopsies) prostate cancer in the Swedish section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer who received radical prostatectomy (RP) were studied. One group received immediate RP, whereas another group received delayed RP after an initial period of expectant management. These groups were compared regarding histopathological and biochemical outcomes, correcting for baseline differences.

Mean follow-up after diagnosis was 5.7 years (standard deviation [SD], 3.2). The immediate RP group (n = 158) received RP a mean of 0.5 (SD, 0.2) years after diagnosis; the delayed RP group (n = 69) received RP after 2.6 (SD, 2.0) years (P < .001). After adjustment for small baseline dissimilarities, no differences in RP frequencies of Gleason score >6 (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; P = .221), capsular penetration (OR, 2.45; P = .091), positive margins (OR, 1.34; P = .445), RP tumor volume (difference, 0.099; P = .155), or biochemical progression rates (P = .185, P = .689) were found between groups, although all data were in favor of immediate RP.

With limited patient numbers available for analysis, differences in intermediate outcomes between immediate RP and delayed RP were nonsignificant. The delayed RP group may be subject to a selection bias. Prospective evaluation of active surveillance protocols is essential.

Written by:
van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, Aus G, Pihl CG, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Roobol MJ, Schröder FH, Hugosson J.   Are you the author?

Reference:
Cancer. 2010 Jan 11. Epub ahead of print.
doi:10.1002/cncr.24882

PubMed Abstract
PMID:20066716

UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section

Reader Comments

Please log-in or register in order to submit comments.

Powered by AkoComment!

 
User Rating: / 2
PoorBest


 
Visitor Ratings:
Healthcare Professionals:
5 (1 votes)

Patients:
5 (1 votes)


Bookmark and Share

Member's Section

Login

Sign Up

Quick Search

Meet the Expert


All Experts



Featured Conference

Media and Publisher

Advertising Rates

Working with Industry

Case Studies
Sponsorship Opportunities

Prostate Cancer
Sponsored by