PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To give insight into literature from the past 12-18 months, reporting on disease-specific and patient-reported outcomes of men under active surveillance for prostate cancer.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
RECENT FINDINGS: From recently published established active surveillance cohorts, we learnt that medium and long-term follow-up outcome data provide favorable evidence for the feasibility and safety of active surveillance. The mortality rates reported are consistent with expected mortality in favorable-risk patients who were managed with initial radical therapy. More definite conclusions on the safety of active surveillance can only be drawn on the basis of randomized controlled trial data. With respect to quality of life, men on active surveillance seem to do well, also with respect to urinary and erectile function. Further research on this subject is, however, warranted.
SUMMARY: Prostate cancer-specific mortality under active surveillance is very low. The combination of disease-specific and patient-reported outcomes indicates that active surveillance is feasible. This is also reflected in smaller, population-based studies which confirm the acceptance of active surveillance in clinical practice.
Venderbos LD, Bangma CH, Korfage IJ. Are you the author?
Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Urology; Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Public Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Reference: Curr Opin Urol. 2015 May;25(3):267-71.