Active Surveillance Articles

Benefits of early diagnosis and treatment remain debatable for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Active surveillance (AS) is an alternative to treatment. The goal of AS is to identify patients whose cancer is progressing rapidly while avoiding treatment in the majority of patients.

With the addition of active surveillance and thermal ablation (TA) to the urologist's established repertoire of partial (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) as first-line management options for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC), appropriate treatment decision-making has become increasingly nuanced.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) incidence has considerably increased during the last decades without any real impact on age-standardized mortality. It questions the relevance of aggressive treatments carrying potential side effects.

Cancer-specific survival for men with early-stage (Stage I-IIB) testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) is greater than 90% with any management strategy. The data regarding the comparative effectiveness of surveillance, primary chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) was synthesized with a focus on oncologic outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, and short- and long-term toxicities.

To evaluate the ability of MRI-targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy (MRI-biopsy) to reduce negative biopsies and detect clinically significant prostate cancer compared to systematic biopsy (SB) alone in the confirmatory biopsy setting using matched cohorts.

This study aimed to estimate the rates of biopsy undersampling and progression for four prostate cancer (PCa) active surveillance (AS) cohorts within the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) consortium.

The optimal interval for repeat biopsy during active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is yet to be defined. This study examined whether risk of upgrading (to grade group ≥ 2) or risk of converting to treatment varied according to intensity of repeat biopsy using data from the GAP3 consortium's global AS database.

Strong evidence comparing effectiveness between nephron-sparing intervention (NSI) and active surveillance (AS) is lacking. Thus, we aim to compare the outcomes of survival, including cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and cardiovascular-specific survival (CVSS), in patients with renal masses who underwent NSI or AS.

Men with prostate cancer on active surveillance (AS) are advised to follow strict follow-up schedules and switch to definitive treatment on risk reclassification. However, some men might not adhere to these strict protocols.

To determine conditional survival for patients with small renal masses (SRM) undergoing active surveillance (AS).

Patients were enrolled in a prospective AS protocol at our institution between May 2005 and January 2016.

To evaluate how accurate a 12-core transrectal biopsy derived low-risk prostate cancer diagnosis is for an active surveillance programme by comparing the histological outcome with that from confirmatory transperineal sector biopsy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy versus extended biopsy or saturation prostate biopsy (SPBx) in men enrolled on active surveillance (AS).

Management for men aged ≤55 years with low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) is debated given quality-of-life implications with definitive treatment versus the potential missed opportunity for cure with conservative management.

Within the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) initiative, 25 centers across the globe collaborate to standardize active surveillance (AS) protocols for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

In the era of digital data, the Internet has become the primary source from which individuals draw healthcare information.

The aim of the present study is to determine worldwide public interest in prostate cancer (PCa) treatments, their penetrance and variation, and how they compare over time.

The approach to favorable risk prostate cancer known as "active surveillance" was first described explicitly in 2002. This was a report of 250 patients managed with a strategy of expectant management, with serial prostate-specific antigen and periodic biopsy, and radical intervention advised for patients who were re-classified as higher risk.

Genomic characterization of prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies may improve criteria for the selection of patients suitable for active surveillance (AS).

To identify somatic genomic aberrations associated with adverse outcome as AS protocol exclusion indicators.

Many localized prostate cancers will follow an indolent course. Management has shifted towards active surveillance (AS), yet an optimal regimen remains controversial especially regarding expensive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to diagnose prostate cancer and direct all low-risk patients into active surveillance (AS).

A Markov cohort model was developed to assess three scenarios: 1) no mpMRI and current AS; 2) mpMRI and current AS; and 3) mpMRI and increased AS.

Cancer-specific survival for men with clinical stage I (CSI) seminoma approaches 100%, regardless of the management approach chosen after orchiectomy. Given the young age and high survival rate of these patients, there has been a shift toward minimizing treatment-related morbidity and cost.

Despite increasing emphasis on value-based care, the cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer (PCa) management options has not been compared using prospective clinical trial data. The prostate testing for cancer and treatment (ProtecT) trial demonstrated no difference in survival for patients randomized to active surveillance (AS), external beam radiotherapy (RT), or radical prostatectomy (RP).

Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS) have shown to cope with anxiety caused by living with an 'untreated cancer' and different factors can influence the tolerance level for anxiety in these patients.

While about 50% of non- seminomatous germ cell tumors of the testes present as clinical stage I (CSI), further management of these patients continues to be mired in controversy. Active surveillance is a frontline option for low- risk CS I patients and according to some, even the high- risk ones with high embryonal carcinoma (ECA) component and vascular invasion (VI).

Renal cell carcinoma accounts for 3-4% of adult malignant neoplasms and over 65,000 new cases of kidney cancer were diagnosed in the USA in 2013 [1, 2]. Widespread use of abdominal imaging is leading to an increased incidence in the detection of small renal masses (SRMs) among other causes [1-4].

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) has shown promising results in diagnosis, localization, risk stratification and staging of clinically significant prostate cancer, and targeting or guiding prostate biopsy.

This study aimed to explore the effects of a decision support intervention (DSI) and shared decision making (SDM) on knowledge, perceptions about treatment, and treatment choice among men diagnosed with localized low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

Decision support tools improve decisional conflict and elicit patient preferences related to prostate cancer treatment. It was hypothesized that men using the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) would be more likely to pursue guideline-concordant treatment.

This study aimed to evaluate the pathological findings and oncological outcomes of deferred radical prostatectomy in patients who initially elected for active surveillance in a Japanese cohort.

We retrospectively analyzed data collected from a multi-institutional prospective observational cohort of the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance-JAPAN study between January 2010 and September 2020.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is increasingly used in staging early prostate cancer (PCa) but remains heavily reader-dependent. We aim to define the incremental utility of mpMRI over clinical parameters in determining the pathologic extracapsular extension (pECE) of PCa interpreted in a standard radiologic setting and when further over-read by a specialized reader.

Although surgical excision is the standard of therapy for small renal masses (SRMs), there is a growing recognition of active surveillance as an option in select patients who are poor surgical candidates or who have shorter life expectancy.

We evaluated the use of secondary treatments in men with grade group (GG) 1 PC following a period of active surveillance (AS) compared with men undergoing immediate radical prostatectomy (RP) to evaluate what is potentially lost in terms of cancer control, if a patient trials AS and transitions to treatment.

Over the last decade, active surveillance has proven to be a safe approach for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Although active surveillance presents several advantages for both patients and the health care system, all eligible patients do not adopt this approach.

To evaluate trends in the utilization of active surveillance (AS) in a nationally representative cancer database. AS has been increasingly recognized as a strategy for patients with small renal masses (SRM), but little is known about national usage patterns.

To report biopsy-related and oncologic outcomes in a large prospective active surveillance cohort that was initiated in the pre-MRI era and to additionally identify clinical factors associated with disease reclassification in order to inform future studies designed to improve enrollment and follow-up on AS.

For men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, we aimed to develop and validate a model to predict the risk of progression on active surveillance (AS), which could inform more personalised AS strategies.

 Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been the gold standard of imaging for diagnosing prostate cancer for decades but is plagued by user error and undersampling. We aim to explore imaging modalities that are now being used in combination or alone for screening, diagnosis, and/or active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) include seminoma and nonseminoma. Chance of cure is excellent for clinical stage I disease regardless of whether adjuvant treatment or a surveillance strategy with treatment only for those who relapse is used.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly utilized to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Evidence for serial MRI in men on active surveillance (AS) is lacking.

OBJECTIVE - To determine the frequency of disease reclassification and to identify clinicopathological variables associated with it in patients with favourable-risk prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance (AS).

We sought to assess if adding a biopsy proven histologic subtype to a model that predicts overall survival that includes variables representing competing risks in observed, biopsy proven, T1a renal cell carcinomas, enhances the model's performance.

To determine whether replacement of protocol-driven repeat prostate biopsy (PB) with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) +/- targeted repeat prostate biopsy (TB) in evaluating men on active surveillance (AS) for low-volume low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) altered the likelihood or time to treatment, or reduced the number of repeat biopsies required to trigger treatment.

To assess whether the visibility of grade group (GG)1 prostate cancer (PCa) on baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) affects clinical outcomes.

We evaluated 454 men who underwent mpMRI between 2006 and 2018 with maximum GG1 PCa inclusive of MRI-targeted biopsy.

The PRECISE score estimates the likelihood of radiological progression in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) with serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

To present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).

To investigate if pathologic biopsy reevaluation and implementation of immunohistochemical biomarkers could improve prediction of radical prostatectomy outcome in men initially on active surveillance.

External factors, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can lead to cancellations and backlogs of cancer surgeries. The effects of these delays are unclear. This study summarised the evidence surrounding expectant management, delay radical prostatectomy (RP), and neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) compared to immediate RP.

Whether men with Gleason 3+4 prostate cancer are appropriate active surveillance (AS) candidates remains a matter of debate.

to evaluate the effects of initial Gleason grade 3+3 or 3+4 on clinical outcomes during AS.

eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) offer patients, healthcare providers, researchers, and policy makers new potential to improve wellness, practice prevention and reduce suffering from diseases. While the eHealth market is growing to an expected US $26 billion, its potential in the field of Urology is still underused.

The Prostate Health Index (phi) has been FDA approved for decision-making regarding prostate biopsy. Phi has additionally been shown to positively correlate with tumor volume, extraprostatic disease and higher Gleason grade tumors.

To establish a prospective registry for the active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer (PC) using the Korean Urological Oncology Society (KUOS) database and to present interim analysis.

The KUOS registry of AS for PC (KUOS-AS-PC) was organized in May 2019 and comprises multiple institutions nationwide.