4.6 Article

Active Surveillance for Men with Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 205, Issue 1, Pages 115-121

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001241

Keywords

watchful waiting; prostatic neoplasms; risk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The optimal treatment for intermediate risk prostate cancer remains unclear. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines suggest active surveillance, prostatectomy, or radiotherapy. This study analyzed U.S. national trends in active surveillance for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer, finding an increasing use of active surveillance with clinical and socioeconomic disparities.
Purpose: Optimal treatment of intermediate risk prostate cancer remains unclear. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (R) guidelines recommend active surveillance, prostatectomy or radiotherapy. Recent trials demonstrated no difference in prostate cancer specific mortality for men undergoing active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer compared to prostatectomy or radiotherapy. The use of active surveillance for intermediate risk prostate cancer is less clear. In this study we characterize U.S. national trends for demographic, clinical and socioeconomic factors associated with active surveillance for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study examined 176,122 men diagnosed with intermediate risk prostate cancer from 2010 to 2016 in the National Cancer Database. Temporal trends in demographic, clinical and socioeconomic factors among men with intermediate risk prostate cancer and association with the use of active surveillance were characterized. The analysis was performed in April 2020. Results: In total, 176,122 men were identified with intermediate risk prostate cancer from 2010 to 2016. Of these men 57.3% underwent prostatectomy, 36.4% underwent radiotherapy and 3.2% underwent active surveillance. Active surveillance nearly tripled from 1.6% in 2010 to 4.6% in 2016 (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis use of active surveillance was associated with older age, diagnosis in recent years, lower Gleason score and tumor stage, type of insurance, treatment at an academic center and proximity to facility, and attaining higher education (p<0.05). Race and comorbidities were not associated with active surveillance. Conclusions: Our findings highlight increasing active surveillance use for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer demonstrating clinical and socioeconomic disparities. Prospective data and improved risk stratification are needed to guide optimal treatment for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available