Purpose
To compare the clinical outcome of males with low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer managed within a standardized modern protocol of active surveillance.
Materials and Methods
This was a prospective cohort study with strict and expanded active surveillance criteria in males with prostate cancer. Baseline assessment included multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), extended systematic biopsy, and software-based MR-targeted biopsy. Follow-up included biannual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) check, mpMRI, and control biopsy once a year for the first 2 years, and afterward mpMRI every 2 years with additional tests as clinically indicated. The primary outcome was the transition rate to active treatment.
Results
A total of 51 patients were included: 17 (33%) and 34 (67%) followed protocols of strict (study arm 1) and expanded (study arm 2) active surveillance criteria, respectively. Median age and PSA were 65 years (IQR, 60–69 years) and 5.3 ng/mL (IQR, 4.5–7.7 ng/mL), respectively. At baseline, a median of 2 (IQR, 1–3) cores were positive out of 13 (IQR, 12–14) cores; 22 males (43%) had visible mpMRI lesions. Eight males (24%) in study arm 2 had Gleason score 3+4. After a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 24–48 mo), no patient in study arm 1 compared with 17 patients (33%) in arm 2 underwent active treatment (p<0.0005).
Conclusions
Although expanding eligibility criteria leads to a greater transition rate to active treatment, active surveillance should be contemplated in well-selected males with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer as the curability window seems to be maintained.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.