Surveillance biopsy and active treatment during active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katsuyoshi Hashine ◽  
Hiroyuki Iio ◽  
Yoshiteru Ueno ◽  
Shohei Tsukimori ◽  
Iku Ninomiya
2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 1240-1250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn L. Taylor ◽  
Richard M. Hoffman ◽  
Kimberly M. Davis ◽  
George Luta ◽  
Amethyst Leimpeter ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-388
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hout ◽  
Ali Merhe ◽  
Nassib Abou Heidar ◽  
Jose M. El-Asmar ◽  
Wassim Wazzan ◽  
...  

Background: The aim of our study was to evaluate the outcome of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer for a cohort of patients at our institution. Methods: A total of 43 patients with low risk prostate cancer were enrolled in an active surveillance pilot program at our institution between 2008 and 2018. Follow up protocols included: periodic prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE), multiparametric MRI, and prostate biopsy at one year. Pertinent parameters were collected, and descriptive statistics were reported along with a subset analysis of patients that dropped out of the protocol to receive active treatment for disease progression. Results: Out of 43 eligible patients, 46.5% had a significant rise in follow up PSA. DRE was initially suspicious in 27.9% of patients, and none had any change in DRE on follow up. Initially, prostate MRIs showed PIRADS 3, 4, and 5 in 14%, 37.2%, and 11.6% respectively, while 23.2% had a negative initial MRI. 14% did not have an MRI. Upon follow up, 18.6% of patients had progression on MRI. Initial biopsies revealed that 86% were classified as WHO group 1, while 14% as WHO group 2. With regards to the follow up biopsies, 11.6% were upgraded. 20.9% of our patients had active treatment; 44.4% due to upgraded biopsy results, 22.2% due to PSA progression, 22.2% due to strong patient preference, and 11.1% due to radiologic progression. Conclusions: For selected men with low risk prostate cancer, AS is a reasonable alternative. The decision for active treatment should be tailored upon changes in PSA, DRE, MRI, and biopsy results.


Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 355
Author(s):  
Matteo Ferro ◽  
Gennaro Musi ◽  
Deliu Victor Matei ◽  
Alessandro Francesco Mistretta ◽  
Stefano Luzzago ◽  
...  

Background: circulating levels of lymphocytes, platelets and neutrophils have been identified as factors related to unfavorable clinical outcome for many solid tumors. The aim of this cohort study is to evaluate and validate the use of the Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers (PSIM) score in predicting and improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. Methods: we reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. We performed a head-to-head comparison between the histological findings of specimens after radical prostatectomy (RP) and prostate biopsies. The PSIM score was calculated on the basis of positivity according to cutoffs (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) 2.0, platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) 118 and monocyte-to-lymphocyte-ratio (MLR) 5.0), with 1 point assigned for each value exceeding the specified threshold and then summed, yielding a final score ranging from 0 to 3. Results: median NLR was 2.07, median PLR was 114.83, median MLR was 3.69. Conclusion: we found a significantly increase in the rate of pathological International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥ 2 with the increase of PSIM. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and PSIM, the latter was found the sole independent prognostic variable influencing probability of adverse pathology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document