Evaluating the Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Prospective Results From the Canary PASS Cohort

Author(s):  
Adrian J. Waisman Malaret ◽  
Peter Chang ◽  
Kehao Zhu ◽  
Yingye Zheng ◽  
Lisa F. Newcomb ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e1289
Author(s):  
Adrian J. Waisman Malaret* ◽  
Kehao Zhu ◽  
Yingye Zheng ◽  
Lisa Newcomb ◽  
Peter Chang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 1735-1740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Ploussard ◽  
Jean-Baptiste Beauval ◽  
Marine Lesourd ◽  
Cécile Manceau ◽  
Christophe Almeras ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 20210321
Author(s):  
Francesco Giganti ◽  
Clare Allen ◽  
Vasilis Stavrinides ◽  
Armando Stabile ◽  
Aiman Haider ◽  
...  

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in lesion volume on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMRI) during active surveillance for prostate cancer. Methods: A total of 160 patients with a targeted biopsy-confirmed visible lesion on mpMRI, stratified by low- and intermediate-risk disease (Gleason Grade Group 1 vs Gleason Grade Group 2), were analysed. The % change per year was calculated using the formula: [(final volume/initial volume) exp (1/interval between scans in years)]-1. Results: There was no significant difference in the annual median percentage change between Gleason Grade Group 1 (18%) and Gleason Grade Group 2 (23%) disease (p = 0.16), and between ≤ 10% (23%) and > 10% (22%) of Gleason pattern 4 (p = 0.78). Assuming a spherical lesion, these changes corresponded to annual increases in mean tumour diameter of 6% and 7% for Gleason Grade Group 1 and Gleason Grade Group 2 respectively, which may be less than the interscan variability of serial mpMRI. Conclusion: In an active surveillance cohort, we did not see a significant difference in the annual growth rate of Gleason Grade Group 1 and 2 tumours. Advances in knowledge: In patients on active surveillance, the measured growth rates for visible tumours in Gleason Grade Groups 1 and 2 were similar. The annual growth rate was small in most cases and this may have implications for the MRI follow-up interval in active surveillance.


2018 ◽  
Vol 199 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigrid Carlsson ◽  
Nicole Benfante ◽  
Ricardo Alvim ◽  
Daniel D Sjoberg ◽  
Behfar Ehdaie ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 (6) ◽  
pp. 1117-1121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigrid Carlsson ◽  
Nicole Benfante ◽  
Ricardo Alvim ◽  
Daniel D. Sjoberg ◽  
Andrew Vickers ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document