Cautionary tale of active surveillance in intermediate-risk patients: Overall and cause-specific survival in the Sunnybrook experience.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 163-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hima Bindu Musunuru ◽  
Laurence Klotz ◽  
Danny Vespirini ◽  
Liying Zhang ◽  
Alexandre Mamedov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
P Value ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Cause Specific Survival

163 Background: To document the long-term outcomes of intermediate risk (IR) prostate cancer patients managed on active surveillance (AS) protocol in a single institute. Methods: Patients(pts) with PSA >10ng/ml or Gleason score 7 or clinical stage T2b/2c were identified from a prospectively collected database of 945 patients managed on AS between 1995 and 2013. Intervention was offered to those pts with a PSA doubling time of < 3 years, Gleason score or clinical progression.Overall survival (OS), cause-specific survival (CSS) for IR and low risk (LR) pts were analyzed as well as metastasis free survival (MFS) and treatment-free survival (TFS) for IR pts. Results: 237 (23.9%) pts had IR disease, with a median follow up of 6.9 years (IQR 3.89, 10.85) .708 pts had LR cancer with a median follow up of 6.4 years (IQR 3.76, 9.03). 61.2% of the IR cohort was older than 70 years. 86 IR pts (36.3%) received treatment (mainly radiation). The median treatment free interval for IR pts was 12.3 years (range 10.1 - 19.8). 33 IR patients developed biochemical failure and 17 developed metastatic disease [11 IR pts(4.6%) and 6 LR pts(0.8%)].The 10 and 15year OS was 68.4% and 50.3% for IR pts;83.6% and 68.8% for LR pts (p value <0.0001).Similarly 10 and 15 year CSS was 95.5% and 88.5% for IR ; 98.2% and 96.3% for LR pts (p value=0.006).The hazard ratio for IR pts versus LR pts was 2.08 for OS and 3.75 for CSS.IR pts had 3.75 times higher chance of dying from prostate cancer when compared to LR pts (Table). 10 year MFS and TFS were 92.1% (87.4-97.1%) and 58.5% (51.6-66.4%) in the IR cohort. Survival outcomes did not vary according to the year of patient enrollment. Conclusions: AS for intermediate risk prostate has significantly lower OS and CSS compared to low risk patients and therefore extreme caution should be exercised if it were to be implemented in intermediate risk patients. [Table: see text]

Gleason upgrading with time in a large, active surveillance cohort with long-term follow-up.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suneil Jain ◽  
Danny Vesprini ◽  
Alexandre Mamedov ◽  
D. Andrew Loblaw ◽  
Laurence Klotz
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Disease Rate ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Rate Of Increase ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

1 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted management strategy for localized prostate cancer. However, the rate of pathological upgrading has not been well described in mature study cohorts. Furthermore, concern exists over the possibility of prostate cancer dedifferentiation with time in patients on AS. Methods: Patients in our prospectively collected AS database with at least one repeat prostate biopsy were included. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the proportion of patients upgraded (Gleason 6 to 3+4 or higher, Gleason 3+4 to 4+3 or higher) with time from diagnostic biopsy. Results: 593 of 862 patients in our cohort had at least one repeat biopsy. Median follow-up was 6.4 years (max. 20.2 years). The total number of biopsies ranged from 2 to 6. 20% of patients were intermediate risk, 0.3 % high risk, all others low risk. 31.2% of patients were upgraded during active surveillance. The proportion of patients upgraded increased with time, suggesting prostate cancer dedifferentiation occurred at a rate of 1.0%/year (95%CI -0.12 to 2.16%/year). The estimated rate of increase was 2.5 times higher in patients with intermediate risk disease at diagnosis (rate 1.9%/year, 95%CI -0.7-4.6) compared with those with low risk disease (rate 0.75%/year, 95%CI -0.5-2.0). Further analysis is underway. 62% of upgraded patients (n=114) went on to have active treatment. Patients who were upgraded and treated had significantly greater PSA velocities (median 1.2 ng/ml/y vs 0.42 ng/ml/y, p=0.01) and significantly higher Gleason scores when upgraded, than those who remained on surveillance (21.8% vs 2.8% Gleason 8-10, p<0.01). Conclusions: This is the largest re-biopsy cohort, with long-term follow-up, described to date, enabling the first estimates of prostate cancer dedifferentiation in patients on AS. Dedifferentiation rates appear higher in patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer compared with those who are low risk at baseline.

Gleason score upgrade among 10,282 men who underwent surgery as initial treatment in 2010: A population-based study.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 72-72
Author(s):  
Hong Zhang ◽  
Edward M. Messing ◽  
Hamza Ahmed ◽  
Yuhchyau Chen
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Time Of Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

72 Background: Active surveillance is now accepted initial management for men who have localized prostate cancer with low risk of disease progression. Many criteria have been used for patient identification, including Gleason score (GS) obtained from prostate biopsy. Because of concerns of sampling error, some have recommended repeated biopsy before committing to active surveillance. However, there is limited information about the risk of missing high grade disease using the current standard biopsy approach. This study seeks to compare GS difference from biopsy and surgery to provide an estimated rate of GS upgrade. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program was used to identify men with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage T1-2cN0M0 prostate cancer diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2010. Patients who underwent prostatectomy were selected for further analysis. Based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and GS, cases were divided into low (PSA <=10 and GS <=6) and intermediate (10<PSA<=20 or GS=7) risk groups. The rates of GS upgrade were reported for each group. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in categorical variables (e.g. age and race) between groups of GS upgrade and no change/downgrade. Results: A total of 10,282 men were evaluated, with 9.2% (n=942) having low-risk disease, and 90.8% (n=9340) having intermediate-risk disease. Among men with low-risk prostate cancer, 22.3% (n=210) had GS upgrade and 0.8% (n=8) had GS 8 disease. Among men with intermediate risk disease, 26.2% (n=2446) had GS upgrade and 2.3% (n=214) had GS 8 disease. There was no statistically significant difference in either age or race distribution among men who had GS upgrade versus no change or downgrade at the time of surgery. Conclusions: A substantial number of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients had GS upgrade at the time of surgery, but few had upgraded to GS 8 high risk disease. These observations suggest that repeat biopsy prior to active surveillance may not be necessary.

Performance of MRI-TRUS-guided fusion biopsy to detect progression on active surveillance for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 43-43
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Frye ◽  
Nabeel Ahmad Shakir ◽  
Steven Abboud ◽  
Arvin Koruthu George ◽  
Maria J Merino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Trus Biopsy ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

43 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established treatment option for men with low risk prostate cancer. Its role in intermediate prostate cancer is still being investigated. Recent studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI (mp-MRI) along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to determine the performance of MRI-TRUS guided biopsy for men on AS with both low and intermediate risk disease. Methods: Between 2007-2014 men on AS were included if they had complete mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more MRI-TRUS biopsy sessions. Fusion guided biopsy procedures consisted of MRI identified targeted biopsies as well as random 12 core biopsies. Men were allowed to participate in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 89 men met our study criteria with an average age of 62 years old (range 45-79). 75 men had low risk Gleason 3+3=6 at the outset of AS by 1st biopsy session with a median PSA 5.1 ng/ml. The other 14 men had intermediate risk prostate cancer Gleason 3+4=7 at the outset of AS and a median PSA 4.6 ng/ml. During follow-up, 25 (33%) low risk men progressed to 3+4 or above at a median of 20.6 months. Of these, 19 were found by targeted biopsy. 6 (43%) of the intermediate risk men progressed to Gleason 4+3=7 at a median of 36.8 months. 4 of these progressed on targeted fusion biopsy. In the intermediate risk men, 84 random biopsy cores were require to detect 1 progression versus 15 targeted biopsy cores to detect 1 progression. Conclusions: The majority of patients on AS who progressed were identified by MRI-TRUS targeted biopsy. Less biopsy cores are required to detect progression with targeted biopsy. These results are preliminary and a larger cohort with longer follow-up would be beneficial.

scholarly journals Changes in Prostate Cancer Grade on Serial Biopsy in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (20) ◽  
pp. 2795-2800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sima P. Porten ◽  
Jared M. Whitson ◽  
Janet E. Cowan ◽  
Matthew R. Cooperberg ◽  
Katsuto Shinohara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Sampling Error ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Extended Period ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Gleason Grade

Purpose Active surveillance is now considered a viable treatment option for men with low-risk prostate cancer. However, little is known regarding changes in Gleason grade on serial biopsies over an extended period of time. Patients and Methods Men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1998 and 2009 who elected active surveillance as initial treatment, with 6 or more months of follow-up and a minimum of six cores at biopsy, were included in analysis. Upgrading and downgrading were defined as an increase or decrease in primary or secondary Gleason score. Means and frequency tables were used to describe patient characteristics, and treatment-free survival rates were determined by life-table product limit estimates. Results Three hundred seventy-seven men met inclusion criteria. Mean age at diagnosis was 61.9 years. Fifty-three percent of men had prostate-specific antigen of 6 ng/mL or less, and 94% had Gleason score of 6 or less. A majority of men were cT1 (62%), had less than 33% of biopsy cores involved (80%), and were low risk (77%) at diagnosis. Median number of cores taken at diagnostic biopsy was 13, mean time to follow-up was 18.5 months, and 29% of men had three or more repeat biopsies. Overall, 34% (129 men) were found to have an increase in Gleason grade. The majority of men who experienced an upgrade (81%) did so by their second repeat biopsy. Conclusion A proportion of men experience an upgrade in Gleason score while undergoing active surveillance. Men who experience early upgrading likely represent initial sampling error, whereas later upgrading may reflect tumor dedifferentiation.

Are men with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer candidates for active surveillance?

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 82-82
Author(s):  
Ann Caroline Raldow ◽  
Danjie Zhang ◽  
Ming-Hui Chen ◽  
Michelle H. Braccioforte ◽  
Brian Joseph Moran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

82 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is considered appropriate for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) and a life expectancy of at least 10 years. However, with grade migration following the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology consensus conference, AS may also be an initial option for men with favorable intermediate-risk PC. We estimated and compared the risk of PC-specific mortality (PCSM) following high dose radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy as appropriate amongst men with low, favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk PC. Methods: The study consisted of 6,595 consecutively treated men (median age: 68 years) with localized or locally advanced PC at the Chicago PC Center between 1997 and 2013. Fine and Gray competing risks regression analyses (table) were used to assess the risk of PCSM in men with favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate or high-risk compared to low-risk PC, adjusting for age at and year of treatment. Results: After median follow-up of 7.76 years, 820 men died: 72 of PC. While men with favorable intermediate-risk did not have significantly increased risk of PCSM as compared to low-risk PC (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.28, 0.63-2.62 95% confidence interval (CI), p-value 0.49), men with high (adjusted HR 9.91, 5.48-17.94 95% CI, p-value <0.0001) or unfavorable intermediate-risk PC (adjusted HR 3.17, 1.60-6.30, p-value 0.001) did. Eight-year point estimates of PCSM were low: 0.68% [0.32-1.31% 95% CI] and 0.44% [0.25-0.75% 95% CI] for men with favorable intermediate and low-risk PC, respectively. Conclusions: Men with low and favorable intermediate-risk PC have similar and low estimates of PCSM during the first decade following standard management. These results provide evidence to support AS as an initial approach for men with favorable intermediate-risk PC. [Table: see text]

Imatinib Mesylate Versus Allogeneic HSCT for Patients with Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia In Accelerated Phase: A Single Center Experience In China After a 9-Year Follow-up

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 2347-2347
Author(s):  
Qian Jiang ◽  
Lan-Ping Xu ◽  
Dai-Hong Liu ◽  
Kaiyan Liu ◽  
Shan-Shan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Imatinib Therapy ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Poor Risk ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Abstract 2347 The role of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in the imatinib era in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in accelerated phase (AP) has not been evaluated due to few comparison study published. A prospective study was designed to compare the outcome of imatinib versus allo-HSCT for AP CML according to the World Health Organization (WHO) 2001 classification in our center (Registration Number: ChiCTR-TNC-10000955). In imatinib group, imatinib were given at an initial dose of 400 mg or 600 mg daily. In allo-HSCT group, the recommended treatment prior to transplantation was a short-term imatinib therapy less than 3 months. From April 2001 to September 2008, 132 patients were enrolled, 87 in imatinib group and 45 in allo-HSCT group, respectively, according to their intention. In allo-HSCT group, 19 patients performed transplant from a HLA-matched sibling donor, 23 from a HLA-mismatched sibling/haploidentical donor, and 3 from a HLA-mismatched unrelated donor. The end time of evaluation was April 2010. After a median follow-up of 45 months (range, 7–108 months) for 53 living patients on imatinib and 65 months (range, 18–108 months) for 38 living patients post allo-HSCT, imatinib was inferior to allo-HSCT in outcome, with the estimated 6-year event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates of 39.2% vs 71.7% (P=0.035), 51.4% vs 83.3% (P=0.023), and 48.3% vs 95.2% (P=0.000), respectively. A multivariate analysis of the total population of 132 patients adding pretreatment characteristics and therapy (imatinib versus allo-HSCT) indicated that longer CML disease duration, pretreatment anemia and higher percentage of peripheral blasts were independent adverse prognostic factors for OS and PFS in common, imatinib therapy was only associated with shorter PFS. In order to analyze whether therapy play an important role in survival differences among patients with or without common pretreatment poor prognostic factors for OS and PFS, we categorized the entire cohort into low-risk (neither factor, n=40), intermediate-risk (either factor, n=59) or poor-risk (at least two factors, n=33). Therapy had no influence on the outcome in low-risk patients, with the estimated 6-year EFS, OS and PFS rates of 80.9% vs 80.7% (P=0.898), 100% vs 81.2% (P=0.114), and 85.2% vs 95.2% (P=0.365), in imatinib group vs allo-HSCT group, respectively. EFS and OS showed no difference by therapy in intermediate-risk patients, with the estimated 6-year EFS and OS rates of 47.1% vs 61.9% (P=0.788), and 61.3% vs 81.3% (P=0.773), in imatinib group vs allo-HSCT group, respectively. However more patients developed a relapse in advanced phase with imatinib compared to those with allo-HSCT, the estimated 6-year PFS rates were 55.7% vs 92.9% (P=0.047), respectively. The superiority of allo-HSCT was extremely significant in poor-risk patients, with the estimated 5-year EFS, OS and PFS rates of 9.3% vs 66.7% (P=0.034), 17.7% vs 100% (P=0.008) and 18.8% vs 100% (P=0.006), in imatinib group vs allo-HSCT group, respectively. We conclude that allo-HSCT is the first-line option for all patients with CML in AP; it is superior to imatinib with evident survival advantage for poor/intermediate-risk patients. However, the outcome of imatinib and allo-HSCT were equally good in low-risk patients with CML in AP. For such patients, it may also be advised that imatinib remains the primary option by carefully monitoring of MRD, and allo-HSCT may be considered if there is evidence of imatinib resistance. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Active Surveillance for Incidental (cT1a/b) Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Outcomes of the Prospective Noninterventional HAROW Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Jan Herden ◽  
Andreas Schwarte ◽  
Edith A. Boedefeld ◽  
Lothar Weissbach
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Invasive Treatment ◽  
Incidental Prostate Cancer ◽  
Free Survival

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Optimal treatment for incidental prostate cancer (IPC) after surgical treatment for benign prostate obstruction is still debatable. We report on long-term outcomes of IPC patients managed with active surveillance (AS) in a German multicenter study. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> HAROW (2008–2013) was designed as a noninterventional, prospective, health-service research study for patients with localized prostate cancer (≤cT2), including patients with IPC (cT1a/b). A follow-up examination of all patients treated with AS was carried out. Overall, cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival and discontinuation rates were determined. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 210 IPC patients, 68 opted for AS and were available for evaluation. Fifty-four patients had cT1a category and 14 cT1b category. Median follow-up was 7.7 years (IQR: 5.7–9.1). Eight patients died of which 6 were still under AS or watchful waiting (WW). No PCa-specific death could be observed. One patient developed metastasis. Twenty-three patients (33.8%) discontinued AS changing to invasive treatment: 12 chose radical prostatectomy, 7 radiotherapy, and 4 hormonal treatment. Another 19 patients switched to WW. The Kaplan-Meier estimated 10-year overall, cancer-specific, metastasis-free, and intervention-free survival was 83.8% (95% CI: 72.2–95.3), 100%, 98.4% (95% CI: 95.3–99.9), and 61.0% (95% CI: 47.7–74.3), respectively. In multivariable analysis, age (RR: 0.97; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001), PSA density ≥0.2 ng/mL<sup>2</sup> (RR: 13.23; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001), and PSA ≥1.0 ng/mL after surgery (RR: 5.19; <i>p</i> = 0.016) were significantly predictive for receiving an invasive treatment. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> In comparison with other AS series with a general low-risk prostate cancer population, our study confirmed the promising survival outcomes for IPC patients, whereas discontinuation rates seem to be lower for IPC. Thus, IPC patients at low risk of progression may be good candidates for AS.

Conditional progression-free survival in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer stratified by NCCN risk.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 222-222
Author(s):  
Andrew Gusev ◽  
Florian Rumpf ◽  
Keyan Salari ◽  
Jeffrey Twum-Ampofo ◽  
Matthew F Wszolek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Conditional Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Grade Progression

222 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted management strategy for men with very low, low, and select cases of favorable intermediate National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk prostate cancer (PCa). However, how patients’ risk of disease progression evolves over time during AS has not been well defined. Conditional survival measures the probability a patient will continue to survive some number of years, given that they have already survived a certain number without progression. We evaluated our AS cohort to investigate overall and conditional progression free survival on AS, stratified by the NCCN risk groups. Methods: We reviewed our institutional database of 1254 men enrolled in AS for localized PCa from 1996-2016. Our AS protocol includes prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal exam (DRE) every 4-6 months for 3 years, then annually. Mandatory confirmatory 12 core biopsy is done at 12-18 months. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imagining (mpMRI) or additional systematic or MRI-fusion biopsies are done at the discretion of physician and patient. Overall freedom from pathologic grade progression on follow-up biopsy and treatment free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival curves were compared pairwise using the Log-rank test and adjusted for false discovery rates with the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure. Three-year conditional survival estimates were derived for both outcomes from the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Results: Of 1254 men, 521 (41.6%) met criteria for very low, 606 (48.4%) for low, and 125 (10.0%) for favorable intermediate NCCN risk at diagnosis. Median follow-up time was 6.5 years (IQR 4.1-9.4). Median pathologic grade progression free survival in years was significantly longer for very low risk (7.8, 95% CI 6.8-11.2) compared to low risk men (5.6, 95% CI 4.7-6.9), however neither was significantly different from favorable intermediate risk men (5.9). There was no significant difference in treatment free survival between the three risk groups. At diagnosis, the three-year risk for pathologic grade progression (24%, 95% CI 21-27%) and progression to treatment (22%, 95% CI 20-25%) were similar. However, with increasing time of event-free AS, the conditional probability of pathologic grade progression increased, while that of progression to treatment decreased. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that despite a mild increase in pathologic progression free survival in very low risk men, there was no clear difference in overall treatment free survival between very low, low, and select favorable intermediate NCCN risk men. Further, with increased time spent on AS, despite elevated rates of pathologic progression, patient progression to treatment decreased. This trend may be indicative of changes in goals of care as men with PCa age and should be closely monitored during AS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document