| 1. |
-
- 2019
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 2. |
- Van Hemelrijck, Mieke, et al.
(author)
-
Reasons for Discontinuing Active Surveillance : Assessment of 21 Centres in 12 Countries in the Movember GAP3 Consortium
- 2019
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838. ; 75:3, s. 523-531
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Careful assessment of the reasons for discontinuation of active surveillance (AS) is required for men with prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: Using Movember's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance initiative (GAP3) database, we report on reasons for AS discontinuation. Design, setting, and participants: We compared data from 10 296 men on AS from 21 centres across 12 countries. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cumulative incidence methods were used to estimate the cumulative incidence rates of AS discontinuation. Results and limitations: During 5-yr follow-up, 27.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.4–28.6%) men showed signs of disease progression, 12.8% (95% CI: 12.0–13.6%) converted to active treatment without evidence of progression, 1.7% (95% CI: 1.5–2.0%) continued to watchful waiting, and 1.7% (95% CI: 1.4–2.1%) died from other causes. Of the 7049 men who remained on AS, 2339 had follow-up for >5 yr, 4561 had follow-up for <5 yr, and 149 were lost to follow-up. Cumulative incidence of progression was 27.5% (95% CI: 26.4–28.6%) at 5 yr and 38.2% (95% CI: 36.7–39.9%) at 10 yr. A limitation is that not all centres were included due to limited information on the reason for discontinuation and limited follow-up. Conclusions: Our descriptive analyses of current AS practices worldwide showed that 43.6% of men drop out of AS during 5-yr follow-up, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Improvements in selection tools for AS are thus needed to correctly allocate men with PCa to AS, which will also reduce discontinuation due to conversion to active treatment without evidence of disease progression. Patient summary: Our assessment of a worldwide database of men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS) shows that 43.6% drop out of AS within 5 yr, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Better tools are needed to select and monitor men with PCa as part of AS.
|
|
| 3. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid V., et al.
(author)
-
Estimating the harms and benefits of prostate cancer screening as used in common practice versus recommended good practice : A microsimulation screening analysis
- 2016
-
In: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 122:21, s. 3386-3393
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and concomitant treatment can be implemented in several ways. The authors investigated how the net benefit of PSA screening varies between common practice versus “good practice.”. METHODS: Microsimulation screening analysis (MISCAN) was used to evaluate the effect on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) if 4 recommendations were followed: limited screening in older men, selective biopsy in men with elevated PSA, active surveillance for low-risk tumors, and treatment preferentially delivered at high-volume centers. Outcomes were compared with a base model in which annual screening started at ages 55 to 69 years and were simulated using data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. RESULTS: In terms of QALYs gained compared with no screening, for 1000 screened men who were followed over their lifetime, recommended good practice led to 73 life-years (LYs) and 74 QALYs gained compared with 73 LYs and 56 QALYs for the base model. In contrast, common practice led to 78 LYs gained but only 19 QALYs gained, for a greater than 75% relative reduction in QALYs gained from unadjusted LYs gained. The poor outcomes for common practice were influenced predominantly by the use of aggressive treatment for men with low-risk disease, and PSA testing in older men also strongly reduced potential QALY gains. CONCLUSIONS: Commonly used PSA screening and treatment practices are associated with little net benefit. Following a few straightforward clinical recommendations, particularly greater use of active surveillance for low-risk disease and reducing screening in older men, would lead to an almost 4-fold increase in the net benefit of prostate cancer screening. Cancer 2016;122:3386–3393.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bruinsma, Sophie M, et al.
(author)
-
Expert consensus document : Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer - results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure
- 2017
-
In: Nature Reviews Urology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1759-4820 .- 1759-4812. ; 14:5, s. 312-322
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Active surveillance (AS) is broadly described as a management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer, but semantic heterogeneity exists in both the literature and in guidelines. To address this issue, a panel of leading prostate cancer specialists in the field of AS participated in a consensus-forming project using a modified Delphi method to reach international consensus on definitions of terms related to this management option. An iterative three-round sequence of online questionnaires designed to address 61 individual items was completed by each panel member. Consensus was considered to be reached if ≥70% of the experts agreed on a definition. To facilitate a common understanding among all experts involved and resolve potential ambiguities, a face-to-face consensus meeting was held between Delphi survey rounds two and three. Convenience sampling was used to construct the panel of experts. In total, 12 experts from Australia, France, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, the UK, Canada and the USA participated. By the end of the Delphi process, formal consensus was achieved for 100% (n = 61) of the terms and a glossary was then developed. Agreement between international experts has been reached on relevant terms and subsequent definitions regarding AS for patients with localized prostate cancer. This standard terminology could support multidisciplinary communication, reduce the extent of variations in clinical practice and optimize clinical decision making.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bruinsma, Sophie M, et al.
(author)
-
The Movember Foundation's GAP3 cohort : a profile of the largest global prostate cancer active surveillance database to date
- 2018
-
In: BJU International. - : Wiley. - 1464-4096. ; 121:5, s. 737-744
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: The Movember Foundation launched the Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) initiative to create a global consensus on the selection and monitoring of men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS). The aim of this study is to present data on inclusion and follow-up for AS in this unique global AS database.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2014 and 2016, the database was created by combining patient data from 25 established AS cohorts worldwide (USA, Canada, Australasia, UK and Europe). Data on a total of 15 101 patients were included. Descriptive statistics were used to report patients' clinical and demographic characteristics at the time of PCa diagnosis, clinical follow-up, discontinuation of AS and subsequent treatment. Cumulative incidence curves were used to report discontinuation rates over time.RESULTS: At diagnosis, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) patient age was 65 (60-70) years and the median prostate-specific antigen level was 5.4 (4.0-7.3) ng/mL. Most patients had clinical stage T1 disease (71.8%), a biopsy Gleason score of 6 (88.8%) and one tumour-positive biopsy core (60.3%). Patients on AS had a median follow-up time of 2.2 (1.0-5.0) years. After 5, 10 and 15 years of follow-up, respectively, 58%, 39% and 23% of patients were still on AS. The current version of GAP3 has limited data on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), quality of life and genomic testing.CONCLUSIONS: GAP3 is the largest worldwide collaboration integrating patient data from men with PCa on AS. The results will allow individual patients and clinicians to have greater confidence in the personalized decision to either delay or proceed with active treatment. Longer follow-up and the evaluation of MRI, new genomic markers and patient-related outcomes will result in even more valuable data and eventually in better patient outcomes.
|
|
| 6. |
- Gandaglia, Giorgio, et al.
(author)
-
Structured Population-based Prostate-specific Antigen Screening for Prostate Cancer : The European Association of Urology Position in 2019
- 2019
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838. ; 76:2, s. 142-150
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Prostate cancer (PCa)is one of the first three causes of cancer mortality in Europe. Screening in asymptomatic men (aged 55–69 yr)using prostate-specific antigen (PSA)is associated with a migration toward lower staged disease and a reduction in cancer-specific mortality. By 20 yr after testing, around 100 men need to be screened to prevent one PCa death. While this ratio is smaller than for breast and colon cancer, the long natural history of PCa means many men die from other causes. As such, the nonselective use of PSA testing and radical treatments can lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The European Association of Urology (EAU)supports measures to encourage appropriate PCa detection through PSA testing, while reducing overdiagnosis and overtreatment. These goals may be achieved using personalized risk-stratified approaches. For diagnosis, the greatest benefit from early detection is likely to come in men assessed using baseline PSA levels at the age of 45 yr to individualize screening intervals. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as well as risk calculators based on family history, ethnicity, digital rectal examination, and prostate volume should be considered to triage the need for biopsy, thus reducing the risk of overdiagnosis. For treatment, the EAU advocates balancing patient's life expectancy and cancer's mortality risk when deciding an approach. Active surveillance is encouraged in well-informed patients with low-risk and some intermediate-risk cancers, as it decreases the risks of overtreatment without compromising oncological outcomes. Conversely, the EAU advocates radical treatment in suitable men with more aggressive PCa. Multimodal treatment should be considered in locally advanced or high-grade cancers. Patient summary: Implementation of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening should be considered at a population level. Men at risk of prostate cancer should have a baseline PSA blood test (eg, at 45 yr). The level of this test, combined with family history, ethnicity, and other factors, can be used to determine subsequent follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging scans and novel biomarkers should be used to determine which men need biopsy and how any cancers should be treated.
|
|
| 7. |
- Kasivisvanathan, Veeru, et al.
(author)
-
MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis
- 2018
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 378:19, s. 1767-1777
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without targeted biopsy, is an alternative to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy for prostate-cancer detection in men with a raised prostate-specific antigen level who have not undergone biopsy. However, comparative evidence is limited. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we assigned men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously to undergo MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, or standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. Men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group underwent a targeted biopsy (without standard biopsy cores) if the MRI was suggestive of prostate cancer; men whose MRI results were not suggestive of prostate cancer were not offered biopsy. Standard biopsy was a 10-to-12-core, transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. The primary outcome was the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically significant cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer. RESULTS: A total of 500 men underwent randomization. In the MRI-targeted biopsy group, 71 of 252 men (28%) had MRI results that were not suggestive of prostate cancer, so they did not undergo biopsy. Clinically significant cancer was detected in 95 men (38%) in the MRI-targeted biopsy group, as compared with 64 of 248 (26%) in the standard-biopsy group (adjusted difference, 12 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4 to 20; P = 0.005). MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, was noninferior to standard biopsy, and the 95% confidence interval indicated the superiority of this strategy over standard biopsy. Fewer men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group than in the standard-biopsy group received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer (adjusted difference, -13 percentage points; 95% CI, -19 to -7; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of risk assessment with MRI before biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy was superior to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in men at clinical risk for prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and the European Association of Urology Research Foundation; PRECISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02380027.)
|
|
| 8. |
- Vickers, Andrew, et al.
(author)
-
Properties of the 4-Kallikrein Panel Outside the Diagnostic Gray Zone : Meta-Analysis of Patients with Positive Digital Rectal Examination or Prostate Specific Antigen 10 ng/ml and Above
- 2017
-
In: Journal of Urology. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0022-5347 .- 1527-3792. ; 197, s. 607-613
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose: The 4-kallikrein panel, commercially available as the 4Kscore™, is a reflex test for prostate cancer early detection that has been extensively validated in multiple international cohorts. It has been suggested that use of such reflex tests be limited to those with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml and negative digital rectal examination. We aimed to determine the value of the panel in men outside this "diagnostic gray zone.". Materials and Methods: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis using data from prior studies on the 4-kallikrein panel. We calculated the properties of the panel for predicting high grade (Gleason 7+) cancer in a subgroup of men with either positive digital rectal examination or prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml. Results: A total 2,891 men from 8 cohorts were included. An important proportion of patients, including 32% in the United States validation study, had prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml or a positive digital rectal examination. For men with prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml the fixed-effects estimate for the discrimination of the kallikrein model was 0.84 vs 0.69 for the base model (difference 0.128, 95% CI 0.098-0.159). In the positive digital rectal examination group discrimination was 0.82 vs 0.72 (difference 0.092, 95% CI 0.069-0.115). Decision analysis showed a clinical net benefit for use of the panel in this subgroup with a reduction in biopsy rates of about 20% and only a small number of high grade cancers missed, fewer than 3% of those not biopsied. Conclusion: The use of the kallikrein panel in men with a positive digital rectal examination or prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml is justified.
|
|
