Active surveillance is an acceptable treatment option in men with a low-risk prostate cancer. In the present study, we have retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 509 men who fit the criteria for active surveillance...Active surveillance is an acceptable treatment option in men with a low-risk prostate cancer. In the present study, we have retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 509 men who fit the criteria for active surveillance but selected radical prostatectomy. Then, the impact of varying prostate-specific antigen （PSA） levels on the risk of upstaging and upgrading in these patients was assessed. Pathological characteristics of patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria under three active surveillance criteria--those of the University of California-San Francisco, the National Cancer Institute and the European Association of Urology--were examined. The proportion of men who were deemed candidates for active surveillance but were subsequently upstaged or upgraded was determined. Of 509 patients, 186 （36.5%）, 132 （25.9%） and 88 （17.3%） men fulfilled the active surveillance criteria, respectively. Upgrading （Gleason scores 7-10） ranged from 32.8% to 38.6%, while upstaging （≥ pT3） ranged from 10.2% to 12.5%, depending on the three active surveillance criteria. After a median follow-up of 24 months, three patients developed a biochemical recurrence. When the impact of varying PSA levels was examined using a test for trend analysis in the context of PSA for each protocol, rates of upstaging were lower in men with PSA 〈4 ng m1-1. However, there was no impact of varying PSA levels on upgrading. In conclusion, commonly used active surveillance protocols carry the risks of upgrading and upstaging. More reliable and accurate markers are needed to better stratify the risks of men who are appropriate candidates for active surveillance.展开更多
文摘Active surveillance is an acceptable treatment option in men with a low-risk prostate cancer. In the present study, we have retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 509 men who fit the criteria for active surveillance but selected radical prostatectomy. Then, the impact of varying prostate-specific antigen （PSA） levels on the risk of upstaging and upgrading in these patients was assessed. Pathological characteristics of patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria under three active surveillance criteria--those of the University of California-San Francisco, the National Cancer Institute and the European Association of Urology--were examined. The proportion of men who were deemed candidates for active surveillance but were subsequently upstaged or upgraded was determined. Of 509 patients, 186 （36.5%）, 132 （25.9%） and 88 （17.3%） men fulfilled the active surveillance criteria, respectively. Upgrading （Gleason scores 7-10） ranged from 32.8% to 38.6%, while upstaging （≥ pT3） ranged from 10.2% to 12.5%, depending on the three active surveillance criteria. After a median follow-up of 24 months, three patients developed a biochemical recurrence. When the impact of varying PSA levels was examined using a test for trend analysis in the context of PSA for each protocol, rates of upstaging were lower in men with PSA 〈4 ng m1-1. However, there was no impact of varying PSA levels on upgrading. In conclusion, commonly used active surveillance protocols carry the risks of upgrading and upstaging. More reliable and accurate markers are needed to better stratify the risks of men who are appropriate candidates for active surveillance.
