PSA doubling time predicts the outcome after active surveillance in screening-detected prostate cancer: results from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Sweden section

Risk stratification in the hormonal treatment of patients with prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common type of cancer found in American men, other than skin cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that there will be 186,320 new cases of prostate cancer in the United States in 2008. About 28,660 men will die of this disease this year and PCa remains the second-leading cause of cancer death in men. One in six men will get PCa during his lifetime and one in 35 will die of the disease. Today, more than 2 million men in the United States who have had PCa are still alive. The death rate for PCa continues to decline, chiefly due to early detection and treatment, and improved salvage therapy such as hormone therapy (HT). HT continues to be a mainstay for primary-recurrent PCa and locally-advanced PCa. However, HT is associated with many undesirable side effects including sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis and hot flashes, all of which can lead to decreased quality of life (QOL). These risks are seen in both long- and short-term HT regimens. Additionally, research in recent years has revealed trends related to clinico pathological variables and their predictive ability in HT outcomes. Awareness of the potential adverse effects, the risks associated with HT and the prognostic ability of clinical and pathological variables is important in determining optimal therapy for individual patients. A rigorous evaluation of the current scientific literature associated with HT was conducted with the goal of identifying the most favorable balance of benefits and risks associated with HT.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: patient selection and management

Screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been appealing. However, the significant associated decline in prostate cancer mortality comes at the cost of a very high rate of diagnosis, and many patients with indolent, non-life-threatening cancer are exposed to the risk of significant side effects from radical treatment. Most men with favourable-risk prostate cancer are not destined to die of their disease, even in the absence of treatment. The challenge is to identify the subset that harbour more aggressive disease early enough that curative therapy is still a possibility, thereby allowing the others to enjoy improved quality of life, free from the side effects of treatment. This article reviews current research into active surveillance in favourable-risk disease and some of the issues that arise when prostate cancer is monitored rather than being treated immediately.

Active Surveillance Program for Prostate Cancer: An Update of the Johns Hopkins Experience

Purpose

We assessed outcomes of men with prostate cancer enrolled in active surveillance.

Patients and Methods

Since 1995, a total of 769 men diagnosed with prostate cancer have been followed prospectively (median follow-up, 2.7 years; range, 0.01 to 15.0 years) on active surveillance. Enrollment criteria were for very-low-risk cancers, defined by clinical stage (T1c), prostate-specific antigen density < 0.15 ng/mL, and prostate biopsy findings (Gleason score ≤ 6, two or fewer cores with cancer, and ≤ 50% cancer involvement of any core). Curative intervention was recommended on disease reclassification on the basis of biopsy criteria. The primary outcome was survival free of intervention, and secondary outcomes were rates of disease reclassification and exit from the program. Outcomes were compared between men who did and did not meet very-low-risk criteria.

Results

The median survival free of intervention was 6.5 years (range, 0.0 to 15.0 years) after diagnosis, and the proportions of men remaining free of intervention after 2, 5, and 10 years of follow-up were 81%, 59%, and 41%, respectively. Overall, 255 men (33.2%) underwent intervention at a median of 2.2 years (range, 0.6 to 10.2 years) after diagnosis; 188 men (73.7%) underwent intervention on the basis of disease reclassification on biopsy. The proportions of men who underwent curative intervention (P = .026) or had biopsy reclassification (P < .001) were significantly lower in men who met enrollment criteria than in those who did not. There were no prostate cancer deaths.

Conclusion

For carefully selected men, active surveillance with curative intent appears to be a safe alternative to immediate intervention. Limiting surveillance to very-low-risk patients may reduce the frequency of adverse outcomes.

When is active surveillance the appropriate treatment for prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND

The incidence of prostate cancer has increased dramatically worldwide during the past few decades in part because of increased testing for prostate specific antigen (PSA). The aggressive use of this screening tool has resulted in the identification of many localized prostate cancers a majority of which are relatively low volume, low grade tumors. Older autopsy studies have documented that incidental prostate cancer is quite common especially in older men. The finasteride chemoprevention trial confirmed these findings. Many prostate cancers are not destined to progress to clinically significant tumors. Several case series have documented the natural history of clinically detected prostate cancer. The progression of disease identified by PSA testing is less certain. These studies uniformly show that many men with low grade tumors can survive for over two decades in the absence of treatment. Furthermore, randomized clinical trials have shown only a modest ten year survival advantage for those men undergoing either surgery or radiation.

RESULTS

As a consequence, men with low risk of disease progression may wish to consider active surveillance as a treatment option. To date, several case series have documented that men following an active surveillance protocol that includes regular PSA testing and periodic re-biopsy have an excellent outcome. The majority of these men have not demonstrated evidence of progression during the first decade of follow-up and among those that have the majority have undergone either surgery or radiation without compromise of their long-term outcome. Unfortunately, until better biomarkers become available, the outcome of any individual patient defies accurate prediction.

CONCLUSION

Men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer must weigh the risk of disease progression against the potential efficacy and safety of treatment when making a decision whether to consider active surveillance as an appropriate treatment.

Increasing low risk prostate cancer incidence in United States Air Force servicemen and selection of treatments

PURPOSE

Periodic Health Assessments have been mandated for United States Air Force servicemen since the mid 1990s. Thus, we determined whether United States Air Force prostate cancer incidence rates increased thereafter and how these tumors segregate into low and intermediate/high risk categories. We also identified treatment choices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We queried the Department of Defense Automated Central Tumor Registry for prostate cancer diagnosed in United States Air Force servicemen between 1991 and 2008 to determine incidence rates, disease risk category and treatments.

RESULTS

Age adjusted rates in white active duty servicemen diagnosed for the most recent period of 2005 to 2008 increased 3-fold relative to the rate in the earliest period of 1991 to 1994. A similar trend was evident in black servicemen. Relative to the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results population prostate cancer rates in active duty United States Air Force men between 1995 and 2008 were significantly increased for the 2 racial groups. A significantly greater proportion of active duty servicemen than retirees (62% vs 40%) presented with low risk disease, defined as prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, Gleason sum less than 7 and clinical stage T1a-T2a. Of those with low risk disease significantly more active duty servicemen elected curative surgery than retirees (93% vs 53%).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer incidence rates in United States Air Force servicemen have increased with time, exceeding rates in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results population. While most cases are characterized as low risk, aggressive management is elected.

Acceptance and durability of surveillance as a management choice in men with screen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer: improved outcomes with stringent enrollment criteria

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the acceptance rate and durability of surveillance among contemporary men with low-risk prostate cancer managed at a large, US academic institution.

METHODS

Patients with low-risk parameters on initial and repeat biopsy were offered surveillance regardless of age. Regular clinical evaluation and repeat prostate biopsy were recommended every 1-2 years, and intervention was recommended based on adverse clinical and pathologic parameters on follow-up. Acceptance rate of active surveillance, freedom from intervention, and freedom from recommended intervention were measured.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 202 low-risk patients, 86 (43%) chose immediate treatment and 116 (57%) underwent repeat biopsy for consideration of surveillance. Intervention was recommended after initial repeat biopsy in 27 (23%) men because of higher-risk features, leaving a total of 89 men on surveillance. Over a median follow-up of 33 months, 16 men were ultimately treated and 8 were recommended to undergo treatment because of adverse clinical features on subsequent evaluations. Of the men on surveillance, the 3-year freedom from intervention and freedom from recommended intervention was 87% (95% CI, 78-93) and 93% (95% CI, 85-97), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptance of surveillance (57%) in low-risk patients in this series is substantially higher than previous reports, and approximately one-third of these patients are ultimately managed by surveillance using stringent criteria. The risk of reclassification to a more aggressive cancer over short-term follow-up in appropriately selected patients is low.

ProPSA and diagnostic biopsy tissue DNA content combination improves accuracy to predict need for prostate cancer treatment among men enrolled in an active surveillance program

OBJECTIVES

To assess a novel application of the Prostate Health Index (phi) and biopsy tissue DNA content in benign-adjacent and cancer areas to predict which patients would eventually require treatment of prostate cancer in the Proactive Surveillance cohort.

METHODS

We identified 71 men who had had serum and biopsy tissue from their diagnosis banked and available for the present study. Of the 71 patients, 39 had developed unfavorable biopsy findings and 32 had maintained favorable biopsy status during surveillance. The serum total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), free PSA (fPSA) and [-2]proPSA were measured using the Beckman Coulter immunoassay. The DNA content measurements of Feulgen-stained biopsy sections were performed using the AutoCyte imaging system.

RESULTS

The ratio of phi was significantly greater (37.23 ± 15.76 vs 30.60 ± 12.28; P = .03) in men who ultimately had unfavorable biopsy findings. The serum phi ratio (P = .003), [-2]proPSA/%fPSA (P = .004), biopsy tissue DNA content (ie, benign-adjacent excess of optical density, P = .019; and cancer area standard deviation of optical density, P = .002) were significant predictors of unfavorable biopsy conversion on Cox regression analysis. However, phi and [-2]proPSA/%fPSA showed a highly significant correlation (rho = 0.927, P < .0001) and no difference in accuracy (c-index, 0.6247 vs 0.6158; P = .704) for unfavorable biopsy conversion prediction. Furthermore, phi and [-2]proPSA/%fPSA remained significant (P = .047 and P = .036, respectively) in the multivariate models and, combined with the biopsy tissue DNA content, showed improvement in the predictive accuracy (c-index, 0.6908 and 0.6884, respectively) for unfavorable biopsy conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prostate Health Index to proPSA/%fPSA, combined with biopsy tissue DNA content, improved the accuracy to about 70% to predict unfavorable biopsy conversion at the annual surveillance biopsy examination among men enrolled in an Active Surveillance program.

Risk stratification and validation of prostate specific antigen density as independent predictor of progression in men with low risk prostate cancer during active surveillance

PURPOSE

We assessed risk stratification in patients with low grade prostate cancer managed by active surveillance using a 20-core saturation biopsy technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 135 consecutive patients with low risk prostate cancer were prospectively entered in an active surveillance program in a 10-year period. The study entrance requirement and progression definition followed Epstein criteria using only pathological parameters, ie fewer than 3 positive cores, Gleason score 6 or less and 50% or less of any single core involved. All patients were monitored by restaging 20-core saturation biopsy every 12 to 18 months. A total of 120 patients with at least 1 rebiopsy form the basis of this report.

RESULTS

Of the cohort 30% progressed during a median of 2.4 years. Three multivariate analyses were performed. The first analysis used variables only at diagnosis biopsy and revealed that prostate specific antigen density greater than 0.08 ng/ml/cc and prostate cancer family history were significant predictors of progression. When combined in a 3-level risk factor score, they were significant (p = 0.003). The second multivariate analysis considered changes in characteristics between diagnosis biopsy and first rebiopsy. Prostate specific antigen velocity along with prostate specific antigen density and family history highly predicted progression according to a 4-level risk factor score (p <0.0001). The third multivariate analysis validated the previously reported prostate specific antigen density cutoff of 0.08 ng/ml/cc at first rebiopsy as a significant predictor of subsequent progression (HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.12, 8.93; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factor stratification can be used to significantly predict the outcome in patients on active surveillance. Prostate specific antigen density 0.08 ng/ml/cc at first rebiopsy was validated as a significant predictor of subsequent progression.

Role of prostate specific antigen and immediate confirmatory biopsy in predicting progression during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We evaluated predictors of progression after starting active surveillance, especially the role of prostate specific antigen and immediate confirmatory prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 238 men with prostate cancer met active surveillance eligibility criteria and were analyzed for progression with time. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate predictors of progression. Progression was evaluated using 2 definitions, including no longer meeting 1) full and 2) modified criteria, excluding prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml as a criterion.

RESULTS

Using full criteria 61 patients progressed during followup. The 2 and 5-year progression-free probability was 80% and 60%, respectively. With prostate specific antigen included in progression criteria prostate specific antigen at confirmatory biopsy (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.14-1.46, p <0.0005) and positive confirmatory biopsy (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.01-3.04, p = 0.047) were independent predictors of progression. Of the 61 cases 34 failed due to increased prostate specific antigen, including only 5 with subsequent progression by biopsy criteria. When prostate specific antigen was excluded from progression criteria, only 32 cases progressed, and 2 and 5-year progression-free probability was 91% and 76%, respectively. Using modified criteria as an end point positive confirmatory biopsy was the only independent predictor of progression (HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.41-7.09, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is feasible in patients with low risk prostate cancer and most patients show little evidence of progression within 5 years. There is no clear justification for treating patients in whom prostate specific antigen increases above 10 ng/ml in the absence of other indications of tumor progression. Patients considering active surveillance should undergo confirmatory biopsy to better assess the risk of progression.

Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of treatment options for clinically localised prostate cancer continues to impact on clinical decision-making. Two such options are radical prostatectomy (RP) and watchful waiting (WW). WW involves providing no initial treatment and monitoring the patient with the intention of providing palliative treatment if there is evidence of disease progression.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of RP versus WW for the treatment of localised prostate cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ISI Science Citation Index, DARE and LILACS were searched through 30 July 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the effects of RP versus WW for clinically localised prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and quality assessment were carried out independently by two authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials met the inclusion criteria. Both trials commenced prior to the widespread availability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening; hence the results may not be applicable to men with PSA-detected disease.One trial (N = 142), conducted in the US, was judged to be of poor quality. All cause (overall) mortality was not significantly different between RP and WW groups after fifteen years of follow up (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.9 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.43).The second trial (N = 695), conducted in Scandinavia, was judged to be of good quality. After 12 years of follow up, the trial results were compatible with a beneficial effect of RP on the risks of overall mortality, prostate cancer mortality and distant metastases compared with WW but the precise magnitude of the effect is uncertain as indicated by the width of the confidence intervals for all estimates (risk difference (RD) -7.1% (95% CI -14.7 to 0.5); RD -5.4% (95% CI -11.1 to 0.2); RD -6.7% (95% CI -13.2 to -0.2), respectively).        Compared to WW, RP increased the absolute risks of erectile dysfunction (RD 35% (95% CI 25 to 45)) and urinary leakage (RD 27% (95% CI 17 to 37)). These estimates must be interpreted cautiously as they are derived from data obtained from a self-administered questionnaire survey of a sample of the trial participants (N = 326), no baseline quality of life data were obtained and nerve-sparing surgery was not routinely performed on trial participants undergoing RP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The existing trials provide insufficient evidence to allow confident statements to be made about the relative beneficial and harmful effects of RP and WW for patients with localised prostate cancer. The results of ongoing trials should help to inform treatment decisions for men with screen-detected localised prostate cancer.

Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the leading causes of death from malignant disease among men in the developed world. One strategy to decrease the risk of death from this disease is screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA); however, the extent of benefit and harm with such screening is under continuous debate.

METHODS

In December, 1994, 20,000 men born between 1930 and 1944, randomly sampled from the population register, were randomised by computer in a 1:1 ratio to either a screening group invited for PSA testing every 2 years (n=10,000) or to a control group not invited (n=10,000). Men in the screening group were invited up to the upper age limit (median 69, range 67-71 years) and only men with raised PSA concentrations were offered additional tests such as digital rectal examination and prostate biopsies. The primary endpoint was prostate-cancer specific mortality, analysed according to the intention-to-screen principle. The study is ongoing, with men who have not reached the upper age limit invited for PSA testing. This is the first planned report on cumulative prostate-cancer incidence and mortality calculated up to Dec 31, 2008. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial ISRCTN54449243.

FINDINGS

In each group, 48 men were excluded from the analysis because of death or emigration before the randomisation date, or prevalent prostate cancer. In men randomised to screening, 7578 (76%) of 9952 attended at least once. During a median follow-up of 14 years, 1138 men in the screening group and 718 in the control group were diagnosed with prostate cancer, resulting in a cumulative prostate-cancer incidence of 12.7% in the screening group and 8.2% in the control group (hazard ratio 1.64; 95% CI 1.50-1.80; p<0.0001). The absolute cumulative risk reduction of death from prostate cancer at 14 years was 0.40% (95% CI 0.17-0.64), from 0.90% in the control group to 0.50% in the screening group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer was 0.56 (95% CI 0.39-0.82; p=0.002) in the screening compared with the control group. The rate ratio of death from prostate cancer for attendees compared with the control group was 0.44 (95% CI 0.28-0.68; p=0.0002). Overall, 293 (95% CI 177-799) men needed to be invited for screening and 12 to be diagnosed to prevent one prostate cancer death.

INTERPRETATION

This study shows that prostate cancer mortality was reduced almost by half over 14 years. However, the risk of over-diagnosis is substantial and the number needed to treat is at least as high as in breast-cancer screening programmes. The benefit of prostate-cancer screening compares favourably to other cancer screening programs.

FUNDING

The Swedish Cancer Society, the Swedish Research Council, and the National Cancer Institute.

Pathological findings at radical prostatectomy in Japanese prospective active surveillance cohort

OBJECTIVES

The present study was carried out to analyze pathological features of prostatectomy specimens performed at different timing and trigger during active surveillance.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-four patients that fit a selection condition similar to the so-called Hopkins' criteria were enrolled into the present study between January 2002 and December 2003. Patients were recommended to start curable treatment when they showed prostate-specific antigen-doubling time of 2 years or shorter or pathological progression at 1-year re-biopsy. Median observation period was 61 months.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients underwent radical prostatectomy immediately after enrollment (Group A) whereas 28 patients underwent radical prostatectomy after substantial periods of active surveillance (Group B). Of the 28 Group B, trigger of radical prostatectomy was on protocol in 17 patients (Group B1) whereas 11 patients underwent radical prostatectomy by their preference (Group B2). Upgrade from initial biopsy was observed in 43% of Group A and 68% of Group B. Upgrade was more frequently observed in Group B1 than B2 with border line significance (P = 0.075). Perineural infiltration and positive surgical margin rates of Group B1 were significantly higher than those of B2 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Unfavorable pathological features of surgical specimens were more frequently observed in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy due to short prostate-specific antigen-doubling time or biopsy findings than those who underwent radical prostatectomy because of other reasons including patients' preference. Rates of unfavorable pathological features at radical prostatectomy that deviate initial selection criteria was high enough to support integration of frequent biopsies into active surveillance program.

Treatment of localized prostate cancer: when is active surveillance appropriate?

Testing for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has caused a dramatic increase in the incidence of prostate cancer during the past two decades. Many cancers identified by repeated PSA testing are small volume, low-grade lesions that pose little threat of progression over 15-20 years. Data from a recently reported randomized trial indicate that as many as 48 men must undergo treatment to prevent one prostate cancer-related death. Unfortunately, no test is currently available that can identify those men who have clinically significant disease. Men least likely to experience disease progression are men who harbor tumors with a Gleason score of 6 involving 2 needle cores or less; these men may want to consider active surveillance as their initial treatment option. Researchers have followed over 2,500 men on active surveillance protocols (over 200 men have been followed for >10 years). To date, prostate cancer-specific survival is over 99%. About 25% of men enrolled in active surveillance programs have abandoned this approach because of concerns about disease progression. For men harboring tumors with a Gleason score >7, data from two recently reported Swedish trials suggest lower prostate cancer-related mortality for those men receiving either surgery or radiation.

Preoperative prostate specific antigen doubling time is not a useful predictor of biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

Postoperative prostate specific antigen doubling time may be used as a surrogate for prostate cancer specific mortality in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Less is known about the usefulness of preoperative prostate specific antigen doubling time for the initial prediction of prostatectomy outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preoperative prostate specific antigen doubling time was calculated in 1,208 men from a large prostate cancer screening study who were treated with radical prostatectomy. We examined the relationship of prostate specific antigen doubling time with tumor features and biochemical progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Overall prostate specific antigen doubling time was associated with nonorgan confined disease (OR 0.996, 95% CI 0.992-0.999, p = 0.013) but not with biochemical progression (HR 1.000, 95% CI 0.998-1.001, p = 0.66). Using previously published 18 and 36-month thresholds for prostate specific antigen doubling time there was no significant relationship between doubling time and specific adverse pathological features or biochemical progression. Using the concordance index prostate specific antigen doubling time did not enhance the prediction of biochemical progression beyond that achieved by a model with prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and biopsy Gleason score.

CONCLUSIONS

In our series of men with newly diagnosed, clinically localized prostate cancer shorter preoperative prostate specific antigen doubling time was associated with nonorgan confined disease but not with biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy. All calculations of prostate specific antigen kinetics may not be equivalent. Caution should be exercised when using prostate specific antigen doubling time in the pretreatment setting.

Risk stratification of men choosing surveillance for low risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We sought to predict biopsy progression in men on prostate cancer surveillance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 376 men with a median age of 65.5 years (range 45.8 to 79.5) with low risk prostate cancer on surveillance underwent at least 1 followup biopsy after diagnosis. Progression was defined at surveillance biopsy as Gleason pattern 4 or 5, greater than 2 biopsy cores with cancer or greater than 50% involvement of any core with cancer. Proportional hazards analysis was used to evaluate the association between covariates and progression at surveillance biopsy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the probability of disease progression.

RESULTS

Of the 376 men 123 (32.7%) had progression a median of 5.6 years (range 0.3 to 8.5) after diagnosis. Percent free PSA and maximum percent core involvement at diagnosis were associated with progression, allowing stratification of the progression risk at initial surveillance biopsy. Cancer presence and PSA density at initial surveillance biopsy were associated with subsequent progression, allowing stratification of the cumulative incidence of progression 3 years after initial surveillance biopsy (cumulative incidence 11.1%, 95% CI 4.7 to 25.2 for negative biopsy and PSAD less than 0.08 ng/ml/cm(3) vs 53.6%, 95% CI 38.6 to 70.0 for positive biopsy and PSAD 0.08 ng/ml/cm(3) or greater, log rank test p <0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical variables at diagnosis and at first surveillance biopsy during followup in an active surveillance program can be used to inform men about the likelihood of an unfavorable prostate biopsy. This information could improve patient and physician acceptance of active surveillance in carefully selected men.

Pro-prostate-specific antigen measurements in serum and tissue are associated with treatment necessity among men enrolled in expectant management for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We assessed the association of quantitative clinical and pathologic information, including serum and tissue pro-prostate-specific antigen (proPSA) measurements, with outcomes among men with prostate cancer in an expectant management (active surveillance) program.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We identified 71 men enrolled in expectant management with frozen serum and tissue available from diagnosis: 39 subsequently developed unfavorable biopsies (Gleason score > or =7, > or =3 cores positive for cancer, >50% of any core involved with cancer), whereas 32 maintained favorable biopsies (median follow-up, 3.93 years). Serum total PSA, free PSA (fPSA), and [-2]proPSA were measured by the Beckman Coulter immunoassay. [-5/-7]proPSA was evaluated in cancer and benign-adjacent areas (BAA) by quantitative immunohistochemistry. Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to identify significant associations with unfavorable biopsy conversion.

RESULTS

The ratio [-2]proPSA/% fPSA in serum was significantly higher at diagnosis (0.87 +/- 0.44 versus 0.65 +/- 0.36 pg/mL; P = 0.02) in men developing unfavorable biopsies. [-5/-7]proPSA tissue staining was more intense (4104.09 +/- 3033.50 versus 2418.06 +/- 1606.04; P = 0.03) and comprised a greater fractional area (11.58 +/- 7.08% versus 6.88 +/- 5.20%; P = 0.01) in BAA of these men. Serum [-2]proPSA/% fPSA [hazard ratio, 2.53 (1.18-5.41); P = 0.02], BAA [-5/-7]proPSA % area [hazard ratio, 1.06 (1.01-1.12); P = 0.02] and BAA [-5/-7]proPSA stain intensity [hazard ratio, 1.000213 (1.000071-1.000354); P = 0.003] were significantly associated with unfavorable biopsy in Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses. Serum [-2]proPSA/% fPSA significantly correlated with BAA [-5/-7]proPSA % area (rho = 0.40; P = 0.002) and BAA [-5/-7]proPSA stain intensity (rho = 0.33; P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective cohort of men enrolled into expectant management for prostate cancer, serum and tissue levels of proPSA at diagnosis are associated with need for subsequent treatment. The increase in serum proPSA/% fPSA might be driven by increased proPSA production from "premalignant" cells in the prostate BAA.

Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE We assessed the outcome of a watchful-waiting protocol with selective delayed intervention by using clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA), or histologic progression as treatment indications for clinically localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a prospective, single-arm, cohort study. Patients were managed with an initial expectant approach. Definitive intervention was offered to those patients with a PSA doubling time of less than 3 years, Gleason score progression (to 4 + 3 or greater), or unequivocal clinical progression. Survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard model were applied to the data. Results A total of 450 patients have been observed with active surveillance. Median follow-up was 6.8 years (range, 1 to 13 years). Overall survival was 78.6%. The 10-year prostate cancer actuarial survival was 97.2%. Overall, 30% of patients have been reclassified as higher risk and have been offered definitive therapy. Of 117 patients treated radically, the PSA failure rate was 50%, which was 13% of the total cohort. PSA doubling time of 3 years or less was associated with an 8.5-times higher risk of biochemical failure after definitive treatment compared with a doubling time of more than 3 years (P < .0001). The hazard ratio for nonprostate cancer to prostate cancer mortality was 18.6 at 10 years. CONCLUSION We observed a low rate of prostate cancer mortality. Among the patients who were reclassified as higher risk and who were treated, PSA failure was relatively common. Other-cause mortality accounted for almost all of the deaths. Additional studies are warranted to improve the identification of patients who harbor more aggressive disease despite favorable clinical parameters at diagnosis.

Prostate-specific antigen velocity for early detection of prostate cancer: result from a large, representative, population-based cohort

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) over time (ie, PSA velocity [PSAV]) aid prostate cancer detection. Some guidelines do incorporate PSAV cut points as an indication for biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether PSAV enhances prediction of biopsy outcome in a large, representative, population-based cohort.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

There were 2742 screening-arm participants with PSA <3 ng/ml at initial screening in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer in Rotterdam, Netherlands, or Göteborg, Sweden, and who were subsequently biopsied during rounds 2-6 due to elevated PSA.

MEASUREMENTS

Total, free, and intact PSA and human kallikrein 2 were measured for 1-6 screening rounds at intervals of 2 or 4 yr. We created logistic regression models to predict prostate cancer based on age and PSA, with or without free-to-total PSA ratio (%fPSA). PSAV was added to each model and any enhancement in predictive accuracy assessed by area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

PSAV led to small enhancements in predictive accuracy (AUC of 0.569 vs 0.531; 0.626 vs 0.609 if %fPSA was included), although not for high-grade disease. The enhancement depended on modeling a nonlinear relationship between PSAV and cancer. There was no benefit if we excluded men with higher velocities, which were associated with lower risk. These results apply to men in a screening program with elevated PSA; men with prior negative biopsy were not evaluated in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

In men with PSA of about ≥3 ng/ml, we found little justification for formal calculation of PSAV or for use of PSAV cut points to determine biopsy. Informal assessment of PSAV will likely aid clinical judgment, such as a sudden rise in PSA suggesting prostatitis, which could be further evaluated before biopsy.

Early prostate-specific antigen changes and the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To delineate how recent findings on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can improve prediction of risk, detection, and prediction of clinical endpoints of prostate cancer (PCa).

RECENT FINDINGS

The widely used PSA cut-point of 4.0 ng/ml increasingly appears arbitrary, but no cut-point achieves both high sensitivity and high specificity. The accuracy of detecting PCa can be increased by additional predictive factors and a combinations of markers. Evidence implies that a panel of kallikrein markers improves the specificity and reduces costs by eliminating unnecessary biopsies. Large, population-based studies have provided evidence that PSA can be used to predict PCa risk many years in advance, improve treatment selection and patient care, and predict the risk of complications and disease recurrence. However, definitive evidence is currently lacking as to whether PSA screening lowers PCa -specific mortality.

SUMMARY

PSA is still the main tool for early detection, risk stratification, and monitoring of PCa. However, PSA values are affected by many technical and biological factors. Instead of using a fixed PSA cut-point, using statistical prediction models and considering the integration additional markers may be able to improve and individualize PCa diagnostics. A single PSA measurement at early middle age can predict risk of advanced PCa decades in advance and stratify patients for intensity of subsequent screening.

Prostate cancer: the new landscape

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights current features of the changing landscape of the US population with newly diagnosed prostate cancer and discusses new treatment options utilizing noninvasive or minimally invasive management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent evidence of significant changes in the current prostate cancer landscape is based on clinical data and pathological specimens after radical prostatectomy that suggest a further increase of the low-risk patient population that may require reconsideration of treatment options. For a select cohort of patients with low-risk features, based on the D'Amico definition, active surveillance or focal ablative therapy may be a rational alternative to surgical prostatectomy or whole-gland radiation therapy that still dominate as the main treatment approaches for localized prostate cancer.

SUMMARY

As the prostate-specific antigen era continues to mature, we continue to witness stage migration. A growing segment of the localized prostate cancer patient population has very low-volume, low-grade disease. Although active surveillance may be an appropriate approach for a selected group of patients, the progression requiring whole-gland therapy remains a challenge. Organ-sparing focal therapy might ideally fill the gap between a surveillance strategy and whole-gland treatment providing a reasonable balance between cancer control and quality of life.

Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study

BACKGROUND

The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer.

METHODS

We identified 182,000 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years through registries in seven European countries for inclusion in our study. The men were randomly assigned to a group that was offered PSA screening at an average of once every 4 years or to a control group that did not receive such screening. The predefined core age group for this study included 162,243 men between the ages of 55 and 69 years. The primary outcome was the rate of death from prostate cancer. Mortality follow-up was identical for the two study groups and ended on December 31, 2006.

RESULTS

In the screening group, 82% of men accepted at least one offer of screening. During a median follow-up of 9 years, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer was 8.2% in the screening group and 4.8% in the control group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer in the screening group, as compared with the control group, was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.98; adjusted P=0.04). The absolute risk difference was 0.71 death per 1000 men. This means that 1410 men would need to be screened and 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The analysis of men who were actually screened during the first round (excluding subjects with noncompliance) provided a rate ratio for death from prostate cancer of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

PSA-based screening reduced the rate of death from prostate cancer by 20% but was associated with a high risk of overdiagnosis. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.)

Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: from definition to clinical implications

CONTEXT

Due to early detection strategies, prostate cancer is diagnosed early in its natural history. It remains unclear whether all patients diagnosed with prostate cancer warrant radical treatment or may benefit from delayed intervention following active surveillance.

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review of active surveillance protocols to investigate the inclusion criteria for active surveillance and the outcome of treatment.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medline was searched using the following terms: prostate cancer, active surveillance and expectant management for dates up to October 2008. Further studies were chosen on the basis of manual searches of reference lists and review papers.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Numerous studies on active surveillance were identified. The recent inclusion criteria of the studies are rather similar. Keeping the short follow-up of all studies in mind, the majority of men stay on active surveillance, and the percentage of patients receiving active treatment is as high as 35% of all patients. Once a patients requires active treatment, most patients still present with curable prostate cancer. Furthermore, only few deaths due to prostate cancer have occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is an alternative option to immediate treatment of men with presumed insignificant prostate cancer. It seems that criteria used to identify men with low-risk prostate cancer are rather similar, and immediate treatment of men meeting these criteria may result in an unnecessary number of treatments in these highly selected patients. Data from randomised trials comparing active surveillance and active treatment will provide additional insight into outcome and follow-up strategies.

Systematic review of pretreatment prostate-specific antigen velocity and doubling time as predictors for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) dynamics (PSA velocity and PSA doubling time) are widely advocated as useful prognostic markers in prostate cancer. We aimed to assess the published evidence for the clinical utility of PSA dynamics in this population.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies published before March 2007 in which a PSA dynamic (velocity or doubling time) was calculated in patients before definitive treatment, a subsequent event (such as biopsy or recurrence) was ascertained, and the association between the two was analyzed. Our principal end point was the type of analysis reported, particularly whether the predictive accuracy of a statistical model that included both absolute PSA level and a PSA dynamic was compared with that of a model that included only PSA.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven articles were eligible for analysis. The most common end points were biopsy (42 articles), and either recurrence (14 articles) or metastases or death (14 articles) after definitive therapy. Although PSA dynamics were generally found to be associated with outcome, only one article compared predictive accuracy of models with and without a PSA dynamic: this reported that PSA velocity improved prediction slightly (from 0.81 to 0.83), but was subject to verification bias. No article used decision analytic methods to examine the clinical impact of PSA dynamics.

CONCLUSION

There is little evidence that calculation of PSA velocity or doubling time in untreated patients provides predictive information beyond that provided by absolute PSA level alone. We see no justification for the use of PSA dynamics in clinical decision making before treatment in early-stage prostate cancer.

Surveillance and deferred treatment for localized prostate cancer. Population based study in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden

PURPOSE

To what extent active surveillance and deferred treatment for localized risk prostate cancer are used is unclear. We assessed the use of surveillance and of deferred treatment in a population based, nationwide cohort in Sweden.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, with a 98% coverage vs the compulsory Swedish Cancer Registry, we identified 8,304 incident cases of prostate cancer in 1997 to 2002 with age younger than 70 years, clinical local stage T1 or 2, N0 or Nx, M0 or Mx and serum prostate specific antigen less than 20 ng/ml. Data were extracted from medical charts for 7,782 of these men (94%) at a median of 4 years after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Primary treatment was surveillance for 2,065 men (26%), radical prostatectomy for 3,722 (48%), radiotherapy for 1,632 (21%) and hormonal treatment for 363 (5%). Men on surveillance had lower local tumor stage, grade and prostate specific antigen, and were older than those who received active primary treatment (p <0.001). After a median surveillance of 4 years 711 men (34%) on surveillance had received deferred treatment, which was radical prostatectomy for 279 (39%), radiotherapy for 212 (30%) and hormonal treatment for 220 (30%).

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance was a common treatment for patients younger than 70 years with localized prostate cancer in Sweden in 1997 to 2002, 26% of men with localized prostate cancer started surveillance and after a median followup of 4 years, 66% of these men remained on surveillance.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: trials and tribulations

INTRODUCTION

Prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening results in the detection of prostate cancer in many men who are not destined to die from the disease. This often results in overtreatment. One approach to reducing the overtreatment effect is to treat selectively by observing patients with favorable risk disease, and treating only the subsets who are reclassified as higher risk over time, based on biochemical or pathologic progression of disease.

METHODS

The data supporting the active surveillance concept is reviewed, including the results of several large-scale Phase 2 studies. A number needed to treat analysis was performed based on these studies and a large randomized trial of radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting. The arguments in favor of, and opposed to, active surveillance are presented.

RESULTS

The largest, most mature Phase 2 study of active surveillance has reported an 85% overall survival and 99% disease-specific survival with a median follow-up of 8 years (range 2-11 years). The number needed to treat analysis suggests that between 80 and 100 radical prostatectomies would be required for each prostate cancer death avoided in a favorable risk, screen detected population.

CONCLUSION

Active surveillance appears to be safe for favorable risk prostate cancer and represents an appealing alternative to radical treatment for all newly diagnosed men. Further follow-up and a randomized study design are required to conclusively demonstrate the safety of this approach over the 15- to 20-year time frame. A large-scale randomized trial has recently been initiated internationally to address this question.

PSA doubling time versus PSA velocity to predict high-risk prostate cancer: data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging

BACKGROUND

Our group has previously shown that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity (PSAV) is associated with the presence of life-threatening prostate cancer. Less is known about the relative utility of pretreatment PSA doubling time (PSA DT) to predict tumor aggressiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the utility of PSAV and PSA DT for the prediction of life-threatening prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging, we identified 681 men with serial PSA measurements.

MEASUREMENTS

Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between PSAV, PSA DT, and the presence of high-risk disease.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Within the period of 5 yr prior to diagnosis, PSAV was significantly higher among men with high-risk or fatal prostate cancer than men without it. By contrast, PSA DT was not significantly associated with high-risk or fatal disease. On multivariate analysis, including age, date of diagnosis, and PSA, the addition of PSAV significantly improved the concordance index from 0.85 to 0.88 (p<0.001), whereas PSA DT did not.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that PSAV is more useful than PSA DT in the pretreatment setting to help identify those men with life-threatening disease.

Prostate-specific antigen kinetics in clinical decision-making during active surveillance for early prostate cancer--a review

CONTEXT

The kinetics of prostate specific antigen (PSA) are generally assumed to be indicative of tumour progression and are therefore used in clinical decision-making in men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide support for exploiting PSA kinetics in an active surveillance setting.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched the Medline database and reviewed the evidence on both the relation between PSA kinetics before radical treatment for prostate cancer and outcome, as well as the role of PSA kinetics during active surveillance. Furthermore, the benefits and setbacks of different derivatives of PSA kinetics, minimum required time interval and number of measurements, practical recommendations, and pitfalls of their use in clinical practice are discussed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The evidence concerning the prognostic value of the PSA velocity (PSA-V) and PSA doubling time (PSA-DT) is sparse, especially in active surveillance. PSA kinetics should therefore be combined with other diagnostic measures as the trigger for deferred radical treatment or repeat prostate biopsies. There seems to be consensus among several reports on the unfavourable outcome relating to a PSA-DT <3-4 yr and on the favourable prognostic value of a PSA-DT >10 yr or a decreasing PSA level. Online tools provide help with calculations and insight on disease development. The best method of calculation, number of measurements, and time interval between measurements is unknown for now.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the current deficits in our understanding of the natural behaviour of early prostate cancer and its relation to serum PSA levels, and despite several secondary factors playing a role in PSA kinetics, PSA kinetics are a practical parameter we can offer men on active surveillance to assess the status of their disease.

Current applications for prostate-specific antigen doubling time

OBJECTIVE

To review the current status of prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) as it pertains to the evolution of prostate cancer (PCa), specifically assessing its role in the following four stages: before diagnosis, prior to definitive treatment, following treatment including salvage therapy after recurrence, and lastly, after onset of androgen-insensitive PCa.

METHODS

We searched PubMed literature for current articles on PSADT using the key words listed for this review and, where possible, selected those with significant levels of evidence that were deemed relevant, seminal, or controversial. We summarized the data regarding PSADT as a marker for diagnosis and disease characterization, as well as a predictor of progression, response to treatment, and mortality.

RESULTS

PSADT may offer an advantage in providing a more dynamic picture of tumor behavior, providing clues regarding the relative aggressiveness of the underlying pathology. Evidence points toward a role for PSADT in the management of PCa, specifically in active surveillance, disease recurrence after treatment, and in androgen-independent PCa. PSADT is an important prognostic factor that may serve as an auxiliary end point for cancer-specific survival; however, optimal cut-off points denoting risk remain debatable.

CONCLUSIONS

PCa management requires risk stratification with a combination of variables, PSADT being one of the most reliable predictors. It is now a parameter included in many predictive nomograms and in treatment guidelines for expectant management and salvage therapy.

Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience

PURPOSE

We updated our experience with a strategy of expectant treatment for men with stage T1c prostate cancer and evaluated predictors of disease intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 407 men with a median age of 65.7 years (range 45.8 to 81.5) with stage T1c (99.8%) or T2a (0.2%) prostate cancer suspected of harboring small volume prostate cancer based on needle biopsy findings and prostate specific antigen density have been followed in a prospective, longitudinal surveillance program with a median followup of 2.8 years (range 0.4 to 12.5). A recommendation for treatment was made if disease progression was suggested by unfavorable followup needle biopsy findings (Gleason pattern 4 or 5, greater than 2 biopsy cores with cancer or greater than 50% involvement of any core with cancer). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the affect of multiple covariates on the outcome of curative intervention.

RESULTS

Of 407 men 239 (59%) men remained on active surveillance at a median followup of 3.4 years (range 0.43 to 12.5), 103 (25%) underwent curative intervention at a median of 2.2 years after diagnosis (range 0.96 to 7.39) and 65 (16%) were either lost to followup (12), withdrew from the program (45), or died of causes other than prostate cancer (8). Older age at diagnosis (p = 0.011) and an earlier date of diagnosis (p = 0.001) were significantly associated with curative intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognizing that over treatment of prostate cancer is prevalent, especially among elderly patients, a program of careful selection and monitoring of older men who are likely to harbor small volume, low grade disease may be a rational alternative to the active treatment of all.

[Radiotherapy for prostate cancer]

Depending on tumor-stage and risk-factors, prostate cancer can be treated by Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy, Androgen Ablation or a combination of at least two of them. In clinically localized low-risk cases, the results of radiotherapy and surgery are very similar. Patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer, often not suited for radical prostatectomy, seem to benefit from higher radiation doses and additional Androgen ablation, although questions remain regarding the treatment volume of radiotherapy and the optimal timing and duration of androgen deprivation. Standardised target volume definitions and dose prescriptions for different risk groups and improved patient selection for radiotherapy are required.

Screening for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Any form of screening aims to reduce mortality and increase a person's quality of life. Screening for prostate cancer has generated considerable debate within the medical community, as demonstrated by the varying recommendations made by medical organizations and governed by national policies. Much of this debate is due to the limited availability of high quality research and the influence of false-positive or false-negative results generated by use of the diagnostic techniques such as the digital rectal examination (DRE) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether screening for prostate cancer reduces prostate cancer mortality and has an impact on quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases (PROSTATE register, CENTRAL the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CANCERLIT and the NHS EED) were searched electronically in addition to hand searching of specific journals and bibliographies in an effort to identify both published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials of screening versus no screening or routine care for prostate cancer were eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The search identified 99 potentially relevant articles that were selected for full text review. From these 99 citations, two randomised controlled trials were identified as meeting the review's inclusion criteria. Data from the trials were independently extracted by two authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Two randomised controlled trials with a total of 55,512 participants were included; however, both trials had methodological weaknesses. Re-analysis using intention-to-screen and meta-analysis of results from the two randomised controlled trials indicated no statistically significant difference in prostate cancer mortality between men randomised for prostate cancer screening and controls (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.80-1.29). Neither study assessed the effect of prostate cancer screening on quality of life, all-cause mortality or cost effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given that only two randomised controlled trials were included, and the high risk of bias of both trials, there is insufficient evidence to either support or refute the routine use of mass, selective or opportunistic screening compared to no screening for reducing prostate cancer mortality. Currently, no robust evidence from randomised controlled trials is available regarding the impact of screening on quality of life, harms of screening, or its economic value. Results from two ongoing large scale multicentre randomised controlled trials that will be available in the next several years are required to make evidence-based decisions regarding prostate cancer screening.