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

Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study: design of a multi-institutional active surveillance cohort and biorepository

Active surveillance is a management plan for localized prostate cancer that offers selective delayed intervention on indication of disease progression, allowing patients to delay or avoid treatment and associated side-effects. Outcomes from centers that promote active surveillance are favorable, with high rates of disease-specific survival. However, there remains a need for prognostic variables or biomarkers that distinguish with high specificity the aggressive cancers that progress on surveillance from the indolent cancers. The Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study is a multicenter study and a biorepository that will discover and confirm biomarkers of aggressive disease as defined by histologic, prostate-specific antigen, or clinical criteria.

Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management

CONTEXT

Most newly diagnosed prostate cancers are clinically localized, and major treatment options include surgery, radiation, or conservative management. Although conservative management can be a reasonable choice, there is little contemporary prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-era data on outcomes with this approach.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of clinically localized prostate cancer managed without initial attempted curative therapy in the PSA era.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A population-based cohort study of men aged 65 years or older when they were diagnosed (1992-2002) with stage T1 or T2 prostate cancer and whose cases were managed without surgery or radiation for 6 months after diagnosis. Living in areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, the men were followed up for a median of 8.3 years (through December 31, 2007). Competing risk analyses were performed to assess outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Ten-year overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and major cancer related interventions.

RESULTS

Among men who were a median age of 78 years at cancer diagnosis, 10-year prostate cancer-specific mortality was 8.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2%-12.8%) for men with well-differentiated tumors; 9.1% (95% CI, 8.3%-10.1%) for those with moderately differentiated tumors, and 25.6% (95% CI, 23.7%-28.3%) for those with poorly differentiated tumors. The corresponding 10-year risks of dying of competing causes were 59.8% (95% CI, 53.2%-67.8%), 57.2% (95% CI, 52.6%-63.9%), and 56.5% (95% CI, 53.6%-58.8%), respectively. Ten-year disease-specific mortality for men aged 66 to 74 years diagnosed with moderately differentiated disease was 60% to 74% lower than earlier studies: 6% (95% CI, 4%-8%) in the contemporary PSA era (1992-2002) compared with results of previous studies (15%-23%) in earlier eras (1949-1992). Improved survival was also observed in poorly differentiated disease. The use of chemotherapy (1.6%) or major interventions for spinal cord compression (0.9%) was uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

Results following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 1992 through 2002 are better than outcomes among patients diagnosed in the 1970s and 1980s. This may be due, in part, to additional lead time, overdiagnosis related to PSA testing, grade migration, or advances in medical care.

Radical prostatectomy findings in patients in whom active surveillance of prostate cancer fails

PURPOSE

Little data are available on radical prostatectomy findings in men who experience disease progression following active surveillance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 470 men in our active surveillance program underwent annual repeat needle biopsies to look for progression defined as any Gleason pattern grade 4/5, more than 50% cancer on any core or cancer in more than 2 cores. Slides were available for review in 48 of 51 radical prostatectomies with progression.

RESULTS

The average time between the first prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy was 29.5 months (range 13 to 70), with 44% and 75% of the patients showing progression by the second and third biopsy, respectively. There were 31 (65%) organ confined cases, of which 25 (52%) were Gleason score 6. Of 48 cases 17 (35%) had extraprostatic extension, 3 had seminal vesicle/lymph node involvement and 7 (15%) had positive margins. Mean total tumor volume was 1.3 cm(3) (range 0.02 to 10.8). Of the 48 tumors 13 (27%) were potentially clinically insignificant (organ confined, dominant nodule less than 0.5 cm(3), no Gleason pattern 4/5) and 19% (5 of 26) of the radical prostatectomies with a dominant tumor nodule less than 0.5 cm(3) demonstrated extraprostatic extension, 4 with Gleason pattern 4. All 10 tumors with a dominant nodule greater than 1 cm(3) were located predominantly anteriorly.

CONCLUSIONS

Most progression after active surveillance occurs 1 to 2 years after diagnosis suggesting undersampling of more aggressive tumor rather than progression of indolent tumor. Even with progression most tumors have favorable pathology (27% potentially insignificant). A small percentage of men have advanced stage disease (pT3b or N1). The anterior region should be sampled in men on active surveillance.

Techniques and predictive models to improve prostate cancer detection

The use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening test remains controversial. There have been several attempts to refine PSA measurements to improve its predictive value. These modifications, including PSA density, PSA kinetics, and the measurement of PSA isoforms, have met with limited success. Therefore, complex statistical and computational models have been created to assess an individual's risk of prostate cancer more accurately. In this review, the authors examined the methods used to modify PSA as well as various predictive models used in prostate cancer detection. They described the mathematical underpinnings of these techniques along with their intrinsic strengths and weaknesses, and they assessed the accuracy of these methods, which have been shown to be better than physicians' judgment at predicting a man's risk of cancer. Without understanding the design and limitations of these methods, they can be applied inappropriately, leading to incorrect conclusions. These models are important components in counseling patients on their risk of prostate cancer and also help in the design of clinical trials by stratifying patients into different risk categories. Thus, it is incumbent on both clinicians and researchers to become familiar with these tools. Cancer 2009;115(13 suppl):3085-99. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

Natural history, growth kinetics, and outcomes of untreated clinically localized renal tumors under active surveillance

BACKGROUND

The growth kinetics of untreated solid organ malignancies are not defined. Radiographic active surveillance (AS) of renal tumors in patients unfit or unwilling to undergo intervention provides an opportunity to quantify the natural history of untreated localized tumors. The authors report the radiographic growth kinetics of renal neoplasms during a period of surveillance.

METHODS

The authors identified patients with enhancing renal masses who were radiographically observed for at least 12 months. Clinical and pathological records were reviewed to determine tumor growth kinetics and clinical outcomes. Tumor growth kinetics were expressed in terms of absolute and relative linear and volumetric growth.

RESULTS

The authors identified 172 renal tumors in 154 patients under AS. Median tumor diameter and volume on presentation were 2.0 cm (mean, 2.5; range, 0.4-12.0) and 4.18 cm(3) (mean, 20.0; range, 0.033-904). Median duration of follow-up was 24 months (mean, 31; range, 12-156). A significant association between presenting tumor size and proportional growth was noted, with smaller tumors growing faster than larger tumors. Thirty-nine percent (68 of 173) of tumors underwent delayed intervention, and 84% (57 of 68) were pathologically malignant. Progression to metastatic disease was noted in 1.3% (2 of 154) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors demonstrated the association between a tumor's volume and subsequent growth, with smaller tumors exhibiting significantly faster volumetric growth than larger tumors, consistent with Gompertzian kinetics. Surveillance of localized renal tumors is associated with a low rate of disease progression in the intermediate term, and suggests potential overtreatment biases in select patients.

[Characteristics of prostate cancer in men less than 50-year-old]

OBJECTIVE

To report the characteristics of prostate cancer (PCa) in men less than 50-year-old and the results of different treatments of PCa in this population.

METHOD

A bibliographic research was performed using Pubmed database. The keywords that we used were: prostate cancer, age, young, radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, radiotherapy, active surveillance. The studies which included a significant number of patients were selected. A total of 38 articles were used as bibliographic references.

RESULTS

PCa in young men does not seem to have different characteristics than in older men. Nevertheless, young men seem to have a lower risk of severe urinary and sexual sequelae, particularly following radical prostatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no recommendation regarding management of PCa in men less than 50-year-old. In case of localized cancer, two options may be considered. First option consists in decreasing the urinary and sexual complications of radical prostatectomy. A minimally-invasive treatment, such as brachytherapy or even active surveillance, may reach this objective. Second option consists in being more aggressive. To propose a radical prostatectomy offers to the patient the possibility of salvage radiation therapy in case of locally-advanced tumor or local recurrence.

Non-surgical treatment of localised prostate cancer

The non-surgical treatment of localised prostate cancer depends on a number of factors including: PSA, stage, Gleason score, age, fitness for treatment and life expectancy, and is individualised depending on risk. Patients who present with early localised (stage T1 or T2) tumours with low risk features (PSA <10 ng/ml, Gleason score 3+4 or below) and who have a life expectancy of more than 10 years may consider radiotherapy or active surveillance. Permanent brachytherapy seed implantation is suitable for low risk patients who have minimal lower urinary tract symptoms, with equivalent results to external beam radiotherapy Conformal high-dose external beam radiotherapy is effective for patients with high risk disease, and consideration should be given to the use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant anti-androgens. Prophylactic pelvic nodal irradiation is indicated for patients with high risk of lymph node disease, followed by a boost to the prostate using either a smaller external beam volume, or brachytherapy. The definitive treatment depends on both clinical parameters such as the clinical staging, prognostic risk, and the likelihood of acute and late toxicity and the patient's personal choice based on their life style.

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.

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.

A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

For select men with low risk prostate cancer active surveillance is more often being considered a management strategy. In a multicenter retrospective study we evaluated the actuarial rates and predictors of remaining on active surveillance, the incidence of cancer progression and the pathological findings of delayed radical prostatectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 262 men from 4 institutions met the inclusion criteria of age 75 years or younger, prostate specific antigen 10 ng/ml or less, clinical stage T1-T2a, biopsy Gleason sum 6 or less, 3 or less positive cores at diagnostic biopsy, repeat biopsy before active surveillance and no treatment for 6 months following the repeat biopsy. Active surveillance started on the date of the second biopsy. Actuarial rates of remaining on active surveillance were calculated and univariate Cox regression was used to assess predictors of discontinuing active surveillance.

RESULTS

With a median followup of 29 months 43 patients ultimately received active treatment. The 2 and 5-year probabilities of remaining on active surveillance were 91% and 75%, respectively. Patients with cancer on the second biopsy (HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.23-4.06, p = 0.007) and a higher number of cancerous cores from the 2 biopsies combined (p = 0.002) were more likely to undergo treatment. Age, prostate specific antigen, clinical stage, prostate volume and number of total biopsy cores sampled were not predictive of outcome. Skeletal metastases developed in 1 patient 38 months after starting active surveillance. Of the 43 patients undergoing delayed treatment 41 (95%) are without disease progression at a median of 23 months following treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

With a median followup of 29 months active surveillance for select patients appears to be safe and associated with a low risk of systemic progression. Cancer at restaging biopsy and a higher total number of cancerous cores are associated with a lower likelihood of remaining on active surveillance. A restaging biopsy should be strongly considered to finalize eligibility for active surveillance.

Sociodemographic predictors of prostate cancer risk category at diagnosis: unique patterns of significant and insignificant disease

PURPOSE

We determined various sociodemographic predictors of prostate cancer risk category at presentation as assessed by serum prostate specific antigen, cancer grade and tumor stage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 5,939 patients enrolled in the CaPSURE national disease registry database between 1995 and 2007. Prostate cancer risk category was assigned as low, intermediate or high based on diagnostic prostate specific antigen, clinical grade and biopsy Gleason grade. Additionally, a group of men with low grade, limited volume tumors were identified as having clinically insignificant disease. The primary outcome was prostate cancer risk category at presentation. Treatment received vs active surveillance was analyzed as a secondary end point.

RESULTS

Patients who were older, had lower levels of education and had Medicare with or without a supplement instead of private or Veteran's Affairs insurance were more likely to have intermediate and high risk disease than low risk disease. Nonwhite race was associated with high risk disease at presentation. Clinically insignificant disease was more common in men younger than 60 years, those with higher education and income, and those with private insurance. Logistic regression analysis suggested that younger age, higher education and income, and private insurance were related to insignificant disease being detected. Among men with insignificant disease younger age and private insurance were associated with immediate treatment with curative intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Unique sociodemographic variables are associated with the clinical risk of prostate cancer at diagnosis and they may influence treatment decisions and outcomes. Patients with insignificant disease may be susceptible to overtreatment due to the indolent nature of the disease. Intermediate and high risk groups, which are associated with poorer outcomes, may be further endangered by late detection of the disease.

DNA Ploidy as surrogate for biopsy gleason score for preoperative organ versus nonorgan-confined prostate cancer prediction

OBJECTIVES

Transformation of normal epithelium into cancer cells involves epigenetic and genetic changes and modifications in nuclear structure and tissue architecture. To evaluate nuclear morphometric alterations and clinicopathologic features for organ- vs nonorgan-confined prostate carcinoma (PCa) prediction.

METHODS

Of 557 prospectively enrolled patients, 370 had complete information and sufficient tumor area for all evaluated parameters (281 organ-confined and 89 nonorgan-confined PCa cases). Digital images of Feulgen DNA-stained nuclei were captured from biopsies using the AutoCyte imaging system, and the nuclear morphometric alterations were calculated. Logistic regression analysis with bootstrap resampling was used to determine the factors important for differentiation of the 2 groups and to generate models for organ- vs nonorgan-confined PCa prediction.

RESULTS

Several nuclear morphometric features were significantly altered and could differentiate organ- and nonorgan-confined disease. DNA ploidy was the most important factor among the significant nuclear morphometric features and was the second most important factor for organ- vs nonorgan-confined PCa prediction when considered with total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), complexed PSA, free/total PSA, biopsy Gleason score, and clinical stage. The combination of DNA ploidy with clinical stage, total PSA, and biopsy Gleason score showed an improvement of 1.5% in the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves compared with the combination of clinical stage, total PSA, and biopsy Gleason (73.97% vs 72.43%). The use of DNA ploidy in lieu of the biopsy Gleason score in each preoperative model evaluated resulted in equivalent or improved organ- vs nonorgan-confined PCa prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study have shown that DNA ploidy can serve as a surrogate biomarker that has the potential to replace biopsy Gleason scores for organ- vs nonorgan-confined PCa prediction.

Conventional treatments of localized prostate cancer

Established therapeutic approaches for clinically localized prostate cancer include watchful waiting (active surveillance), radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy. The risk of progression during surveillance is related to the initial cancer stage and grade; reasonable evidence has supported the safety and feasibility, during a period of 5-10 years, of an active surveillance regimen for men with low-risk prostate cancer. The progression rates at >10 years have not yet been studied in modern trials. Patients with low-risk tumor characteristics can be actively monitored without sacrificing the possibility of cure and without being exposed to an undue risk of disease progression, although some patients will not accept the emotional burden of living with an untreated cancer. Focal ablation might be an attractive alternative to active surveillance for some patients with low-risk cancer, if it proves to have minimal adverse effects on their quality of life. Radical prostatectomy is an effective form of therapy for patients with clinically significant prostate cancer; however, outcomes are highly sensitive to variations in surgical technique. Because of the risks of perioperative complications and urinary and sexual dysfunction, which appear to be as great with robotic-assisted prostatectomy as with any other technique, patients with low-risk cancer, especially those >60 years, might be attracted to more conservative alternatives, including active surveillance, radiotherapy, and focal ablation. External beam radiotherapy is an effective, noninvasive form of therapy, but it carries the long-term risks of troublesome bowel and sexual and urinary dysfunction. It might be too aggressive for many low-risk cancers detected in screened populations. For more aggressive cancers, local recurrence after radiotherapy carries substantial morbidity and low rates of long-term cancer control. Brachytherapy, a convenient, effective form of radiotherapy, is targeted at selected patients with clinically confined cancer and a prostate size of <60 g without evidence of extraprostatic extension on imaging. However, excellent outcomes require meticulous technique; acute urinary symptoms are frequent; and the long-term risks of proctitis and erectile dysfunction are comparable to the risks associated with external beam radiotherapy. Androgen-deprivation therapy is not recommended for men with localized prostate cancer who would otherwise be candidates for surgery or radiotherapy, because, even with short-term use, the risk of side effects, including osteopenic fracture and major cardiovascular events, serious. For locally extensive cancer, androgen-deprivation therapy should be used alone only for the relief of local symptoms in men with a life expectancy of <5 years who are not eligible for more aggressive treatment.

Watchful waiting versus active surveillance: appropriate patient selection

The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening era has seen dramatic stage and age migration in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. The average serum PSA level of newly diagnosed patients is about 6 ng/dL, and 60% of patients are diagnosed with clinical stage T1c disease. There is evidence that many low-grade and low-stage prostate cancers have a slow growth rate and protracted clinical course, with a very low threat of metastasis or death over a prolonged interval. Many men are also appropriately concerned about the impact of prostate cancer treatment on sexual and urinary function. Therefore, delaying therapy in favor of careful surveillance, with the expectation of delivering curative treatment upon evidence of progression, is an attractive concept. In this review, we discuss active surveillance, contrast it to watchful waiting, and define common inclusion criteria. We compare follow-up regimens and discuss indications and intervention outcomes after active surveillance. Finally, we support well-designed prospective clinical trials that evaluate active surveillance compared with immediate definitive treatment.

Prostate cancer--to screen, or not to screen, is that the question?

There continues to be controversy regarding serum Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) and prostate cancer screening. We anxiously await the results of two large prospective randomized clinical trials (Prostate, Lung, Colon, and Ovary-PCLO screening trial in the US and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer-ERSPC in Europe) assessing the benefits of prostate cancer screening. However the true question to answer may be which cancer to treat and when should we treat it.

Does race affect postoperative outcomes in patients with low-risk prostate cancer who undergo radical prostatectomy?

OBJECTIVES

To assess the magnitude of racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes following radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our database of 2407 patients who under went radical prostatectomy and isolated 2 cohorts of patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Cohort 1 was defined using liberal criteria, and cohort 2 was isolated using more stringent criteria. We then studied pre- and postoperative parameters to discern any racial differences in these 2 groups. Statistical analyses, including log-rank, chi(2), and Fisher's exact analyses, were used to ascertain the significance of such differences.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, no significant differences were found between the white and African-American patients with regard to age at diagnosis, mean prostate-specific antigen, median follow-up, or percentage of involved cores on prostate biopsy. African-American patients in cohort 1 had a greater mean body mass index than did white patients (26.9 vs 27.8, P = .026). The analysis of postoperative data demonstrated no significant difference between white and African-American patients in the risk of biochemical failure, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, positive surgical margins, tumor volume, or risk of disease upgrading. African-American patients in cohort 2 demonstrated greater all-cause mortality compared with their white counterparts (9.4% vs 3.1%, P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with low-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy, there exist no significant differences in surrogate measures of disease control, risk of disease upgrading, estimated tumor volume, or recurrence-free survival between whites and African-Americans.

Prognostic value of Her-2/neu and DNA index for progression, metastasis and prostate cancer-specific death in men with long-term follow-up after radical prostatectomy

Abnormal DNA content in tumor cells represents large scale chromosomal alterations and reflects later changes of genetic instability. Her-2/neu oncogene is amplified in 20-30% of breast and ovarian cancer patients and is associated with poor prognosis. Therefore, we evaluated prognostic value of Her-2/neu expression and DNA content measurements in 252 clinically localized PCa patients with long-term follow-up after radical prostatectomy for progression, metastasis and PCa-specific death. Her-2/neu expression was determined by immunohistochemistry and DNA content measurements employed Feulgen-stained cancer nuclei captured using static image cytometry system. Cox proportional hazard regression and Kaplan-Meir plots were used to identify significant prognostic factors for progression, metastasis and PCa-specific death. The proportions of Her-2/neu positive and high %DNA index tumors significantly increased from nonprogressor to progressors without metastasis to progressors with metastasis (p < 0.0001; <0.0001). Further, the proportions of Her-2/neu positive and high %DNA index tumors significantly increased from patients who died from another cause without progression to those who died from another cause with progression to those died with PCa-specific death (p = 0.027; <0.0001). Her-2/neu expression and %DNA index were significant prognosticators for progression (p <or= 0.001), metastasis (p <or= 0.01) PCa-specific death (p <or= 0.04) in univariate analyses. Multivariately, Her-2/neu expression and %DNA index were also significant for progression (p = 0.001), metastasis (p = 0.001) and PCa-specific death (p = 0.02). When all other clinicopathologic information is available, the increment in concordance index by addition of either Her-2/neu or DNA index was approximately 2% and of both biomarkers was approximately 3% for progression, metastasis and PCa-specific death free survival models. Therefore, patients with Her-2/neu positive and high %DNA index are at a higher risk for disease progression, metastasis and PCa-specific death. Further, Her-2/neu expression and %DNA index may be used with clinicopathologic parameters for prediction of long-term prognosis in PCa.

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.

Focal treatment of prostate cancer with vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy

Epidemiologic and pathologic features of prostate cancer have given rise to an interest in focal treatment for carefully selected patients. Prostate cancer remains highly prevalent, particularly in the U.S. and Europe. As screening programs have become more aggressive and widespread, a substantial proportion of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer have disease characteristics associated with a low risk of progression. Treatments such as radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy can lead to durable recurrence-free survival in most patients, but carry variable risks of bowel, urinary, and sexual side effects. Few men and few urologists are comfortable leaving a potentially curable prostate cancer untreated. Focal therapy offers an attractive alternative for the patient faced with a choice between aggressive local intervention (radiation or surgery) and watchful waiting. Contemporary diagnostic biopsy strategies and imaging tools, and the development of predictive statistical models (nomograms), have led to improvements in tumor characterization and risk stratification, making focal therapy a viable treatment option for specific men. This article reviews the rationale and indications for focal therapy and highlights vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (PDT) as one of many promising focal therapy techniques.

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.

Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance followed by selective treatment for men who have evidence of disease progression may be an option for select patients with early-stage prostate cancer. In this article, the authors report their experience in a contemporary cohort of men with prostate cancer who were managed with active surveillance.

METHODS

All men who were managed initially with active surveillance were identified through the authors' institutional database. Selection criteria for active surveillance included: prostate-specific antigen (PSA)<10 ng/mL, biopsy Gleason sum </=6 with no pattern 4 or 5, cancer involvement of <33% of biopsy cores, and clinical stage T1/T2a tumor. Patients were followed with PSA measurements and digital rectal examination every 3 to 6 months and with transrectal ultrasound at 6- to 12-month intervals. Beginning in 2003, patients also underwent repeat prostate biopsy at 12 to 24 months. The primary outcome measured was active treatment. Evidence of disease progression, defined as an increase in rebiopsy Gleason sum or significant PSA velocity changes (>0.75 ng/mL per year), was a secondary outcome. Chi-square and log-rank tests were used to compare groups. The association between clinical characteristics and receipt of active treatment was analyzed by using Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-one men (mean age [+/-standard deviation]: 63.4+/-8.5 years) selected active surveillance as their initial management. The overall median follow-up was 3.6 years (range, 1-17 years). The initial mean PSA level was 6.5+/-3.9 ng/mL. One hundred twenty men (37%) met at least 1 criterion for progression. Overall, 38% of men had higher grade on repeat biopsy, and 26% of men had a PSA velocity>0.75 ng/mL per year. Seventy-eight men (24%) received secondary treatment at a median 3 years (range, 1-17 years) after diagnosis. Approximately 13% of patients with no disease progression elected to obtain treatment. PSA density at diagnosis and rise in Gleason score on repeat biopsy were associated significantly with receipt of secondary treatment. The disease-specific survival rate was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected individuals with early-stage prostate cancer may be candidates for active surveillance. Specific criteria can be and need to be developed to select the most appropriate individuals for this form of management and to monitor disease progression. A small attrition rate can be expected because of men who are unable or unwilling to tolerate surveillance.

Vascular targeted photodynamic therapy for localized prostate cancer

Survival for men diagnosed with prostate cancer directly depends on the stage and grade of the disease at diagnosis. Prostate cancer screening has greatly increased the ability to diagnose small and low-grade cancers that are amenable to cure. However, widespread prostate-specific antigen screening exposes many men with low-risk cancers to unnecessary complications associated with treatment for localized disease without any survival advantage. One challenge for urological surgeons is to develop effective treatment options for low-risk disease that are associated with fewer complications. Minimally invasive ablative treatments for localized prostate cancer are under development and may represent a preferred option for men with low-risk disease who want to balance the risks and benefits of treatment. Vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) is a novel technique that is being developed for treating prostate cancer. Recent advances in photodynamic therapy have led to the development of photosynthesizers that are retained by the vascular system, which provides the opportunity to selectively ablate the prostate with minimal collateral damage to other structures. The rapid clearance of these new agents negates the need to avoid exposure to sunlight for long periods. Presented herein are the rationale and preliminary data for VTP for localized prostate cancer.

Prostate Cancer Specificity of PCA3 Gene Testing: Examples from Clinical Practice

A specific marker for early prostate cancer would fill an important void. In initial evaluations of the prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) gene vis-à-vis serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, the gene offers great promise. At the cellular level, PCA3 specificity for cancer is nearly perfect because of the gross overexpression of the gene by cancer cells. As a clinical test for early prostate cancer, heightened specificity is also seen in urine containing prostate cells from men with the disease. PCA3 gene testing holds valuable potential in PSA quandary situations: (1) men with elevated PSA levels but no cancer on initial biopsy; (2) men found to have cancer despite normal levels of PSA; (3) men with PSA elevations associated with varying degrees of prostatitis; and (4) men undergoing active surveillance for presumed microfocal disease.