1
|
Wei Y, Liu L, Li X, Song W, Zhong D, Cao X, Yuan D, Ming S, Zhang P, Wen Y. Current Treatment for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in China: A National Network Survey. J Cancer 2019; 10:1496-1502. [PMID: 31031859 PMCID: PMC6485215 DOI: 10.7150/jca.29595] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2018] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the current treatment for low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) in China. Methods: A national questionnaire survey titled "A survey of current treatment of LRPC" was designed and released nationally through the network from July 16 to August 3, 2017. Results: A total of 1,116 valid questionnaires were recovered. The percentages of preferred treatment by active surveillance (AS) or radical prostatectomy (RP) were 29.21% and 45.61%, respectively. A correspondence analysis showed that the physician in charge was more inclined to choose AS than RP. Respondents from different institution types, hospitals with different annual numbers of newly admitted patients with prostate cancer, and with different familiarity with the LRPC definition presented a significant difference in the preferred treatments (p < 0.05). Urologists chose AS or not for the following reasons: tumor progression (52.51%), potential medical disputes (42.56%) (i.e., medical disputes from patients or their relatives when urologists choose AS to treat patients with LRPC and the patient has a poor outcome), fear of cancer (41.94%), and surgical risk (39.07%). These reasons were ubiquitous, and there was no significant difference among urologists for these concerns (p > 0.05). Personal skills, surgical risk, and tumor progression were the most common factors that influenced whether AS or RP was preferred (p < 0.05). Concern about the medical disputes brought about by AS was a key factor for not choosing AS (p < 0.05). Conclusions: LRPC is still dominated by RP in China, followed by AS. Personal skills, surgical risk, and concern about tumor progression were the common factors influencing whether AS or RP was preferred. In addition, medical disputes brought by AS are another key factor for not choosing AS. There will be more Chinese data in the future to guide treatment of LRPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yongbao Wei
- Shengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou 350001, China
- Department of Urology, Fujian Provincial Hospital, No.134 Dong Street, Fuzhou 350001, China
| | - Longfei Liu
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410000
| | - Xin Li
- Department of Urology, the 118th Hospital of PLA, Wenzhou, 325000
| | - Wei Song
- Department of Urology, the Hunan Provincial People's Hospital, Changsha 410005
| | - Dewen Zhong
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Longyan, 364000
| | - Xiande Cao
- Department of Urology, Affiliated hospital of Jining Medical University, Jining, 272000
| | - Daozhang Yuan
- Department of Urology, Cancer Center of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510095
| | - Shaoxiong Ming
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433
| | - Peng Zhang
- Department of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071
| | - Yanlin Wen
- Department of Urology,Nanchong Central Hosipital, Nanchong, 637000
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Huang QX, Xiao CT, Chen Z, Lu MH, Pang J, Di JM, Luo ZH, Gao X. Combined analysis of CRMP4 methylation levels and CAPRA-S score predicts metastasis and outcomes in prostate cancer patients. Asian J Androl 2018; 20:56-61. [PMID: 28382925 PMCID: PMC5753555 DOI: 10.4103/aja.aja_3_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2016] [Revised: 11/03/2016] [Accepted: 01/06/2017] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
The present study analyzed the predictive value of combined analysis of collapsin response mediator protein 4 (CRMP4) methylation levels and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA-S) Postsurgical score of patients who required adjuvant hormone therapy (AHT) after radical prostatectomy (RP). We retrospectively analyzed 305 patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who received RP and subsequent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Two hundred and thirty patients with clinically high-risk PCa underwent immediate ADT, and 75 patients with intermediate risk PCa underwent deferred ADT. CRMP4 methylation levels in biopsies were determined, and CAPRA-S scores were calculated. In the deferred ADT group, the values of the hazard ratios for tumor progression and cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in patients with ≥15% CRMP4 methylation were 6.81 (95% CI: 2.34-19.80) and 12.83 (95% CI: 2.16-26.10), respectively. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that CRMP4 methylation levels ≥15% served as a significant prognostic marker of tumor progression and CSM. In the immediate ADT group, CAPRA-S scores ≥6 and CRMP4 methylation levels ≥15% were independent predictors of these outcomes (uni- and multi-variable Cox regression analyses). The differences in the 5-year progression-free survival between each combination were statistically significant. Combining CAPRA-S score and CRMP4 methylation levels improved the area under the curve compared with the CRMP4 or CAPRA-S model. Therefore, CRMP4 methylation levels ≥15% were significantly associated with a poor prognosis and their combination with CAPRA-S score accurately predicted tumor progression and metastasis for patients requiring AHT after RP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qun-Xiong Huang
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Chu-Tian Xiao
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Zheng Chen
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Min-Hua Lu
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Jun Pang
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Jin-Ming Di
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Zi-Huan Luo
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| | - Xin Gao
- Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
| |
Collapse
|