Best practice in active surveillance for men with prostate cancer: a Prostate Cancer UK consensus statement

The experiences of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer and their significant others: A qualitative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) is a monitoring pathway for men with low-grade, slow growing PCa and aims to delay or avoid active treatment by treating only in the case of disease progression. Experiences of this pathway vary but living with an untreated cancer can have a negative psychological impact on both the patient and their significant other (SO). Literature suggests partners are the primary source of support for men on AS, and therefore it is important to consider SO experiences alongside those of the patient. To the best of our knowledge this is the first UK-based qualitative review looking specifically at experiences of AS for both men with PCa and their SOs.

METHODS

MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched for literature reporting qualitative experiences of AS for PCa for either men on AS or SOs (or both). 2769 records were identified and screened, with 28 meeting the eligibility criteria. Qualitative data were synthesised and included men on AS (n = 428), and SOs (n = 51).

RESULTS

Experiences of the AS pathway vary but reports of uncertainty and anxiety were present in the accounts of both men on AS and SOs. SOs are intertwined throughout every part of the PCa journey, and couples presented as a unit that were on AS together. Both patients and SOs expressed a need for more support, and highly valued peer support. Despite this finding, men expressed a dislike towards 'support groups'.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased recognition in clinical practice of SO involvement in AS is needed. Further research is required to explore the specific types of support that would be most acceptable to this population to address the unmet support needs uncovered in this review.

Developing machine learning algorithms for dynamic estimation of progression during active surveillance for prostate cancer

Active Surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is a management option that continually monitors early disease and considers intervention if progression occurs. A robust method to incorporate “live” updates of progression risk during follow-up has hitherto been lacking. To address this, we developed a deep learning-based individualised longitudinal survival model using Dynamic-DeepHit-Lite (DDHL) that learns data-driven distribution of time-to-event outcomes. Further refining outputs, we used a reinforcement learning approach (Actor-Critic) for temporal predictive clustering (AC-TPC) to discover groups with similar time-to-event outcomes to support clinical utility. We applied these methods to data from 585 men on AS with longitudinal and comprehensive follow-up (median 4.4 years). Time-dependent C-indices and Brier scores were calculated and compared to Cox regression and landmarking methods. Both Cox and DDHL models including only baseline variables showed comparable C-indices but the DDHL model performance improved with additional follow-up data. With 3 years of data collection and 3 years follow-up the DDHL model had a C-index of 0.79 (±0.11) compared to 0.70 (±0.15) for landmarking Cox and 0.67 (±0.09) for baseline Cox only. Model calibration was good across all models tested. The AC-TPC method further discovered 4 distinct outcome-related temporal clusters with distinct progression trajectories. Those in the lowest risk cluster had negligible progression risk while those in the highest cluster had a 50% risk of progression by 5 years. In summary, we report a novel machine learning approach to inform personalised follow-up during active surveillance which improves predictive power with increasing data input over time.

Developing a consensus statement for psychosocial support in active surveillance for prostate cancer

Purpose

Our objective was to prioritise the psychosocial support needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer and to develop a consensus statement to provide guidance on best practice psychosocial support for men choosing active surveillance and their families.

Subjects and methods

We undertook a patient and public involvement Delphi process over two rounds, informed by qualitative data and a comprehensive literature review, to prioritise the information and support needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Two panels were surveyed, a patient/carer panel (n = 55) and a health care provider panel (n = 114). Based on the findings of the Delphi surveys, an expert active surveillance discussion group developed a consensus statement to guide best practice.

Results

Patients and health care professionals differed slightly in their ideas concerning priorities for active surveillance psychosocial support. Broadly, agreed priority areas included -patients being involved in decision-making, continuity of care, more streamlined access to health care teams, improved understanding of the risk of prostate cancer progression and information and support provided through both health care professionals and peers. Based on the identified priorities, the expert discussion group agreed on 22 consensus statements for best practice in psychosocial care for active surveillance in respect of (1) principles of an active surveillance programme; (2) structure of consultations; (3) content of information and support; and (4) delivery of information.

Conclusion

This consensus statement provides a framework for patient-focused psychosocial support, which, if adopted, should increase uptake and adherence to active surveillance among men with prostate cancer.

A Feasibility Study of the Therapeutic Response and Durability of Short-term Androgen-targeted Therapy in Early Prostate Cancer Managed with Surveillance: The Therapeutics in Active Prostate Surveillance (TAPS01) Study

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is a preferred management option for men with prostate cancer with favourable prognosis. However, nearly half of men on AS switch to treatment within 5 years, so therapeutic strategies to prevent or delay disease progression could be considered. The androgen receptor is the pre-eminent oncogenic driver in prostate cancer.

Objective

To explore image-based tumour responses and the patient impact of short-duration androgen-targeted therapy (ATT) to abrogate disease progression during AS.

Design, setting, and participants

Men on AS with Cambridge Prognostic Group 1 & 2 (low and favourable intermediate risk) prostate cancer and lesions visible on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited to an open-label, single-centre, phase 2 feasibility study of short-term ATT (the TAPS01 study).

Intervention

Apalutamide 240 mg was administered for 90 days.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

MRI-measured tumour volume (TV), gland volume (GV), and the TV/GV ratio were calculated at baseline, at day 90 (end of treatment), and at 6- and 18-month follow-up. Quality of life metrics were measured at day 0, day 90, and 6 weeks after ATT.

Results and limitations

Eleven patients (40% of eligible men approached) agreed to participate, of whom nine completed treatment. At day 90, the median percentage reduction was −38.2% (range −51.8% to −23.5%) for GV, −54.2% (range −74.1% to −13.8%) for TV, and −27.2% (range −61.5% to −7.5%) for TV/GV (all p < 0.0001). At 6 mo, while GV had returned to baseline (p = 0.95) both TV (−31.9%; p = 0.0007) and TV/GV (−28.7%; p = 0.0009) remained significantly reduced. This reduction was sustained at 18 months (TV −18%, TV/GV −23.8%; p = 0.01). European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL core 30-item questionnaire scores for global, physical, role, and social functioning decreased during treatment, but all were recovering by 6 weeks. EQ-VAS scores were unchanged compared to baseline.

Conclusions

TAPS01 has demonstrated feasibility and patient tolerability for short-term ATT in men on AS. Our data suggest a selective and durable antitumour effect in the short term and support a larger-scale randomised trial.

Patient summary

We investigated the feasibility of short-term treatment with an androgen inhibitor to prevent or delay disease progression for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Results for a small group of patients show that 90-day treatment led to a sustained decrease in tumour volume over 18 months. The findings warrant a larger clinical trial for this approach, which could allow patients to delay or even avoid longer-term active treatments.

The role of diagnostic ultrasound imaging for patients with known prostate cancer within an active surveillance pathway: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) within active surveillance of prostate cancer programmes is identified by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE guideline NG 131 2019) as having a role for monitoring disease. The widespread demands on mpMRI capacity may limit its use in surveillance. It is therefore timely to review the options that modern ultrasound imaging present to this cohort of patients in the monitoring of prostate cancer.

METHODS

Between April and September 2020, 10 databases were searched to recruit studies for the review. Three reviewers evaluated the publications for inclusion. Characteristics including the inclusion criteria for the study cohort, how disease was determined, identification of disease progression, and the modality and mode of imaging used were reviewed. Given the paucity of full text articles, a meta-analysis was not possible. A narrative review was undertaken.

RESULTS

In total, 12 studies, utilising the range of ultrasound parameters of B-mode, micro-ultrasound, colour Doppler, contrast ultrasound and elastography were included. The review demonstrated that micro-ultrasound offers promise as an imaging tool comparable with mpMRI. However, this is an emerging technology with limited availability. Analysis of the data further demonstrated that by combining the diagnostic features provided by multiple modes reviewed, ultrasound has a role in the diagnostic imaging of patients on active surveillance.

CONCLUSION

Providing a multiparametric approach is utilised, stable ultrasound findings may allow for increased intervals between biopsy for men on surveillance. The advent of micro-US offers promise as an imaging modality within an active surveillance pathway but requires further verification.

Hidden clues in prostate cancer - Lessons learned from clinical and pre-clinical approaches on diagnosis and risk stratification

The heterogeneity of prostate cancer is evident at clinical, morphological and molecular levels. To aid clinical decision making, a three-tiered system for risk stratification is used to designate low-, intermediate-, and high-risk of disease progression. Intermediate-risk prostate cancers are the most frequently diagnosed, and even with common diagnostic features, can exhibit vastly different clinical progression. Thus, improved risk stratification methods are needed to better predict patient outcomes. Here, we provide an overview of the improvements in diagnosis/prognosis arising from advances in pathology reporting of prostate cancer, which can improve risk stratification, especially for patients with intermediate-risk disease. This review discusses updates to pathology reporting of morphological growth patterns, and proposes the utility of integrating prognostic biomarkers or innovative imaging techniques to enhance clinical decision-making. To complement clinical studies, experimental approaches using patient-derived tumors have highlighted important cellular and morphological features associated with aggressive disease that may impact treatment response. The intersection of urology, pathology and scientific disciplines is required to work towards a common goal of understanding disease pathogenesis, improving the stratification of patients with intermediate-risk disease and subsequently defining optimal treatment strategies using precision-based approaches.

Factors that influence clinicians' decisions to decrease active surveillance monitoring frequency or transition to watchful waiting for localised prostate cancer: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about clinicians' decision-making about decreasing active surveillance (AS) testing/converting patients to watchful waiting (WW), nor are there any guidelines. The objective of this study was to identify factors that clinicians consider when decreasing AS testing/converting to WW for men with prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Exploratory qualitative study.

SETTING

All participants practiced in various institutions in the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible clinicians had to provide clinical care for patients with prostate cancer in the USA and speak English. Clinicians could be either urologists or radiation oncologists. Of the 24 clinicians, 83% were urologists representing 11 states, 92% were men and 62% were white.

METHODS

This qualitative study used data from semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to ensure geographical variation in the USA. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was achieved. Framework analysis guided coding and identification of themes. Two researchers coded all transcripts independently, met to discuss and reached consensus.

RESULTS

Interviews with clinicians demonstrated that testing or monitoring for AS or transitioning to WW is happening in practice, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Decisions to decrease AS were personalised and tailored to patients' health status. Life expectancy was the dominant factor that influenced decision, but clinicians were generally hesitant to specify an age when they would decrease AS or transition to WW. Fear that poor adherence could lead to missed progression and concerns about the medico-legal issue of not doing enough were cited as barriers to decreasing AS.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that in certain situations, AS frequency is reduced or transitioned to WW, yet decisions appear to be inconsistent and there are no significant barriers. These findings could inform further areas to explore when drafting recommendations that consider patients' values and preferences when making decisions about decreasing AS/converting to WW.

The role of magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer

Active surveillance (AS) is an important strategy to avoid overtreatment of prostate cancer (PCa) and has become the standard of care for low-risk patients. The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in AS has expanded due to its ability to risk stratify patients with suspected or known PCa, and MRI has become an integral part of the AS protocols at various institutions. A negative pre-biopsy MRI result is associated with a very high negative predictive value for a Gleason score ≥ 3+4. A positive MRI result in men who are otherwise eligible for AS has been shown to be associated with the presence of high-grade PCa and therefore with ineligibility. In addition, MRI can be used to guide and determine the timing of per-protocol biopsy during AS. However, there are several MRI-related issues that remain unresolved, including the lack of a consensus and guidelines; concerns about gadolinium deposition in various tissues; and increased demand for higher efficiency and productivity. Similarly, the need for the combined use of targeted and systematic sampling is still a matter of debate when lesions are visible on MRI. Here, we review the current AS guidelines, as well as the accepted roles of MRI in patient selection and monitoring, the potential uses of MRI that are still in question, and the limitations of the method.

A modified Delphi study to develop a practical guide for selecting patients with prostate cancer for active surveillance

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is a management option for men diagnosed with lower risk prostate cancer. There is wide variation in all aspects of AS internationally, from patient selection to investigations and follow-up intervals, and a lack of clear evidence on the optimal approach to AS. This study aimed to provide guidance for clinicians from an international panel of prostate cancer experts.

Methods

A modified Delphi approach was undertaken, utilising two rounds of online questionnaires followed by a face-to-face workshop. Participants indicated their level of agreement with statements relating to patient selection for AS via online questionnaires on a 7-point Likert scale. Factors not achieving agreement were iteratively developed between the two rounds of questionnaires. Draft statements were presented at the face-to-face workshop for discussion and consensus building.

Results

12 prostate cancer experts (9 urologists, 2 academics, 1 radiation oncologist) participated in this study from a range of geographical regions (4 USA, 4 Europe, 4 Australia). Complete agreement on statements presented to the participants was 29.4% after Round One and 69.0% after Round Two. Following robust discussions at the face-to-face workshop, agreement was reached on the remaining statements. PSA, PSA density, Multiparametric MRI, and systematic biopsy (with or without targeted biopsy) were identified as minimum diagnostic tests required upon which to select patients to recommend AS as a treatment option for prostate cancer. Patient factors and clinical parameters that identified patients appropriate to potentially receive AS were agreed. Genetic and genomic testing was not recommended for use in clinical decision-making regarding AS.

Conclusions

The lack of consistency in the practice of AS for men with lower risk prostate cancer between and within countries was reflected in this modified Delphi study. There are, however, areas of common practice and agreement from which clinicians practicing in the current environment can use to inform their clinical practice to achieve the best outcomes for patients.

Predictors of ISUP score upgrade in patients with low-risk prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

The literature contains few studies that focus on the relationship between International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) score upgrade and complete blood count (CBC) parameters for patients with low-risk prostate cancer and studies achieved inconclusive results.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed our institutional database for patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1994 and 2017. In total, we included 633 patients with low-risk prostate cancer in the study. We investigated the effects of clinicopathologic factors on ISUP score upgrade. Moreover, we compared RP pathologic outcomes between the patients with and without ISUP score upgrade.

RESULTS

The mean age and follow-up periods were 61.09±6.61 years and 41.9±1.8 months, respectively. ISUP score upgrade was observed in 207 patients (32.7%). In multivariate analysis, high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density and percentage of positive cores were found to be significantly associated with ISUP score upgrade (p = 0.003 and p = 0.003, respectively). The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-lymphocyte ratio, and eosinophil-lymphocyte ratio were found to have no effect on ISUP score upgrade (p = 0.856, p = 0.353, p = 0.128, and p = 0.074, respectively). The percentage of tumors, surgical margin positivity, seminal vesicle invasion rate, and extraprostatic extension rate in RP pathology were higher in patients with ISUP score upgrade (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of the patients in our series had ISUP score upgrade in RP pathology. PSA density and the percentage of positive cores were found to be the factors significantly associated with ISUP score upgrade. CBC-related factors had no effect on ISUP score upgrade.

[Predictive factors of active surveillance interruption for prostate cancer after 5years of follow-up]

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

The objective of this work was to identify the risk factors (RFs) of active surveillance (AS) interruption in a prostate cancer (PCa) single-center retrospective cohort of patients.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

All patients in AS between January 2011 and October 2019 were retrospectively included in a computerized database. The group of patients who had an AS interruption was compared to the one still under AS, in order to identify potential risk factors for the interruption of the surveillance protocol.

RESULTS

Two hundred and two patients have been included in the AS cohort with a median follow-up of 32months. At the time of analysis, 72 patients (36%) were not under the AS protocol anymore, 118 (58%) were still under AS and 12 (6%) were lost of follow-up. Sixty-six patients (92%) had left SA due to PCa progression, 4 (5%) by personal choice and 2 (3%) switched to watchful waiting. A PSA doubling Time<3years (PSADT<3years) has been identified as the only statistically significant RF for AS interruption, both in the unvaried (P<0.001) and multivariate (OR=5.403, P<0.01) analysis. It was also the only RF of AS interruption in the early analysis in the first three years of AS, in the unvaried analysis (P=0.021) and the multivariate analysis (OR=3.612, P=0.018).

CONCLUSION

PSADT was the only RF of AS early and late interruption in our study. It represents a major inclusion criterion in AS protocol during the initial assessment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A novel split mode TFBAR device for quantitative measurements of prostate specific antigen in a small sample of whole blood

Easy monitoring of prostate specific antigen (PSA) directly from blood samples would present a significant improvement as compared to conventional diagnostic methods. In this work, a split mode thin film bulk acoustic resonator (TFBAR) device was employed for the first time for label-free measurements of PSA concentrations in the whole blood and without sample pre-treatment. The surface of the sensor was covalently modified with anti-PSA antibodies and demonstrated a very high sensitivity of 101 kHz mL ng^-1 and low limit of detection (LOD) of 0.34 ng mL^-1 in model spiked solutions. It has previously been widely believed that significant pre-processing of blood samples would be required for TFBAR biosensors. Importantly, this work demonstrates that this is not the case, and TFBAR technology provides a cost-effective means for point-of-care (POC) diagnostics and monitoring of PSA in hospitals and in doctors' offices. Additionally, the accuracy of the developed biosensor, with respect to a commercial auto analyser (Beckman Coulter Access), was evaluated to analyse clinical samples, giving well-matched results between the two methods, thus showing a practical application in quantitative monitoring of PSA levels in the whole blood with very good signal recovery.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of High Grade Cancer in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study

PURPOSE

We investigated the ability of prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer in a standardized, multi-institutional active surveillance cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated men enrolled in Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Gleason Grade Group less than 2 and who underwent biopsy within 12 months of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Our primary outcome was biopsy reclassification to Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater. We evaluated the performance of magnetic resonance imaging PI-RADS® score and clinical factors. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit with magnetic resonance imaging and clinical factors and used to perform receiver operating curve analyses.

RESULTS

There were 361 participants with 395 prostate magnetic resonance imaging studies with a median followup of 4.1 (IQR 2.0-7.6) years. Overall 108 (27%) biopsies showed reclassification. Defining positive magnetic resonance imaging as PI-RADS 3-5, the negative predictive value and positive predictive value for detecting Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer was 83% (95% CI 76-90) and 31% (95% CI 26-37), respectively. PI-RADS was significantly associated with reclassification (PI-RADS 5 vs 1 and 2 OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.21-6.17, p=0.016) in a multivariable model but did not improve upon a model with only clinical factors (AUC 0.768 vs 0.762). In 194 fusion biopsies higher grade cancer was found in targeted cores in 21 (11%) instances, while 25 (13%) had higher grade cancer in the systematic cores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds the largest cohort data to the body of literature for magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance, recommending systematic biopsy in patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging and the inclusion of systematic biopsy in patients with positive magnetic resonance imaging.

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer in the era of routine multi-parametric MRI

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer focal therapy aims to minimize the side-effects of whole gland treatments, such as radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy without compromising oncological efficacy. However, concerns exist regarding the multifocal nature of prostate cancer and the lack of long-term oncological data for this form of treatment. In recent years, the routine adoption of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate has improved our ability to select candidates for focal therapy and to accurately deliver this form of prostate cancer treatment.

METHODS

We performed a review of the literature to provide a summary of the oncological and functional outcomes of men receiving primary prostate focal therapy. Furthermore, we discuss the impact of the routine implementation of mpMRI as part of the initial prostate cancer diagnostic pathway on the selection of candidates and delivery of focal therapy. Finally, we summarize knowledge gaps in the field and highlight active clinical trials in this arena.

RESULTS

Primary focal therapy involves the application of one of a number of energies that ablate tissue, such as cryotherapy and high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Success is principally dependent on highly accurate patient selection and disease localization underpinned in large part by the routine integration of pre-biopsy mpMRI. Prospective medium-term follow-up data for primary HIFU and cryotherapy for men with intermediate-risk disease have shown acceptable cancer control with low risk of side effects and complications. Additional research is needed to clearly define an appropriate follow-up approach and to guide the management of in- and out-of-field recurrences. Multiple comparative trials with randomization against standard care are currently underway in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.

CONCLUSION

The widespread adoption of prostate mpMRI has led to improved disease localization, enabling the performance of focal therapy as a viable treatment strategy for men with low volume intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel Consensus Statements for Deferred Treatment with Curative Intent for Localised Prostate Cancer from an International Collaborative Study (DETECTIVE Study)

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty in deferred active treatment (DAT) programmes, regarding patient selection, follow-up and monitoring, reclassification, and which outcome measures should be prioritised.

OBJECTIVE

To develop consensus statements for all domains of DAT.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A protocol-driven, three phase study was undertaken by the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Association of Urology Section of Urological Research (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel in conjunction with partner organisations, including the following: (1) a systematic review to describe heterogeneity across all domains; (2) a two-round Delphi survey involving a large, international panel of stakeholders, including healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and patients; and (3) a consensus group meeting attended by stakeholder group representatives. Robust methods regarding what constituted the consensus were strictly followed.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 109 HCPs and 16 patients completed both survey rounds. Of 129 statements in the survey, consensus was achieved in 66 (51%); the rest of the statements were discussed and voted on in the consensus meeting by 32 HCPs and three patients, where consensus was achieved in additional 27 statements (43%). Overall, 93 statements (72%) achieved consensus in the project. Some uncertainties remained regarding clinically important thresholds for disease extent on biopsy in low-risk disease, and the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in determining disease stage and aggressiveness as a criterion for inclusion and exclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus statements and the findings are expected to guide and inform routine clinical practice and research, until higher levels of evidence emerge through prospective comparative studies and clinical trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We undertook a project aimed at standardising the elements of practice in active surveillance programmes for early localised prostate cancer because currently there is great variation and uncertainty regarding how best to conduct them. The project involved large numbers of healthcare practitioners and patients using a survey and face-to-face meeting, in order to achieve agreement (ie, consensus) regarding best practice, which will provide guidance to clinicians and researchers.

The psychological impact of being on a monitoring pathway for localised prostate cancer: A UK-wide mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To address concerns over the psychological impact of being on a monitoring pathway following prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, this study compared the psychological status of men on active surveillance (AS) or watchful waiting (WW) with men on active treatment (AT) and explored psychological adjustment in men on AS/WW.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of UK men diagnosed with PCa 18 to 42 months previously (n = 16 726, localised disease at diagnosis) and telephone interviews with 24 men on AS/WW. Psychological outcomes were measured using two validated scales (Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale [SWEMWBS] and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale). Univariable and multivariable analyses compared outcomes between men on AS/WW and AT. Thematic analysis of interviews was undertaken, informed by a previously developed theory of adjustment to cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 3986 (23.8%) respondents were on AS/WW. Overall, psychological outcomes were similar or better in men on AS/WW compared with those receiving AT (SWEMWBS: Poor well-being; 12.3% AS/WW vs 13.9% AT, adjusted OR = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.76-0.97; K6: severe psychological distress; 4.6% vs 5.4%, adjusted OR = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.74-1.08). Interviews indicated that most men on AS/WW had adjusted positively. Men with poorer well-being were less able to accept, reframe positively and normalise their diagnosis, described receiving insufficient information and support, and reported a lack of confidence in their health care professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Most men on AS/WW cope well psychologically. Men making treatment decisions should be given this information. Psychological health should be assessed to determine suitability for AS/WW, and at monitoring appointments. A clear action plan and support from health care professionals is important.