Adherence to Active Surveillance Protocols for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Results of the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Initiative

Medium-term follow up of active surveillance for early prostate cancer at a non-academic institution

OBJECTIVES

To report oncological outcomes of active surveillance (AS) at a single non-academic institution adopting the standardised Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) protocol.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Competing risk analyses estimated the incidence of overall mortality, metastases, conversion to treatment, and grade reclassification. The incidence of reclassification and adverse pathological findings at radical prostatectomy were compared between patients fulfilling all PRIAS inclusion criteria vs those not fulfilling at least one.

RESULTS

We analysed 341 men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer (PCa) followed on AS between 2010 and 2022. There were no PCa deaths, two patients developed distant metastases and were alive at the end of the study period. The 10-year cumulative incidence of metastases was 1.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-6.4%). A total of 111 men were reclassified, and 127 underwent definitive treatment. Men not fulfilling at least one PRIAS inclusion criteria (n = 43) had a higher incidence of reclassification (subdistribution hazards ratio 1.73, 95% CI 1.07-2.81; P = 0.03), but similar rates of adverse pathological findings at radical prostatectomy.

CONCLUSION

Metastases in men on AS at a non-academic institution are as rare as those reported in established international cohorts. Men followed without stringent inclusion criteria should be counselled about the higher incidence of reclassification and reassured they can expect rates of adverse pathological findings comparable to those fulfilling all criteria. Therefore, AS should be proposed to all men with low-grade PCa regardless of whether they are followed at academic institutions or smaller community hospitals.

Adaptation of a Clinical High-Frequency Transrectal Ultrasound System for Prostate Photoacoustic Imaging: Implementation and Pre-clinical Demonstration

OBJECTIVE

High-frequency, high-resolution transrectal micro-ultrasound (micro-US: ≥15 MHz) imaging of the prostate is emerging as a beneficial tool for scoring disease risk and accurately targeting biopsies. Adding photoacoustic (PA) imaging to visualize abnormal vascularization and accumulation of contrast agents in tumors has potential for guiding focal therapies. In this work, we describe a new imaging platform that combines a transrectal micro-US system with transurethral light delivery for PA imaging.

METHODS

A clinical transrectal micro-US system was adapted to acquire PA images synchronous to a tunable laser pulse. A transurethral side-firing optical fiber was developed for light delivery. A polyvinyl chloride (PVC)-plastisol phantom was developed and characterized to image PA contrast agents in wall-less channels. After resolution measurement in water, PA imaging was demonstrated in phantom channels with dyes and biodegradable nanoparticle contrast agents called porphysomes. In vivo imaging of a tumor model was performed, with porphysomes administered intravenously.

RESULTS

Photoacoustic imaging data were acquired at 5 Hz, and image reconstruction was performed offline. PA image resolution at a 14-mm depth was 74 and 261 μm in the axial and lateral directions, respectively. The speed of sound in PVC-plastisol was 1383 m/s, and the attenuation was 4 dB/mm at 20 MHz. PA signal from porphysomes was spectrally unmixed from blood signals in the tumor, and a signal increase was observed 3 h after porphysome injection.

CONCLUSION

A combined transrectal micro-US and PA imaging system was developed and characterized, and in vivo imaging demonstrated. High-resolution PA imaging may provide valuable additional information for diagnostic and therapeutic applications in the prostate.

Analysis of active surveillance uptake for localized prostate cancer in Quebec in 2016: A Canadian bicentric study and comparison with 2010 data

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a primary management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients. We aimed to assess AS uptake over a 1-year snapshot throughout Quebec and to compare it to 2010 multicentric Canadian data.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review and data collection was performed in 1 academic and 2 non-academic community centres from Quebec, among men identified in 2016 with localized T1c-T2c PC on biopsy, fulfilling NCCN criteria of low-risk (LR)-PC, including very-low-risk (VLR) and non-VLR-PC, and favourable-intermediate risk (FIR)-PC. AS adherence was defined when chosen as initial strategy, without any radical treatment within 6 months.

RESULTS

Overall, 259 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria with 50.2% of VLR-PC patients. At 6 months, 81% patients in the LR group and 65% in the FIR group were considered as adherent to AS, in both centres, but with an increased use of AS in the community centres compared to 2010 data. The rates of AS maintenance decreased at 12 months to respectively 69% and 58%. Among the VLR group, the rate of initiation was 98% and decreased to 85% at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the majority of low-risk PC patients indeed initiated an AS in 2016, with even a greater proportion of VLR-PC patients compared to 2010. This ideal strategy should be encouraged and improved at 12 months, and assessed with recent data and longer follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Patient perspectives on factors influencing active surveillance adherence for low-risk prostate cancer: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men in the United States. Treatment guidelines recommend active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer, which involves monitoring for progression, to avoid or delay definitive treatments and their side effects. Despite increased uptake, adherence to surveillance remains a challenge.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured, qualitative, virtual interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), with men (15) who were or had been on active surveillance for their low-risk prostate cancer in 2020. Interviews were transcribed and coded under TDF's behavioral theory-based domains. We analyzed domains related to adherence to surveillance using constructivist grounded theory to identify themes influencing decision processes in adherence.

RESULTS

The TDF domains of emotion, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, and social influences were most relevant to surveillance adherence-. From these four TDF domains, three themes emerged as underlying decision processes: trust in surveillance as treatment, quality of life, and experiences of self and others. Positive perceptions of these three themes supported adherence while negative perceptions contributed to non-adherence (i.e., not receiving follow-up or stopping surveillance). The relationship between the TDF domains and themes provided a theoretical process describing factors impacting active surveillance adherence for men with low-risk prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Men identified key factors impacting active surveillance adherence that provide opportunities for clinical implementation and practice improvement. Future efforts should focus on multi-level interventions that foster trust in surveillance as treatment, emphasize quality of life benefits and enhance patients' interpersonal experiences while on surveillance to optimize adherence.

Socioeconomic determinants are associated with the utilization and outcomes of active surveillance or watchful waiting in favorable-risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance/watchful waiting (AS/WW) is feasible and effective for favorable-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Understanding socioeconomic determinants of AS/WW may help determine the target population for social support and improve cancer-related survival.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Prostate with Watchful Waiting Database 18 Registries identified 229,428 adult men diagnosed with primary localized PCa (clinical T1-T2c, N0M0) during a median follow-up of 45 months between 2010 and 2016. Socioeconomic determinants included socioeconomic status (SES) tertiles, marital status (unmarried vs married), and residency (urban vs rural). Multivariable logistic regression and Cox models determined the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for AS/WW utilization, and adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). The extent of missing data was evaluated by multiple imputation. Sensitivity analyses were performed in multiple imputation datasets.

RESULTS

Unmarried patients were more likely to receive AS/WW in low-risk group (aOR, 1.20 [95%CI, 1.12-1.28]; p < 0.001) and favorable intermediate-risk group (aOR, 1.41 [95%CI, 1.26-1.59]; p < 0.001) than married patients. Urban patients had 0.77-fold lower likelihood of AS/WW than rural patients in low-risk group (95% CI, 0.68-0.87; p < 0.001), but not in favorable intermediate-risk groups. Among patients undertaking AS/WW, a significantly worse OS was observed among unmarried patients comparing to married group (aHR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.50-2.60]; p < 0.001), and patients with high SES had better CSS than low group (aHR, 0.08 [95%CI, 0.01-0.69]; p = 0.02). No significant survival difference was found between urban and rural patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Unmarried or urban patients had significantly higher rates of AS/WW. The utilization and efficacy of conservative management were affected by socioeconomic factors, which might serve as a barrier of treatment decision-making and targeted a population in need of social support.

Establishment of Prospective Registry of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The Korean Urological Oncology Society Database

PURPOSE

To establish a prospective registry for the active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer (PC) using the Korean Urological Oncology Society (KUOS) database and to present interim analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The KUOS registry of AS for PC (KUOS-AS-PC) was organized in May 2019 and comprises multiple institutions nationwide. The eligibility criteria were as follows: patients with (1) pathologically proven PC; (2) pre-biopsy prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤20 ng/mL; (3) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1 or 2 (no cribriform pattern 4); (4) clinical T stage ≤T2c; (5) positive core ratio ≤50%; and (6) maximal cancer involvement in the core ≤50%. Detailed longitudinal clinical information, including multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging and disease-specific outcomes, was recorded.

RESULTS

From May 2019 to June 2021, 296 patients were enrolled, and 284 were analyzed. The mean±standard deviation (SD) age at enrollment was 68.7±8.2 years. The median follow-up period was 11.2 months (5.9-16.8 mo). Majority of patients had pre-biopsy PSA ≤10 ng/mL (91.2%), PSA density <0.2 ng/mL² (79.7%), ISUP grade group 1 (94.4%), single positive core (65.7%), maximal cancer involvement in the core ≤20% (78.1%), and clinical T stage of T1c or lower (72.9%). Fifty-two (18.3%) discontinued AS for various reasons. Interventions included radical prostatectomy (80.8%), transurethral prostatectomy (5.8%), primary androgen deprivation therapy (5.8%), radiation (5.8%), and focal therapy (1.9%). The mean±SD time to intervention was 8.9±5.2 months. The reasons for discontinuation included pathologic reclassification (59.6%), patient preference (25.0%), and radiologic reclassification (9.6%). Two (4.8%) patients with pathologic Gleason score upgraded to ISUP grade group 4, no biochemical recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

The KUOS established a successful prospective database of PC patients undergoing AS in Korea, named the KUOS-AS-PC registry.

Risk of progression following a negative biopsy in prostate cancer active surveillance

BACKGROUND

Currently, follow-up protocols are applied equally to men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) regardless of findings at their initial follow-up biopsy. To determine whether less intensive follow-up is suitable following negative biopsy findings, we assessed the risk of converting to active treatment, any subsequent upgrading, volume progression (>33% positive cores), and serious upgrading (grade group >2) for negative compared with positive findings on initial follow-up biopsy.

METHODS

13,161 men from 24 centres participating in the Global Action Plan Active Surveillance Prostate Cancer [GAP3] consortium database, with baseline grade group ≤2, PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, cT-stage 1-2, diagnosed after 1995, and ≥1 follow-up biopsy, were included in this study. Risk of converting to treatment was assessed using multivariable mixed-effects survival regression. Odds of volume progression, any upgrading and serious upgrading were assessed using mix-effects binary logistic regression for men with ≥2 surveillance biopsies.

RESULTS

27% of the cohort (n = 3590) had no evidence of PCa at their initial biopsy. Over 50% of subsequent biopsies in this group were also negative. A negative initial biopsy was associated with lower risk of conversion (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.49), subsequent upgrading (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; 95%CI: 0.45-0.62) and serious upgrading (OR: 0.74; 95%CI: 0.59-92). Radiological progression was not assessed due to limited imaging data.

CONCLUSION

Despite heterogeneity in follow-up schedules, findings from this global study indicated reduced risk of converting to treatment, volume progression, any upgrading and serious upgrading among men whose initial biopsy findings were negative compared with positive. Given the low risk of progression and high likelihood of further negative biopsy findings, consideration should be given to decreasing follow-up intensity for this group to reduce unnecessary invasive biopsies.

Prostate Cancer Patients Under Active Surveillance with a Suspicious Magnetic Resonance Imaging Finding Are at Increased Risk of Needing Treatment: Results of the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) Consortium

BACKGROUND

The inclusion criterion for active surveillance (AS) is low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The predictive value of the presence of a suspicious lesion at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of inclusion is insufficiently known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the percentage of patients needing active treatment stratified by the presence or absence of a suspicious lesion at baseline MRI.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of the data from the multicentric AS GAP3 Consortium database was conducted. The inclusion criteria were men with grade group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer combined with prostate-specific antigen <20 ng/ml. We selected a subgroup of patients who had MRI at baseline and for whom MRI results and targeted biopsies were used for AS eligibility. Suspicious MRI was defined as an MRI lesion with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)/Likert ≥3 and for which targeted biopsies did not exclude the patient for AS.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was treatment free survival (FS). The secondary outcomes were histological GG progression FS and continuation of AS (discontinuation FS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The study cohort included 2119 patients (1035 men with nonsuspicious MRI and 1084 with suspicious MRI) with a median follow-up of 23 (12-43) mo. For the whole cohort, 3-yr treatment FS was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69-74). For nonsuspicious MRI and suspicious MRI groups, 3-yr treatment FS rates were, respectively, 80% (95% CI: 77-83) and 63% (95% CI: 59-66). Active treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.0, p < 0.001), grade progression (HR = 1.9, p < 0.001), and discontinuation of AS (HR = 1.7, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the suspicious MRI group than in the nonsuspicious MRI group.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of switching to treatment, histological progression, and AS discontinuation are higher in cases of suspicious MRI at inclusion.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Among men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who choose active surveillance, those with suspicious magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of inclusion in active surveillance are more likely to show switch to treatment than men with nonsuspicious MRI.

Active Surveillance Strategies for Low-Grade Prostate Cancer: Comparative Benefits and Cost-effectiveness

Background Active surveillance (AS) is the recommended treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer (PC). Surveillance varies in MRI, frequency of follow-up, and the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score that would repeat biopsy. Purpose To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of AS strategies for low-risk PC with versus without MRI. Materials and Methods This study developed a mathematical model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surveillance strategies in a simulation of men with a diagnosis of low-risk PC. The following strategies were compared: watchful waiting, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and annual biopsy without MRI, and PSA testing and MRI with varied PI-RADS thresholds for biopsy. MRI strategies differed regarding scheduling and use of PI-RADS score of at least 3, or a PI-RADS score of at least 4 to indicate the need for biopsy. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated by using microsimulation. Sensitivity analysis was used to assess the impact of varying parameter values on results. Results For the base case of 60-year-old men, all strategies incorporating prostate MRI extended QALYs and life-years compared with watchful waiting and non-MRI strategies. Annual MRI strategies yielded 16.19 QALYs, annual biopsy with no MRI yielded 16.14 QALYs, and watchful waiting yielded 15.94 QALYs. Annual MRI with PI-RADS score of at least 3 or of at least 4 as the biopsy threshold and annual MRI with biopsy even after MRI with negative findings offered similar QALYs and the same unadjusted life expectancy: 23.05 life-years. However, a PI-RADS score of at least 4 yielded 42% fewer lifetime biopsies. With a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per QALY, annual MRI with biopsy for lesions with PI-RADS scores of 4 or greater was most cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $67 221 per QALY). Age, treatment type, risk of initial grade misclassification, and quality-of-life impact of procedural complications affected results. Conclusion The use of active surveillance (AS) with biopsy decisions guided by findings from annual MRI reduces the number of biopsies while preserving life expectancy and quality of life. Biopsy in lesions with PI-RADS scores of 4 or greater is likely the most cost-effective AS strategy for men with low-risk prostate cancer who are younger than 70 years. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. An earlier incorrect version appeared online. This article was corrected on July 13, 2021.

Impact of health-related quality of life on repeat protocol biopsy compliance on active surveillance for favorable prostate cancer: results from a prospective cohort in the PRIAS-JAPAN study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate how health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is related to repeat protocol biopsy compliance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from a prospective cohort in the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS)-JAPAN study between January 2010 and August 2019. We used the Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8), as patient-reported outcomes, to assess HRQOL at AS enrollment and the first year of the protocol. The physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) were calculated from SF-8 questionnaires. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the association of HRQOL at enrollment on the first repeat biopsy compliance. The secondary outcome was the comparison of SF-8 scores during AS, stratified by repeat protocol biopsy compliance.

RESULTS

Of 805 patients who proceeded to the first year of the protocol, the non-compliance rate was 15% (121 patients). In the adjusted model, lower MCS at enrollment was significantly associated with the first repeat protocol biopsy non-compliance (odds ratio [OR], 2.134; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.031-4.42; P = 0.041) but not in lower PCS (OR, 0.667; 95% CI, 0.294-1.514; P = 0.333). All subscales of SF-8 were lower in the non-compliance group than in the compliance group at any point. MCS in the non-compliance group improved over time from the time of AS enrollment (2.34 increased, P = 0.152).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that lower MCS at AS enrollment using patient-reported outcomes was negatively associated with the first repeat protocol biopsy compliance. Our study may support the availability of a simple questionnaire to extract non-compliance.

Multiparametric MRI in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: An Overview and a Practical Approach

MRI has become important for the detection of prostate cancer. MRI-guided biopsy is superior to conventional systematic biopsy in patients suspected with prostate cancer. MRI is also increasingly used for monitoring patients with low-risk prostate cancer during active surveillance. It improves patient selection for active surveillance at diagnosis, although its role during follow-up is unclear. We aim to review existing evidence and propose a practical approach for incorporating MRI into active surveillance protocols.

High-dose vitamin D supplementation to prevent prostate cancer progression in localised cases with low-to-intermediate risk of progression on active surveillance (ProsD): protocol of a phase II randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) for patients with prostate cancer (PC) with low risk of PC death is an alternative to radical treatment. A major drawback of AS is the uncertainty whether a patient truly has low risk PC based on biopsy alone. Multiparametric MRI scan together with biopsy, appears useful in separating patients who need curative therapy from those for whom AS may be safe. Two small clinical trials have shown short-term high-dose vitamin D supplementation may prevent PC progression. There is no substantial evidence for its long-term safety and efficacy, hence its use in the care of men with PC on AS needs assessment. This protocol describes the ProsD clinical trial which aims to determine if oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation taken monthly for 2 years can prevent PC progression in cases with low-to-intermediate risk of progression.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

This is an Australian national multicentre, 2:1 double-blinded placebo-controlled phase II randomised controlled trial of monthly oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation (50 000 IU cholecalciferol), in men diagnosed with localised PC who have low-to-intermediate risk of disease progression and are being managed by AS. This trial will assess the feasibility, efficacy and safety of supplementing men with an initial oral loading dose of 500 000 IU cholecalciferol, followed by a monthly oral dose of 50 000 IU during the 24 months of AS. The primary trial outcome is the commencement of active therapy for clinical or non-clinical reason, within 2 years of AS.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by Bellberry Ethics Committee (2016-06-459). All results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12616001707459.

A first step towards a global nomogram to predict disease progression for men on active surveillance

BACKGROUND

Signs of disease progression (28%) and conversion to active treatment without evidence of disease progression (13%) are the main reasons for discontinuation of active surveillance (AS) in men with localised prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to develop a nomogram to predict disease progression in these patients.

METHODS

As a first step in the development of a nomogram, using data from Movembers' GAP3 Consortium (n=14,380), we assessed heterogeneity between centres in terms of risk of disease progression. We started with assessment of baseline hazards for disease progression based on grouping of centres according to follow-up protocols [high: yearly; intermediate: ~2 yearly; and low: at year 1, 4 & 7 (i.e., PRIAS)]. We conducted cause-specific random effect Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate risk of disease progression by centre in each group.

RESULTS

Disease progression rates varied substantially between centres [median hazard ratio (MHR): 2.5]. After adjustment for various clinical factors (age, year of diagnosis, Gleason grade group, number of positive cores and PSA), substantial heterogeneity in disease progression remained between centres.

CONCLUSIONS

When combining worldwide data on AS, we noted unexplained differences of disease progression rate even after adjustment for various clinical factors. This suggests that when developing a global nomogram, local adjustments for differences in risk of disease progression and competing outcomes such as conversion to active treatment need to be considered.

Which Prostate Biopsy in Men Enrolled in Active Surveillance? Experience in 110 Men Submitted to Scheduled Three-Years Transperineal Saturation Biopsy Combined With Fusion Targeted Cores

INTRODUCTION

The reclassification rate for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) has been evaluated in men enrolled in active surveillance (AS) protocol who previously underwent confirmatory biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From May 2013 to September 2017, 110 patients (median age 63 years) with very low risk PCa underwent 3-years scheduled prostate biopsy performing repeated transperineal saturation biopsy (SPBx); in addition, the mpMRI lesions characterized by Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 scores ≥ 3 were submitted to additional mpMRI/TRUS fusion biopsies (4 cores). The reclassification rate for csPCa (over 3 or more than 10% of positive cores, ISUP Grade Group/GG ≥ 2, greatest percentage of cancer > 50%) has been evaluated.

RESULTS

Six (5.4%) patients with PI-RADS score 3 (4 men) vs. 4 (2 men) were reclassified based on upgraded (GG2); SPBx and MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy diagnosed 100% and 0% of csPCa, respectively. Of the remaining 104 (94.5%) patients, 75 (72.2%) were found to have very low-risk PCa and in 29 (27.8%) cancer was absent (normal parenchyma).

CONCLUSION

SPBx combined with mpMRI at confirmatory and repeated evaluation allow to reduce the reclassification rate during AS follow up (5.4% of the cases at 3 years from diagnosis).

Role of Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging before Confirmatory Biopsy in Assessing the Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression during Active Surveillance

Objective

To evaluate the impact of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) before confirmatory prostate biopsy in patients under active surveillance (AS).

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 170 patients with Gleason grade 6 prostate cancer initially enrolled in an AS program between 2011 and 2019. Prostate mpMRI was performed using a 1.5 tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging system with a 16-channel phased-array body coil. The protocol included T1-weighted, T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging sequences. Uroradiology reports generated by a specialist were based on prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PI-RADS) version 2. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed based on regression models.

Results

The reclassification rate at confirmatory biopsy was higher in patients with suspicious lesions on mpMRI (PI-RADS score ≥ 3) (n = 47) than in patients with non-suspicious mpMRIs (n = 61) and who did not undergo mpMRIs (n = 62) (66%, 26.2%, and 24.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, presence of a suspicious mpMRI finding (PI-RADS score ≥ 3) was associated (adjusted odds ratio: 4.72) with the risk of reclassification at confirmatory biopsy after adjusting for the main variables (age, prostate-specific antigen density, number of positive cores, number of previous biopsies, and clinical stage). Presence of a suspicious mpMRI finding (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.62) was also associated with the risk of progression to active treatment during the follow-up.

Conclusion

Inclusion of mpMRI before the confirmatory biopsy is useful to stratify the risk of reclassification during the biopsy as well as to evaluate the risk of progression to active treatment during follow-up.

[Stereotaxic radiotherapy of primary extracranial tumors]

Stereotactic radiotherapy is a fundamental change from the conventional fractionated radiotherapy and represents a new therapeutic indication. Stereotactic radiotherapy is now a standard of care for inoperable patients or patients who refuse surgery. The results are encouraging with local control and survival rates very high in selected populations. The rate of late toxicity remains acceptable. Good tolerability makes it appropriate even for elderly and frail patients. In these fragile patients or in certain specific clinical situations, different surgical, radiotherapy or interventional radiology attitudes can be discussed on a case-by-case basis. These situations are considered in this article for the pulmonary, hepatic and prostatic localizations.

Predictors of adverse pathology on radical prostatectomy specimen in men initially enrolled in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer

Purpose

To evaluate clinical variables, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) predictive of adverse pathology (AP) at radical prostatectomy (RP) in men initially enrolled in active surveillance (AS).

Methods

A population-based cohort study of men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), in Stockholm County, Sweden, during 2008–2017 enrolled in AS their intended primary treatment followed by RP. AP was defined as ISUP grade group  ≥ 3 and/or pT-stage ≥ T3. Association between clinical variables at diagnosis and time to AP was evaluated using Cox regression and multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the association between AP and clinical variables at last biopsy before RP.

Results

In a cohort of 6021 patients with low-risk PCa, 3116 were selected for AS and 216 underwent RP. Follow-up was 10 years, with a median time on AS of 23 months. 37.7% of patients had AP at RP. Clinical T-stage [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04–3.18] and PSA (HR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.17–1.46) at diagnosis and age [Odds Ratio (OR): 1.09, 95% CI 1.02–1.18), PSA (OR: 1.22, 95% CI 1.07–1.41), and PI-RADS (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.11–2.55)] at last re-biopsy were significantly associated with AP.

Conclusion

PI-RADS score is significantly associated with AP at RP and support current guidelines recommending MRI before enrollment in AS. Furthermore, age, cT-stage, and PSA are significantly associated with AP.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00345-020-03394-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Narrative Overview of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

-Active surveillance (AS) is a strategy employed as an alternative to immediate standard active treatments for patients with low-risk localised prostate cancer (PCa). Active treatments such as radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy are associated with significant adverse effects which impair quality of life. The majority of patients with low-risk PCa undergo a slow and predictable course of cancer growth and do not require immediate curative treatment. AS provides a means to identify and monitor patients with low-risk PCa through regular PSA testing, imaging using MRI scans and regular repeat prostate biopsies. These measures enable the identification of progression, or increase in cancer extent or aggressiveness, which necessitates curative treatment. Alternatively, some patients may choose to leave AS to pursue curative interventions due to anxiety. The main benefit of AS is the avoidance of unnecessary radical treatments for patients at the early stages of the disease, hence avoiding over-treatment, whilst identifying those at risk of progression to be treated actively. The objective of this article is to provide a narrative summary of contemporary practice regarding AS based on a review of the available evidence base and clinical practice guidelines. Elements of discussion include the clinical effectiveness and harms of AS, what AS involves for healthcare professionals, and patient perspectives. The pitfalls and challenges for healthcare professionals are also discussed.

DATA SOURCES

We consulted international guidelines, collaborative studies and seminal prospective studies on AS in the management of clinically localised PCa.

CONCLUSION

AS is a feasible alternative to radical treatment options for low-risk PCa, primarily as a means of avoiding over-treatment, whilst identifying those who are at risk of disease progression for active treatment. There is emerging data demonstrating the long-term safety of AS as an oncological management strategy. Uncertainties remain regarding variation in definitions, criteria, thresholds and the most effective types of diagnostic interventions pertaining to patient selection, monitoring and reclassification. Efforts have been made to standardise the practice and conduct of AS. As data from high-quality prospective comparative studies mature, the practice of AS will continue to evolve.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

The practice of AS involves a multi-disciplinary team of healthcare professionals consisting of nurses, urologists, oncologists, pathologists and radiologists. Nurses play a prominent role in managing AS programmes, and are closely involved in patient selection and recruitment, counselling, organising and administering diagnostic interventions including prostate biopsies, and ensuring patients' needs are being met throughout the duration of AS.

The Movember Prostate Cancer Landscape Analysis: an assessment of unmet research needs

Prostate cancer is a heterogeneous cancer with widely varying levels of morbidity and mortality. Approaches to prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, surveillance, treatment and management differ around the world. To identify the highest priority research needs across the prostate cancer biomedical research domain, Movember conducted a landscape analysis with the aim of maximizing the effect of future research investment through global collaborative efforts and partnerships. A global Landscape Analysis Committee (LAC) was established to act as an independent group of experts across urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, radiology, pathology, translational research, health economics and patient advocacy. Men with prostate cancer and thought leaders from a variety of disciplines provided a range of key insights through a range of interviews. Insights were prioritized against predetermined criteria to understand the areas of greatest unmet need. From these efforts, 17 research needs in prostate cancer were agreed on and prioritized, and 3 received the maximum prioritization score by the LAC: first, to establish more sensitive and specific tests to improve disease screening and diagnosis; second, to develop indicators to better stratify low-risk prostate cancer for determining which men should go on active surveillance; and third, to integrate companion diagnostics into randomized clinical trials to enable prediction of treatment response. On the basis of the findings from the landscape analysis, Movember will now have an increased focus on addressing the specific research needs that have been identified, with particular investment in research efforts that reduce disease progression and lead to improved therapies for advanced prostate cancer.

The Movember global Landscape Analysis Committee (LAC) was established to act as an independent group of experts across urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, radiology, pathology, translational research, health economics and patient advocacy to identify the highest priority research needs across the prostate cancer biomedical research domain. Findings from the landscape analysis illustrate the research priorities in prostate cancer and will enable Movember to focus on specific needs, with particular investment in research to reduce disease progression and improve therapies for advanced prostate cancer.