Systematic Review of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer to Develop Recommendations Regarding Inclusion of Intermediate-risk Disease, Biopsy Characteristics at Inclusion and Monitoring, and Surveillance Repeat Biopsy Strategy

  • Peter-Paul M Willemse
  • Niall F Davis
  • Nikolaos Grivas
  • Fabio Zattoni
  • Michael Lardas
  • Erik Briers
  • Marcus G Cumberbatch
  • Maria De Santis
  • Paolo Dell'Oglio
  • James F Donaldson
  • Nicola Fossati
  • Giorgio Gandaglia
  • Silke Gillessen
  • Jeremy P Grummet
  • Ann M Henry
  • Matthew Liew
  • Steven MacLennan
  • Malcolm D Mason
  • Lisa Moris
  • Karin Plass
  • Shane O'Hanlon
  • Muhammad Imran Omar
  • Daniela E Oprea-Lager
  • Karl H Pang
  • Catherine C Paterson
  • Guillaume Ploussard
  • Olivier Rouvière
  • Ivo G Schoots
  • Derya Tilki
  • Roderick C N van den Bergh
  • Thomas Van den Broeck
  • Theodorus H van der Kwast
  • Henk G van der Poel
  • Thomas Wiegel
  • Cathy Yuhong Yuan
  • Philip Cornford
  • Nicolas Mottet
  • Thomas B L Lam

Beteiligte Einrichtungen

Abstract

CONTEXT: There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE: To perform a qualitative systematic review (SR) to issue recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and repeat biopsy strategy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A protocol-driven, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-adhering SR incorporating AS protocols published from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were criteria for inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, monitoring, reclassification, and repeat biopsy strategies (per protocol and/or triggered). Clinical effectiveness data were not assessed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 17 011 articles identified, 333 studies incorporating 375 AS protocols, recruiting 264 852 patients, were included. Only a minority of protocols included the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for recruitment (n = 17), follow-up (n = 47), and reclassification (n = 26). More than 50% of protocols included patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, whilst 44.1% of protocols excluded low-risk patients with more than three positive cores, and 39% of protocols excluded patients with core involvement (CI) >50% per core. Of the protocols, ≥80% mandated a confirmatory transrectal ultrasound biopsy; 72% (n = 189) of protocols mandated per-protocol repeat biopsies, with 20% performing this annually and 25% every 2 yr. Only 27 protocols (10.3%) mandated triggered biopsies, with 74% of these protocols defining progression or changes on MRI as triggers for repeat biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS: For AS protocols in which the use of MRI is not mandatory or absent, we recommend the following: (1) AS can be considered in patients with low-volume International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 (three or fewer positive cores and cancer involvement ≤50% CI per core) or another single element of intermediate-risk disease, and patients with ISUP 3 should be excluded; (2) per-protocol confirmatory prostate biopsies should be performed within 2 yr, and per-protocol surveillance repeat biopsies should be performed at least once every 3 yr for the first 10 yr; and (3) for patients with low-volume, low-risk disease at recruitment, if repeat systematic biopsies reveal more than three positive cores or maximum CI >50% per core, they should be monitored closely for evidence of adverse features (eg, upgrading); patients with ISUP 2 disease with increased core positivity and/or CI to similar thresholds should be reclassified.

PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the literature to issue new recommendations on active surveillance (AS) for managing localised prostate cancer. The recommendations include setting criteria for including men with more aggressive disease (intermediate-risk disease), setting thresholds for close monitoring of men with low-risk but more extensive disease, and determining when to perform repeat biopsies (within 2 yr and 3 yearly thereafter).

Bibliografische Daten

OriginalspracheEnglisch
ISSN0302-2838
DOIs
StatusVeröffentlicht - 04.2022

Anmerkungen des Dekanats

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PubMed 34980492