Active surveillance (AS) has evolved into a widely applied treatment strategy for many men around the world with low-risk prostate cancer (or in selected cases intermediate-risk disease). Here, we report on the safety and acceptability of AS, and treatment outcomes for low- and intermediate-risk tumours over time in 14 623 men with follow-up of over 6 yr.
Clinical data from 26 999 men on AS from 25 cohorts in 15 countries have been collected in an international database from 2000 onwards.
Across our predefined four time periods of 4 yr each (covering the period 2000-2016), there was no significant change in overall survival (OS). However, metastasis-free survival (MFS) rates have improved since the second period and were excellent (>99%). Treatment-free survival rates for earlier periods showed a slightly more rapid shift to radical treatment. Over time, there was a constant proportion of 5% of men for whom anxiety was registered as the reason for treatment alteration. There was, however, also a subset of 10-15% in whom treatment was changed, for which no apparent reason was available. In a subset of men (10-15%), tumour progression was the trigger for treatment. In men who opted for radical treatment, surgery was the most common treatment modality. In those men who underwent radical treatment, 90% were free from biochemical recurrence at 5 yr after treatment.
Our study confirms that AS was a safe management option over the full duration in this large multicentre cohort with long-term follow-up, given the 84.1% OS and 99.4% MFS at 10 yr. The probability of treatment at 10 yr was 20% in men with initial low-risk tumours and 31% in men with intermediate-risk tumours. New diagnostic modalities may improve the acceptability of follow-up using individual risk assessments, while safely broadening the use of AS in higher-risk tumours.
Active surveillance (AS) has evolved into a widely applied treatment strategy for many men with prostate cancer around the world. In this report, we show the long-term safety of following AS for men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Our study confirms AS as a safe management option for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. New diagnostic modalities may improve the acceptability of follow-up using individual risk assessments, while safely broadening the use of AS in higher-risk tumours.
European urology oncology. 2024 Jul 17 [Epub ahead of print]
Chris Bangma, Paul Doan, Lin Zhu, Sebastiaan Remmers, Daan Nieboer, Jozien Helleman, Monique J Roobol, Mikio Sugimoto, Byung Ha Chung, Lui Shiong Lee, Mark Frydenberg, Laurence Klotz, Michael Peacock, Antoinette Perry, Anders Bjartell, Antti Rannikko, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, Prokar Dasgupta, Caroline Moore, Bruce J Trock, Christian Pavlovich, Ewout Steyerberg, Peter Carroll, Kyo Chul Koo, Andrew Hayen, James Thompson, Movember Foundation’s Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) Consortium
Department of Urology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: ., St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Department of Urology, Sydney, Australia., University of Technology Sydney, Department of Public Health, Sydney, Australia., Department of Urology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands., Kagawa University Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa, Japan., Yonsei University, College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea., Department of Urology, Sengkang General Hospital and Singapore General Hospital, Singapore., Department of Surgery, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia; Cabrini Health, Cabrini Institute, Melbourne, Australia., University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada., University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada., University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland., Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden., Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland., King's College London, London, UK., King's College London, London, UK; Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK., University College London, London, UK; University College London Hospitals Trust, London, UK., Johns Hopkins University, The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA., Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands., University of California San Francisco, Department of Urology, San Francisco, USA.