Department of Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
This study aimed to survey urologists regarding their knowledge, acceptance and practice of active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer.
An email-based survey was distributed to 4987 urologists. Respondents were surveyed regarding their knowledge and acceptance of AS. Those who felt AS was a reasonable strategy were asked their opinions on the criteria for AS enrollment and the details of their practice of AS. Respondents who felt AS was not a reasonable alternative were queried as to the reasons why.
A total of 425 (9%) urologists successfully completed the survey and 387 (91%) were both familiar with AS and aware that AS differed from watchful waiting. Of this latter group, 370 (96%) respondents felt AS was a reasonable management strategy, 95% of whom manage patients with this approach. A minority of respondents (6%) felt that patients with a PSA>10 ng ml-1 were eligible for AS. Further, most participants (74%) felt that patients required a Gleason score ≤6. There was little agreement on the timing of follow-up biopsies. Respondents who objected to AS were most commonly concerned with missing an opportunity for curative treatment (76%) and the risk of tumor undergrading (65%).
The majority of participants were knowledgeable and accepting of AS. Respondents were in relative agreement regarding the PSA and Gleason score criteria for AS enrollment. In contrast, there was a lack of agreement on the timing of follow-up biopsies. In the future, comparative studies are required to determine the optimal enrollment criteria and follow-up protocol for patients managed with AS.
Written by:
Gorin MA, Eldefrawy A, Ekwenna O, Soloway MS. Are you the author?
Reference: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2011 Dec 6. Epub ahead of print.
doi: 10.1038/pcan.2011.57
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 22143447
UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section
