Contemporary Management of Prostate Cancer Patients Suitable for Active Surveillance: A North American Population-based Study

Marco Moschini, Nicola Fossati, Akshay Sood, Justin K. Lee, Jesse Sammon, Maxine Sun, Dan Pucheril, Deepansh Dalela, Francesco Montorsi, R. Jeffrey Karnes, Alberto Briganti, Quoc Dien Trinh, Mani Menon, Firas Abdollah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly recognized as a recommended treatment option for prostate cancer (PCa) patients with clinically localized, low-risk disease; however, previous studies suggested that its utilization is uncommon in the United States. Objective: We evaluated the nationwide utilization rate of AS in the contemporary era. Design, setting, and participants: We relied on the 2010–2011 Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database using all 18 SEER-based registries. We identified 9049 patients that fulfilled the University of California, San Francisco AS criteria (prostate-specific antigen level <10 ng/ml, clinical T stage ≤2a, Gleason score ≤6 [no pattern 4 or 5], and percentage of positive biopsy cores <33%). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Logistic regression analysis tested the relationship between receiving local treatment and all available predictors. Results and limitations: Only 32% of AS candidates did not receive any active local treatment. This proportion varied widely among the SEER-based registries, ranging from 13% to 49% (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, clinical stage T2a (odds ratio [OR]: 1.23; p = 0.04) and percentage of positive cores (OR: 1.10 for each 2% increase; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher probability of receiving local treatment. Conversely, older age (OR: 0.89 for each 2-yr increase; p < 0.001), not being married (OR: 0.64; p < 0.001), and uninsured status (OR: 0.55; p = 0.008) were associated with a lower probability of receiving active local treatment. The study is limited by the fact that SEER does not distinguish among patients undergoing observation, AS, watchful waiting, or initial hormonal therapy. Conclusions: In the United States, a considerable proportion of patients suitable for AS receive local treatment for PCa. Proportions differ significantly among SEER registries. Patient summary: Having more extensive and palpable disease, having medical insurance, being married, and being younger are associated with an increased probability of receiving local treatment for low-risk prostate cancer. Despite some differences across Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registries, our findings showed that the majority of patients suitable for active surveillance in United States received local treatment. Several pathologic and demographic parameters were related to this decision.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)68-74
Number of pages7
JournalEuropean Urology Focus
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2018

Keywords

  • Active surveillance
  • Prostate cancer
  • Racial disparities
  • SEER
  • UCSF criteria

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Contemporary Management of Prostate Cancer Patients Suitable for Active Surveillance: A North American Population-based Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this