» Articles » PMID: 27249729

Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: Use, Outcomes, Imaging, and Diagnostic Tools

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2016 Jun 2
PMID 27249729
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a standard management option for men with very low-risk and low-risk prostate cancer, and contemporary data indicate that use of AS is increasing in the United States and abroad. In the favorable-risk population, reports from multiple prospective cohorts indicate a less than 1% likelihood of metastatic disease and prostate cancer-specific mortality over intermediate-term follow-up (median 5-6 years). Higher-risk men participating in AS appear to be at increased risk of adverse outcomes, but these populations have not been adequately studied to this point. Although monitoring on AS largely relies on serial prostate biopsy, a procedure associated with considerable morbidity, there is a need for improved diagnostic tools for patient selection and monitoring. Revisions from the 2014 International Society of Urologic Pathology consensus conference have yielded a more intuitive reporting system and detailed reporting of low-intermediate grade tumors, which should facilitate the practice of AS. Meanwhile, emerging modalities such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and tissue-based molecular testing have shown prognostic value in some populations. At this time, however, these instruments have not been sufficiently studied to consider their routine, standardized use in the AS setting. Future studies should seek to identify those platforms most informative in the AS population and propose a strategy by which promising diagnostic tools can be safely and efficiently incorporated into clinical practice.

Citing Articles

The Emerging Predictive and Prognostic Role of Aggressive-Variant-Associated Tumor Suppressor Genes Across Prostate Cancer Stages.

Pedrani M, Barizzi J, Salfi G, Nepote A, Testi I, Merler S Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(1.

PMID: 39796175 PMC: 11719667. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26010318.


Recommendations from Imaging, Oncology, and Radiology Organizations to Guide Management in Prostate Cancer: Summary of Current Recommendations.

Mew A, Chau E, Bera K, Ramaiya N, Tirumani S Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2025; 7(1):e240091.

PMID: 39792015 PMC: 11791666. DOI: 10.1148/rycan.240091.


Digital Volumetric Biopsy Cores Improve Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer Using Deep Learning.

Redekop E, Pleasure M, Wang Z, Sisk A, Zong Y, Flores K ArXiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39314499 PMC: 11419188.


Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.

Semsarian C, Ma T, Nickel B, Barratt A, Varma M, Delahunt B Prostate. 2023; 83(6):498-515.

PMID: 36811453 PMC: 10952636. DOI: 10.1002/pros.24493.


A multi-resolution model for histopathology image classification and localization with multiple instance learning.

Li J, Li W, Sisk A, Ye H, Wallace W, Speier W Comput Biol Med. 2021; 131:104253.

PMID: 33601084 PMC: 7984430. DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104253.


References
1.
Diaz A, Shakir N, George A, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, Rothwax J . Use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Urol Oncol. 2015; 33(5):202.e1-202.e7. PMC: 6663486. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.01.023. View

2.
Tosoian J, Loeb S, Feng Z, Isharwal S, Landis P, Elliot D . Association of [-2]proPSA with biopsy reclassification during active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2012; 188(4):1131-6. PMC: 3976250. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.06.009. View

3.
Blume-Jensen P, Berman D, Rimm D, Shipitsin M, Putzi M, Nifong T . Development and clinical validation of an in situ biopsy-based multimarker assay for risk stratification in prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015; 21(11):2591-600. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2603. View

4.
Shipitsin M, Small C, Choudhury S, Giladi E, Friedlander S, Nardone J . Identification of proteomic biomarkers predicting prostate cancer aggressiveness and lethality despite biopsy-sampling error. Br J Cancer. 2014; 111(6):1201-12. PMC: 4453845. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.396. View

5.
Stamatakis L, Siddiqui M, Nix J, Logan J, Rais-Bahrami S, Walton-Diaz A . Accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in confirming eligibility for active surveillance for men with prostate cancer. Cancer. 2013; 119(18):3359-66. PMC: 6663489. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28216. View