Using Active Surveillance for Gleason 7 (3+4) Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review

Overview

Journal Can Urol Assoc J

Specialty Urology

Date 2024 Feb 21

PMID 38381936

Authors

Rui Bernardino

Rashid K Sayyid

Ricardo Leao

Alexandre R Zlotta

Theodorus van der Kwast

Laurence Klotz

Neil E Fleshner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The interest in broadening the application of active surveillance (AS) has been increasing, encompassing patients who may not strictly adhere to the conventional criteria for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), particularly those diagnosed with small-volume Gleason grade group 2 disease. Nonetheless, accurately identifying individuals with low intermediate-risk PCa who can safely undergo AS without facing disease progression remains a challenge.This review aims to delve into the progression of this evolving trend specifically within this cohort of men, while also examining strategies aimed at minimizing irreversible disease advancement. Additionally, we address the criteria for patient selection, recommended followup schedules, and the indicators prompting intervention.

Citing Articles

Nutritional Supplement with Fermented Soy in Patients Under Active Surveillance for Low-Risk or Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results from the PRAEMUNE Trial.

Van der Eecken H, De Cock D, Roussel E, Giesen A, Vansevenant B, Goeman L Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(21).

PMID: 39518073 PMC: 11545628. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16213634.

Patients ask and pathologists answer: ten questions around prostate cancer grading.

Cimadamore A, Cheng L, Lopez-Beltran A, Franzese C, Giannarini G, Crestani A Virchows Arch. 2024; .

PMID: 39153109 DOI: 10.1007/s00428-024-03891-9.

References

Shill D, Roobol M, Ehdaie B, Vickers A, Carlsson S . Active surveillance for prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol. 2021; 10(6):2809-2819. PMC: 8261451. DOI: 10.21037/tau-20-1370. View

Bernardino R, Carvalho R, Severo L, Alves M, Papoila A, Pinheiro L . Prostate cancer with cribriform pattern: Exclusion criterion for active surveillance?. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020; 92(3). DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2020.3.235. View

Simpkin A, Tilling K, Martin R, Athene Lane J, Hamdy F, Holmberg L . Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Factors Determining Change to Radical Treatment in Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2015; 67(6):993-1005. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.004. View

Kalapara A, Ballok Z, Ramdave S, OSullivan R, Ryan A, Konety B . Combined Utility of Ga-Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Prostate Biopsy Pathology. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021; 5(3):314-320. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.006. View

Ordner J, Flaifel A, Serrano A, Graziano R, Melamed J, Deng F . Significance of the Percentage of Gleason Pattern 4 at Prostate Biopsy in Predicting Adverse Pathology on Radical Prostatectomy: Application in Active Surveillance. Am J Clin Pathol. 2023; 160(1):35-40. DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/aqad005. View

Vietri M, DElia G, Caliendo G, Resse M, Casamassimi A, Passariello L . Hereditary Prostate Cancer: Genes Related, Target Therapy and Prevention. Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22(7). PMC: 8038462. DOI: 10.3390/ijms22073753. View

Gandellini P, Casiraghi N, Rancati T, Benelli M, Doldi V, Romanel A . Core Biopsies from Prostate Cancer Patients in Active Surveillance Protocols Harbor PTEN and MYC Alterations. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019; 2(3):277-285. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.08.010. View

Giri V, Knudsen K, Kelly W, Cheng H, Cooney K, Cookson M . Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019. J Clin Oncol. 2020; 38(24):2798-2811. PMC: 7430215. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.00046. View

Ruane-McAteer E, Porter S, OSullivan J, Santin O, Prue G . Active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancer: Is there a greater psychological impact than previously thought? A systematic, mixed studies literature review. Psychooncology. 2016; 26(10):1411-1421. DOI: 10.1002/pon.4311. View

10.

Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Curnyn C, Robinson D, Bratt O, Stattin P . Uptake of Active Surveillance for Very-Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in Sweden. JAMA Oncol. 2016; 3(10):1393-1398. PMC: 5559339. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3600. View

11.

Kinsella N, Stattin P, Cahill D, Brown C, Bill-Axelson A, Bratt O . Factors Influencing Men's Choice of and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Mixed-method Systematic Review. Eur Urol. 2018; 74(3):261-280. PMC: 6198662. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.026. View

12.

Bernardino R, Sayyid R, Lajkosz K, Al-Daqqaq Z, Cockburn J, Chavarriaga J . Limitations of Prostate Biopsy in Detection of Cribriform and Intraductal Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2023; 10(1):146-153. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.08.010. View

13.

OConnor L, Wang A, Yerram N, Long L, Ahdoot M, Lebastchi A . Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression for Men on Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021; 4(2):227-234. PMC: 9310665. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.004. View

14.

Baboudjian M, Breda A, Rajwa P, Gallioli A, Gondran-Tellier B, Sanguedolce F . Active Surveillance for Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Metaregression. Eur Urol Oncol. 2022; 5(6):617-627. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.07.004. View

15.

Goldberg H, Spratt D, Chandrasekar T, Klaassen Z, Wallis C, Santiago-Jimenez M . Clinical-genomic Characterization Unveils More Aggressive Disease Features in Elderly Prostate Cancer Patients with Low-grade Disease. Eur Urol Focus. 2020; 7(4):797-806. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.02.008. View

16.

Zlotta A, Egawa S, Pushkar D, Govorov A, Kimura T, Kido M . Prevalence of prostate cancer on autopsy: cross-sectional study on unscreened Caucasian and Asian men. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105(14):1050-8. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djt151. View

17.

Weinstein I, Wu X, Hill A, Brennan D, Omil-Lima D, Basourakos S . Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeting on Pathologic Upgrading and Downgrading at Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2023; 6(4):355-365. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.04.004. View

18.

van Leenders G, van der Kwast T, Grignon D, Evans A, Kristiansen G, Kweldam C . The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2020; 44(8):e87-e99. PMC: 7382533. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001497. View

19.

Kinsella N, Helleman J, Bruinsma S, Carlsson S, Cahill D, Brown C . Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of contemporary worldwide practices. Transl Androl Urol. 2018; 7(1):83-97. PMC: 5861285. DOI: 10.21037/tau.2017.12.24. View

20.

Scheltema M, Chang J, Stricker P, van Leeuwen P, Nguyen Q, Ho B . Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron-emission tomography (PET) and multiparametric (mp)MRI to detect intermediate-grade intra-prostatic prostate cancer using whole-mount pathology: impact of the addition of.... BJU Int. 2019; 124 Suppl 1:42-49. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14794. View