Cargando…

Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer

Active surveillance has been proposed as a therapeutic option in selected intermediate risk patients with biopsy grade group 2 prostate cancer. However, its oncologic safety in this setting is debated. Therefore, we conducted a non-systematic literature research of contemporary surveillance protocol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gandaglia, Giorgio, Leni, Riccardo, Plagakis, Sophie, Stabile, Armando, Montorsi, Francesco, Briganti, Alberto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542696/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37777767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01315-5
_version_ 1785114147104489472
author Gandaglia, Giorgio
Leni, Riccardo
Plagakis, Sophie
Stabile, Armando
Montorsi, Francesco
Briganti, Alberto
author_facet Gandaglia, Giorgio
Leni, Riccardo
Plagakis, Sophie
Stabile, Armando
Montorsi, Francesco
Briganti, Alberto
author_sort Gandaglia, Giorgio
collection PubMed
description Active surveillance has been proposed as a therapeutic option in selected intermediate risk patients with biopsy grade group 2 prostate cancer. However, its oncologic safety in this setting is debated. Therefore, we conducted a non-systematic literature research of contemporary surveillance protocols including patients with grade group 2 disease to collect the most recent evidence in this setting. Although no randomized controlled trial compared curative-intent treatments, namely radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy vs. active surveillance in patients with grade group 2 disease, surgery is associated with a benefit in terms of disease control and survival when compared to expectant management in the intermediate risk setting. Patients with grade group 2 on active surveillance were at higher risk of disease progression and treatment compared to their grade group 1 counterparts. Up to 50% of those patients were eventually treated at 5 years, and the metastases-free survival rate was as low as 85% at 15-years. When considering low- and intermediate risk patients treated with radical prostatectomy, grade group 2 was one of the strongest predictors of grade upgrading and adverse features. Available data is insufficient to support the oncologic safety of active surveillance in all men with grade group 2 prostate cancer. Therefore, those patients should be counselled regarding the oncologic efficacy of upfront active treatment modalities and the lack of robust long-term data supporting the safety of active surveillance in this setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10542696
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105426962023-10-03 Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer Gandaglia, Giorgio Leni, Riccardo Plagakis, Sophie Stabile, Armando Montorsi, Francesco Briganti, Alberto BMC Urol Comment Active surveillance has been proposed as a therapeutic option in selected intermediate risk patients with biopsy grade group 2 prostate cancer. However, its oncologic safety in this setting is debated. Therefore, we conducted a non-systematic literature research of contemporary surveillance protocols including patients with grade group 2 disease to collect the most recent evidence in this setting. Although no randomized controlled trial compared curative-intent treatments, namely radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy vs. active surveillance in patients with grade group 2 disease, surgery is associated with a benefit in terms of disease control and survival when compared to expectant management in the intermediate risk setting. Patients with grade group 2 on active surveillance were at higher risk of disease progression and treatment compared to their grade group 1 counterparts. Up to 50% of those patients were eventually treated at 5 years, and the metastases-free survival rate was as low as 85% at 15-years. When considering low- and intermediate risk patients treated with radical prostatectomy, grade group 2 was one of the strongest predictors of grade upgrading and adverse features. Available data is insufficient to support the oncologic safety of active surveillance in all men with grade group 2 prostate cancer. Therefore, those patients should be counselled regarding the oncologic efficacy of upfront active treatment modalities and the lack of robust long-term data supporting the safety of active surveillance in this setting. BioMed Central 2023-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10542696/ /pubmed/37777767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01315-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Comment
Gandaglia, Giorgio
Leni, Riccardo
Plagakis, Sophie
Stabile, Armando
Montorsi, Francesco
Briganti, Alberto
Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title_full Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title_fullStr Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title_short Active surveillance should not be routinely considered in ISUP grade group 2 prostate cancer
title_sort active surveillance should not be routinely considered in isup grade group 2 prostate cancer
topic Comment
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542696/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37777767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01315-5
work_keys_str_mv AT gandagliagiorgio activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer
AT leniriccardo activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer
AT plagakissophie activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer
AT stabilearmando activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer
AT montorsifrancesco activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer
AT brigantialberto activesurveillanceshouldnotberoutinelyconsideredinisupgradegroup2prostatecancer