Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy

Evan Z. Kovac, Gregory Lieser, Ahmed Elshafei, J. Stephen Jones, Eric A. Klein, Andrew J. Stephenson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose We analyzed the rates of disease reclassification at initial and subsequent surveillance prostate biopsy as well as the treatment outcomes of deferred therapy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods From a prospective database we identified 300 men on active surveillance who had undergone initial surveillance prostate biopsy, with or without confirmatory biopsy, within 1 year of diagnosis. Of these men 261 (87%) were classified as having NCCN very low or low risk disease at diagnosis. Disease reclassification on active surveillance was defined as the presence of 50% or more positive cores and/or surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading. Patients with type I disease reclassification included those with any surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading, while patients with type II reclassification had to have primary Gleason pattern 4-5 disease on surveillance prostate biopsy. Outcomes after initial surveillance prostate biopsy were evaluated using actuarial analyses. Results At the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy 49 (16%) and 19 (6%) patients had type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Those who underwent confirmatory biopsy had significantly reduced rates of type I (9% vs 23%, p=0.001) and type II (3% vs 9%, p=0.01) reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy. For the 251 patients without disease reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy the 2-year rates of subsequent type I and II reclassification were 17% (95% CI 0–24) and 3% (95% CI 0.1–7), respectively. For the 93 patients who received deferred therapy the 5-year biochemical progression-free probability was 89% (95% CI 79–98), including 95%, 82% and 70% among those without, and those with type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Conclusions Patients on active surveillance with stable disease at the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy may be appropriate candidates for less intensive surveillance prostate biopsy schedules.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)84-89
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume197
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Prostate
Biopsy
Neoplasm Grading
Actuarial Analysis
Prostatic Neoplasms
Appointments and Schedules
Databases

Keywords

  • biopsy
  • disease progression
  • outcome assessment
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • watchful waiting

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Kovac, E. Z., Lieser, G., Elshafei, A., Jones, J. S., Klein, E. A., & Stephenson, A. J. (2017). Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy. Journal of Urology, 197(1), 84-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.072

Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy. / Kovac, Evan Z.; Lieser, Gregory; Elshafei, Ahmed; Jones, J. Stephen; Klein, Eric A.; Stephenson, Andrew J.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 197, No. 1, 01.01.2017, p. 84-89.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kovac, EZ, Lieser, G, Elshafei, A, Jones, JS, Klein, EA & Stephenson, AJ 2017, 'Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy', Journal of Urology, vol. 197, no. 1, pp. 84-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.072
Kovac, Evan Z. ; Lieser, Gregory ; Elshafei, Ahmed ; Jones, J. Stephen ; Klein, Eric A. ; Stephenson, Andrew J. / Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy. In: Journal of Urology. 2017 ; Vol. 197, No. 1. pp. 84-89.
@article{ba815381d2b04f8db9644a0d9b7275aa,
title = "Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy",
abstract = "Purpose We analyzed the rates of disease reclassification at initial and subsequent surveillance prostate biopsy as well as the treatment outcomes of deferred therapy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods From a prospective database we identified 300 men on active surveillance who had undergone initial surveillance prostate biopsy, with or without confirmatory biopsy, within 1 year of diagnosis. Of these men 261 (87{\%}) were classified as having NCCN very low or low risk disease at diagnosis. Disease reclassification on active surveillance was defined as the presence of 50{\%} or more positive cores and/or surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading. Patients with type I disease reclassification included those with any surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading, while patients with type II reclassification had to have primary Gleason pattern 4-5 disease on surveillance prostate biopsy. Outcomes after initial surveillance prostate biopsy were evaluated using actuarial analyses. Results At the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy 49 (16{\%}) and 19 (6{\%}) patients had type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Those who underwent confirmatory biopsy had significantly reduced rates of type I (9{\%} vs 23{\%}, p=0.001) and type II (3{\%} vs 9{\%}, p=0.01) reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy. For the 251 patients without disease reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy the 2-year rates of subsequent type I and II reclassification were 17{\%} (95{\%} CI 0–24) and 3{\%} (95{\%} CI 0.1–7), respectively. For the 93 patients who received deferred therapy the 5-year biochemical progression-free probability was 89{\%} (95{\%} CI 79–98), including 95{\%}, 82{\%} and 70{\%} among those without, and those with type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Conclusions Patients on active surveillance with stable disease at the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy may be appropriate candidates for less intensive surveillance prostate biopsy schedules.",
keywords = "biopsy, disease progression, outcome assessment, prostatic neoplasms, watchful waiting",
author = "Kovac, {Evan Z.} and Gregory Lieser and Ahmed Elshafei and Jones, {J. Stephen} and Klein, {Eric A.} and Stephenson, {Andrew J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.072",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "197",
pages = "84--89",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy

AU - Kovac, Evan Z.

AU - Lieser, Gregory

AU - Elshafei, Ahmed

AU - Jones, J. Stephen

AU - Klein, Eric A.

AU - Stephenson, Andrew J.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Purpose We analyzed the rates of disease reclassification at initial and subsequent surveillance prostate biopsy as well as the treatment outcomes of deferred therapy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods From a prospective database we identified 300 men on active surveillance who had undergone initial surveillance prostate biopsy, with or without confirmatory biopsy, within 1 year of diagnosis. Of these men 261 (87%) were classified as having NCCN very low or low risk disease at diagnosis. Disease reclassification on active surveillance was defined as the presence of 50% or more positive cores and/or surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading. Patients with type I disease reclassification included those with any surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading, while patients with type II reclassification had to have primary Gleason pattern 4-5 disease on surveillance prostate biopsy. Outcomes after initial surveillance prostate biopsy were evaluated using actuarial analyses. Results At the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy 49 (16%) and 19 (6%) patients had type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Those who underwent confirmatory biopsy had significantly reduced rates of type I (9% vs 23%, p=0.001) and type II (3% vs 9%, p=0.01) reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy. For the 251 patients without disease reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy the 2-year rates of subsequent type I and II reclassification were 17% (95% CI 0–24) and 3% (95% CI 0.1–7), respectively. For the 93 patients who received deferred therapy the 5-year biochemical progression-free probability was 89% (95% CI 79–98), including 95%, 82% and 70% among those without, and those with type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Conclusions Patients on active surveillance with stable disease at the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy may be appropriate candidates for less intensive surveillance prostate biopsy schedules.

AB - Purpose We analyzed the rates of disease reclassification at initial and subsequent surveillance prostate biopsy as well as the treatment outcomes of deferred therapy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods From a prospective database we identified 300 men on active surveillance who had undergone initial surveillance prostate biopsy, with or without confirmatory biopsy, within 1 year of diagnosis. Of these men 261 (87%) were classified as having NCCN very low or low risk disease at diagnosis. Disease reclassification on active surveillance was defined as the presence of 50% or more positive cores and/or surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading. Patients with type I disease reclassification included those with any surveillance prostate biopsy Gleason score upgrading, while patients with type II reclassification had to have primary Gleason pattern 4-5 disease on surveillance prostate biopsy. Outcomes after initial surveillance prostate biopsy were evaluated using actuarial analyses. Results At the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy 49 (16%) and 19 (6%) patients had type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Those who underwent confirmatory biopsy had significantly reduced rates of type I (9% vs 23%, p=0.001) and type II (3% vs 9%, p=0.01) reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy. For the 251 patients without disease reclassification at initial surveillance prostate biopsy the 2-year rates of subsequent type I and II reclassification were 17% (95% CI 0–24) and 3% (95% CI 0.1–7), respectively. For the 93 patients who received deferred therapy the 5-year biochemical progression-free probability was 89% (95% CI 79–98), including 95%, 82% and 70% among those without, and those with type I and type II disease reclassification, respectively. Conclusions Patients on active surveillance with stable disease at the time of initial surveillance prostate biopsy may be appropriate candidates for less intensive surveillance prostate biopsy schedules.

KW - biopsy

KW - disease progression

KW - outcome assessment

KW - prostatic neoplasms

KW - watchful waiting

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85003749676&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85003749676&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.072

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.072

M3 - Article

VL - 197

SP - 84

EP - 89

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -