Active Surveillance for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Survival Outcomes in the Sunnybrook Experience.

PURPOSE: To assess the applicability of active surveillance in patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer, we compared the survival outcomes of patients with low risk and intermediate risk disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Active surveillance was offered to all patients with low risk (cT1-T2b and Gleason score 6 and prostate specific antigen 10 ng/ml or less) and select intermediate risk disease (age greater than 70 years with cT2c or prostate specific antigen 15 ng/ml or less, or Gleason score 3+4 or less). Data from November 1995 to May 2013 were extracted from a prospectively collected database. The primary outcome was metastasis-free survival, and secondary outcomes were overall survival, cause specific survival and treatment-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 213 intermediate risk and 732 low risk cases were identified. Median age was 72 years (IQR 67.3, 76.8) in the intermediate risk cohort and 67 years (IQR 60.6, 71.9) in the low risk group. Median followup was comparable (6.7 years for intermediate risk vs 6.5 years for low risk). Gleason 7 disease comprised 60% of the intermediate risk cohort. The 15-year metastasis-free, overall, cause specific and treatment-free survival rates were inferior in the intermediate risk group (metastasis-free survival HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.51-6.53, p=0.001, 82% for intermediate risk vs 95% for low risk). On further evaluation the estimated 15-year metastasis-free survival for cases of Gleason 6 or less with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml was 94%, Gleason 6 or less with prostate specific antigen 10 to 20 ng/ml was 94%, Gleason 3+4 with prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or less was 84% and Gleason 4+3 with prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or less was 63%. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of active surveillance in low risk and intermediate risk cases of Gleason 6 but not Gleason 7 prostate cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and novel biomarkers might be vital in detecting favorable Gleason 7 disease.

Diagnosis, referral, and primary treatment decisions in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients in a multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment program.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to report on data from the multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment program (DAP) at the Gale and Graham Wright Prostate Centre (GGWPC) at North York General Hospital (NYGH). We assessed referral, diagnosis, and treatment decisions for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) patients as seen over time, risk stratification, and clinic type to establish a deeper understanding of current decision-making trends. METHODS: From June 2007 to April 2012, 1277 patients who were diagnosed with PCa at the GGWPC were included in this study. Data was collected and reviewed retrospectively using electronic patient records. RESULTS: 1031 of 1260 patients (81.8%) were seen in a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC). Over time, a decrease in low-risk (LR) diagnoses and an increase intermediate-risk (IR) diagnoses was observed (p<0.0001). With respect to overall treatment decisions 474 (37.1%) of patients received primary radiotherapy, 340 (26.6%) received surgical therapy, and 426 (33.4%) had conservative management; 57% of patients who were candidates for active surveillance were managed this way. No significant treatment trends were observed over time (p=0.8440). Significantly, different management decisions were made in those who attended the MDC compared to those who only saw a urologist (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In our DAP, the vast majority of patients presented with screen-detected disease, but there was a gradual shift from low- to intermediate-risk disease over time. Timely multidisciplinary consultation was achievable in over 80% of patients and was associated with different management decisions. We recommend that all patients at risk for prostate cancer be worked up in a multi-disciplinary DAP.

Metastatic Prostate Cancer in Men Initially Treated with Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an approach to low and low intermediate risk prostate cancer that is designed to decrease overtreatment. Despite close monitoring a small subset of patients progress to metastatic disease. We analyzed the clinical and pathological correlates of surveillance in patients who eventually experienced metastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single center, prospective cohort study. Eligible patients were treated with an expectant approach. The main outcome measure was metastasis-free survival. Predictive factors for metastasis were identified. RESULTS: Metastasis developed in 30 of 980 patients, of whom 211 were classified at intermediate risk, including 14 who progressed to metastatic disease. Median followup was 6.3 years, median age was 70 years, median prostate specific antigen was 6.2 ng/ml and median time to metastasis was 8.9 years. Metastases developed in bone in 18 patients (60%) and in lymph nodes in 13 (43%). Prostate specific antigen doubling time less than 3 years (HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4-9.4, p = 0.0006), Gleason score 7 (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.3, p = 0.0018) and a total of 3 or more positive cores (HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-6.8, p = 0.0028) were independent predictors of metastasis. Although the intermediate risk group was at higher risk for metastasis, those with Gleason score 6 and prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml were not at increased risk for metastasis. Metastasis developed in only 2 patients with Gleason score 6 and neither had surgical pathology grading. CONCLUSION: Active surveillance appears safe in patients at low risk and in select patients at intermediate risk, particularly those with Gleason score 6 and prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml. Patients with elements of Gleason pattern 4 on diagnostic biopsy are at increased risk for eventual metastasis when treated with an initial conservative approach.