Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cancer ; 126(3): 583-592, 2020 02 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31639200

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted means of managing low-risk prostate cancer. Because of the rarity of downstream events, data from existing AS cohorts cannot yet address how differences in surveillance intensity affect metastasis and mortality. This study projected the comparative benefits of different AS schedules in men diagnosed with prostate cancer who had Gleason score (GS) ≤6 disease and risk profiles similar to those in North American AS cohorts. METHODS: Times of GS upgrading were simulated based on AS data from the University of Toronto, Johns Hopkins University, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Canary Pass Active Surveillance Cohort. Times to metastasis and prostate cancer death, informed by models from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 4 trial, were projected under biopsy surveillance schedules ranging from watchful waiting to annual biopsies. Outcomes included the risk of metastasis, the risk of death, remaining life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted LYs. RESULTS: Compared with watchful waiting, AS biopsies reduced the risk of prostate cancer metastasis and prostate cancer death at 20 years by 1.4% to 3.3% and 1.0% to 2.4%, respectively; and 5-year biopsies reduced the risk of metastasis and prostate cancer death by 1.0% to 2.4% and 0.6% to 1.6%, respectively. There was little difference between annual and 5-year biopsy schedules in terms of LYs (range of differences, 0.04-0.16 LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (range of differences, -0.02 to 0.09 quality-adjusted LYs). CONCLUSIONS: Among men diagnosed with GS ≤6 prostate cancer, obtaining a biopsy every 3 or 4 years appears to be an acceptable alternative to more frequent biopsies. Reducing surveillance intensity for those who have a low risk of progression reduces the number of biopsies while preserving the benefit of more frequent schedules.


Asunto(s)
Biopsia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , América del Norte/epidemiología , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Medición de Riesgo , San Francisco/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Población Blanca
3.
Ther Adv Urol ; 5(6): 318-29, 2013 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24294290

RESUMEN

The use of biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa) screening, detection, and prognostication have revolutionized the diagnosis and management of the disease. Current clinical practice has been driven largely by the utilization of prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The lack of specificity of PSA for PCa has led to both unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of indolent cancers. The recent controversial recommendation by the United States Preventive Services Task Force against PCa screening has highlighted the need for novel clinically useful biomarkers. We review the literature on PCa biomarkers in serum, urine, and tissue. While these markers show promise, none seems poised to replace PSA, but rather may augment it. Further validation and consideration of how these novel markers improve clinical outcome is necessary. The discovery of new genetic markers shows promise in stratifying men with aggressive PCa.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA