Active surveillance criteria for prostate cancer: Can they be applied to Japanese patients?

Prostate‐specific antigen screening has significantly increased the percentage of men who are diagnosed with low‐risk prostate cancer. All men undergoing retropubic radical prostatectomy for primary treatment of prostate cancer from April 2004 to September 2010 in our hospital were examined in order to determine whether active surveillance criteria could be applied to Japanese men. From pathological data of prostate biopsies, whether these men met five published criteria for active surveillance (Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance Study, University of California, San Francisco, Toronto and Kakehi criteria) was evaluated. Men who met any of the criteria had a statistically significant lower extracapsular extension rate and organ‐confinement rate. From the view of the possibility of Gleason upgrading and organ‐confinement rate, the Johns Hopkins Medical Institution and Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance Study criteria showed to be appropriate for Japanese patients. However, the present study had limitations of selection bias and a limited number of cases.

[1]  M. Kattan,et al.  Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[2]  H. Yasunaga,et al.  Updated Japanese Urological Association Guidelines on prostate‐specific antigen‐based screening for prostate cancer in 2010 , 2010, International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association.

[3]  B. G. Blijenberg,et al.  Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  P. Carroll,et al.  Pathological outcomes of candidates for active surveillance of prostate cancer. , 2009, The Journal of urology.

[5]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort , 2008, Cancer.

[6]  S. Fukuhara,et al.  Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for active surveillance in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. , 2008, Japanese journal of clinical oncology.

[7]  R. V. D. van den Bergh,et al.  Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. , 2007, European urology.

[8]  E. Metter,et al.  Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[9]  M. Terris,et al.  Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications. , 2006, Urology.

[10]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence? , 2003, JAMA.

[11]  Liying Zhang,et al.  Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.