Active Surveillance Enrollment Research Articles

PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

We identified baseline imaging and clinical characteristics of patients that may improve risk stratification among patients being evaluated for active surveillance. From July 2007 to January 2020 patients referred to our institution for prostate cancer were evaluated and those who remained on active surveillance were identified. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging upon entry into our active surveillance protocol during which baseline demographic and imaging data were documented. Patients were then followed and outcomes, specifically progression to Gleason Grade Group (GG)3 or greater disease, were recorded. Of the men placed on active surveillance 344 had at least 1 PI-RADS score documented. For those with an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, 33% (17/51) had progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance with a median time to progression of 31 months. When comparing the progression-free survival times and progression rates in each category, PI-RADS category was found to be associated with progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance (p <0.01). On univariable analysis factors associated with progression included an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, prostate specific antigen density and the size of the largest lesion. On multivariable analysis only PI-RADS category of 5 and prostate specific antigen density were associated with progression on active surveillance. PI-RADS lesion categories at baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance enrollment can be used to predict cancer progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance. This information, along with other clinical data, can better assist urologists in identifying and managing patients appropriate for active surveillance.

PT015 - Effects of real life prostate MRI inter-observer variability on total needle samples and indication for biopsy

Abstract Purpose Prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) improves diagnosis of clinically significant cancer and reduces over-detection of nonsignificant cancer. Disagreement in the interpretation of mpMRI readings is well-known, with a reported discrepancy rate of 10% to 42%. We report the clinical repercussions of this variability on prostate biopsy candidates. Materials and Methods Medical records of patients referred from 11 medical centers for MR-guided prostate biopsy (MRGpB) between October, 2017 and January, 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with at least one prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3 or greater prostate lesion were selected, and the mpMRI studies (all read by others) were reviewed by our prostate mpMRI reader. Outcomes included changes in PI-RADS score and the subsequent effect on total needle samples and indication for biopsy. Results Eighty-two patients with 128 lesions were suitable for analysis (mean age 66.5 ± 7.1 years, mean PSA 6.8 ± 8.5 ng/ml). Nine (11%) patients had suspicious rectal exams (T2a). Following our prostate mpMRI reader's imaging revisions, the PI-RADS score was downgraded in 66 (52%) lesions, upgraded in 15 (12%), and unchanged in 47 (37%), leaving a total of 84 suspected lesions (kappa = 0.17). Biopsy was deferred in 22 (27%) patients, and an estimated 136.4 (34.4%) samples were avoided (P = 0.0001 for both). There was a trend toward prostate size to correlate with imaging revision and abortion of biopsy (P = 0.06) while enrollment in active surveillance correlated with proof from such outcome (P = 0.007). Conclusion These data suggest that high interobserver disagreement in prostate mpMRIs from diverse institutes significantly affects prostate biopsy practice. The clinical consequences of this discord are significant.

Impact of Biopsy Compliance on Outcomes for Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer relies on regular prostate specific antigen tests and surveillance biopsies. Compliance rates with biopsies vary but the subsequent impact on oncologic outcomes is not known. The objective of this study was to determine whether noncompliance with the confirmatory biopsy negatively impacts prostate cancer specific outcomes. A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospective single-arm cohort of men enrolled in active surveillance for prostate cancer between 1995 and 2018 with a median followup of 9.1 years. A total of 1,275 patients were enrolled and 1,043 had a minimum of 3 years of followup and were included in the analysis. Patients were stratified by compliance with a confirmatory biopsy within 24 months of enrollment in active surveillance. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival. Secondary outcomes included metastatic-free survival and cause specific survival. A total of 1,275 patients were enrolled, and 1,043 had a minimum of 3 years of followup and were included in the analysis, of whom 425 were treated for localized prostate cancer. Patients noncompliant with the confirmatory biopsy had higher rates of recurrence after treatment (19% vs 12%, HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.19-2.26, p=0.003) and metastases (7% vs 2%, HR 3.56, 95% CI 1.8-7.0, p=0.0003) even after accounting for age, prostate specific antigen and Grade Group. Cause specific survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups. The results were consistent even in the subset of patients with Grade Group 1 disease at study entry. Noncompliance with a confirmatory biopsy compromises the control of prostate cancer in men followed on active surveillance. Patients and physicians should be aware of the importance of adhering to protocol for men on active surveillance.

Effects of “real life” prostate MRI inter-observer variability on total needle samples and indication for biopsy

PurposeProstate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) improves diagnosis of clinically significant cancer and reduces over-detection of nonsignificant cancer. Disagreement in the interpretation of mpMRI readings is well-known, with a reported discrepancy rate of 10% to 42%. We report the clinical repercussions of this variability on prostate biopsy candidates. Materials and MethodsMedical records of patients referred from 11 medical centers for MR-guided prostate biopsy (MRGpB) between October, 2017 and January, 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with at least one prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3 or greater prostate lesion were selected, and the mpMRI studies (all read by others) were reviewed by our prostate mpMRI reader. Outcomes included changes in PI-RADS score and the subsequent effect on total needle samples and indication for biopsy. ResultsEighty-two patients with 128 lesions were suitable for analysis (mean age 66.5 ± 7.1 years, mean PSA 6.8 ± 8.5 ng/ml). Nine (11%) patients had suspicious rectal exams (T2a). Following our prostate mpMRI reader's imaging revisions, the PI-RADS score was downgraded in 66 (52%) lesions, upgraded in 15 (12%), and unchanged in 47 (37%), leaving a total of 84 suspected lesions (kappa = 0.17). Biopsy was deferred in 22 (27%) patients, and an estimated 136.4 (34.4%) samples were avoided (P = 0.0001 for both). There was a trend toward prostate size to correlate with imaging revision and abortion of biopsy (P = 0.06) while enrollment in active surveillance correlated with proof from such outcome (P = 0.007). ConclusionThese data suggest that high interobserver disagreement in prostate mpMRIs from diverse institutes significantly affects prostate biopsy practice. The clinical consequences of this discord are significant.

MP48-14 OUTCOMES OF RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY AFTER A PERIOD OF ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:As enrollment in active surveillance (AS) expands, it is increasingly important to assess potential risks of deferred treatment. We evaluate the risk of prostate specifi...

Factors That Influence Patient Enrollment in Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer

To learn from patients their rationale for enrollment in active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer as an alternative to primary treatment. A rank-order survey was designed to assess the relative influence of factors that contributed to the decision to elect AS. The survey was mailed to 185 patients enrolled in AS at our university-based urologic oncology practice. Participants were also asked whether they had been offered AS as an alternative to primary treatment by the urologist who had initially diagnosed their cancer. The survey was returned by 105 (57%) of 185 patients. AS was offered to 38 (36%) of 105 patients by the physician who had made the initial diagnosis. Patients most frequently reported physician influence as the greatest contributor to their decision to elect AS (73%). Patients also cited concerns regarding the potential side effects of incontinence (48%) and erectile dysfunction (44%) associated with therapy as reasons for choosing AS. The results of the present study have shown that patients are heavily influenced by physicians in their decision to elect AS. Notably, the majority of our sampled patients were not offered AS at diagnosis. Evidence has indicated that AS is an appropriate approach for low-risk prostate cancer and should be discussed with patients in this risk category.