Defining the threshold for significant versus insignificant prostate cancer
- 28 May 2013
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Nature Reviews Urology
- Vol. 10 (8), 473-482
- https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.112
Abstract
Autopsy studies have shown the presence of a large reservoir of latent prostate cancers in adult men. Serum PSA testing of asymptomatic men leads to the detection of a proportion of these latent prostate cancers. The unequivocal demonstration of a substantial (30-50%) risk of overdiagnosis by the two largest randomized population-based screening trials has led to a growing awareness of this unwanted effect. Unsurprisingly, active surveillance is now becoming the favoured strategy for deferring active treatment in men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer and reducing their risk of overtreatment. Almost all eligibility criteria for active surveillance refer to a strict pathological definition of insignificant prostate cancer, based on two landmark studies published about 20 years ago. However, current epidemiological data suggest that this original pathological definition of insignificant prostate cancer is too restrictive. In addition, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2005 modification to the Gleason grading system might have resulted in a marked upgrading of biopsy-diagnosed prostate cancers, reducing the number of men eligible for active surveillance. An updated definition of insignificant prostate cancer should reflect the optimal trade-off between reducing the risk of underestimating a significant prostate cancer and including as many men as possible in active surveillance programmes.Keywords
This publication has 90 references indexed in Scilit:
- Radical Prostatectomy versus Observation for Localized Prostate CancerThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2012
- What If I Don't Treat My PSA-Detected Prostate Cancer? Answers from Three Natural History ModelsCancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2011
- Mean sojourn time, overdiagnosis, and reduction in advanced stage prostate cancer due to screening with PSA: implications of sojourn time on screeningBritish Journal of Cancer, 2009
- Mortality Results from a Randomized Prostate-Cancer Screening TrialThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Screening and Prostate-Cancer Mortality in a Randomized European StudyThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Lead Time and Overdiagnosis in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Importance of Methods and ContextJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2009
- Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality declineCancer Causes & Control, 2007
- Occurrence of both bladder and prostate cancer in five cancer registries in Belgium, The Netherlands and the United KingdomEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2007
- A model of the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer, and the effect of radical treatment on overall survivalBritish Journal of Cancer, 2006
- Comparison of pathologic characteristics of T1c and non-Tic cancers detected in a population-based screening study, the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancerWorld Journal of Urology, 1997