Triggers for transition from active surveillance to radical treatment of prostate cancer 2008-2020 - a case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between objective signs of progression (triggers) and transition from active surveillance (AS) to radical treatment for prostate cancer (PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This case-control study included men with low- or favourable intermediate-risk PC in the region of Halland, with data from The National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR), Sweden, starting AS between 2008 and 2020. Cases were men who transitioned to radical treatment. For each case, 10 controls who remained in AS were selected without further matching. Triggers for transition to treatment were histopathological progression, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) progression and increases in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. We compared the probabilities for triggers between cases and controls, in 2008-2014 and 2015-2020, using logistic regression. RESULTS: Amongst 846 men, we identified 98 cases in 2008-2014 and 172 cases in 2015-2020. Histopathological progression was associated with transition, most strongly in the later period (2008-2014: odds ratios [OR] 6.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.69-12.80; and 2015-2020: OR 75.29, 95% CI 39.60-143.17). MRI progression was associated with transition in 2015-2020 (OR 6.38, 95% CI 2.70-15.06), whereas an increase in PSA was weakly associated with transition in the early period. The absence of triggers was associated with no transition (2008-2014: OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.40, and 2015-2020: OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.14). The probability of no trigger was 27% in cases 2015-2020. CONCLUSION: The increase in association between histopathological trigger and transition to treatment indicates increased quality of AS. Still, amongst men treated from 2015 to 2020, 27% transitioned without any trigger.

Variations in the Uptake of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer and Its Impact on Outcomes.

Background: Regional differences in active surveillance (AS) uptake for prostate cancer (PC) illustrate an inequality in treatment strategies. Objective: To examine the association between regional differences in AS uptake and transition to radical treatment, start of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), watchful waiting, or death. Design setting and participants: A Swedish population-based cohort study was conducted including men in the National Prostate Cancer Register in Sweden with low-risk or favorable intermediate-risk PC, starting AS from January 1, 2007 and continuing till December 31, 2019. Intervention: Regional tradition of low, intermediate, or high proportions of immediate radical treatment. Outcomes measurements and statistical analysis: Probabilities of transition from AS to radical treatment, start of ADT, watchful waiting, or death from other causes were assessed. Results and limitations: We included 13 679 men. The median age was 66 yr, median PSA 5.1 ng/ml, and median follow-up 5.7 yr. Men from regions with a high AS uptake had a lower probability of transition to radical treatment (36%) than men from regions with a low AS uptake (40%; absolute difference 4.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-7.2), but not a higher probability of AS failure defined as the start of ADT (absolute difference 0.4%; 95% CI -0.7 to 1.4). There were no statistically significant differences in the probability of transition to watchful waiting or death from other causes. Limitations include uncertainty in the estimation of remaining lifetime and transition to watchful waiting. Conclusions: A regional tradition of a high AS uptake is associated with a lower probability of transition to radical treatment, but not with AS failure. A low AS uptake suggests overtreatment. Patient summary: There are considerable regional differences in active surveillance (AS) uptake for prostate cancer. This study compared the outcomes of AS in different regions and found no association between AS uptake and failure of AS; it suggests that a low AS uptake indicates overtreatment.

Time without PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of future biochemical recurrence, metastatic disease and prostate cancer death: a prospective Scandinavian cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Although surveillance after radical prostatectomy routinely includes repeated prostate specific antigen (PSA)-testing for many years, biochemical recurrence often occurs without further clinical progression. We therefore hypothesised that follow-up can be shortened for many patients without increasing the risk of prostate cancer death. We investigated the long-term probabilities of PSA recurrence, metastases and prostate cancer death in patients without biochemical recurrence five and 10 years after radical prostatectomy. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. Stratification by Gleason score (≤3+4=7 or ≥4+3=7), pathological tumour stage (pT2 or ≥pT3) and negative or positive surgical margins. SETTING: Between 1989 and 1998, 14 urological centres in Scandinavia randomised patients to the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group study number 4 (SPCG-4) trial. PARTICIPATION: All 306 patients from the SPCG-4 trial who underwent radical prostatectomy within 1 year from inclusion were eligible. Four patients were excluded due to surgery-related death (n=1) or salvage radiotherapy or hormonal treatment within 6 weeks from surgery (n=3). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cumulative incidences and absolute differences in metastatic disease and prostate cancer death. RESULTS: We analysed 302 patients with complete follow-up during a median of 24 years. Median preoperative PSA was 9.8 ng/mL and median age was 65 years. For patients without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy the 20-year probability of biochemical recurrence was 25% among men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 and 57% among men with Gleason score ≥4+3=7; the probabilities for metastases were 0.8% and 17%; and for prostate cancer death 0.8% and 12%, respectively. The long-term probabilities were higher for pT ≥3 versus pT2 and for positive versus negative surgical margins. Limitations include small size of the cohort. CONCLUSION: Many patients with favourable histopathology without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy could stop follow-up earlier than 10 years after radical prostatectomy.

Bi-parametric MRI/TRUS fusion targeted repeat biopsy after systematic 10-12 core TRUS-guided biopsy reveals more significant prostate cancer especially in anteriorly located tumors.

Background: MRI and fusion guided biopsy have an increased role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Purpose: To demonstrate the possible advantages with Bi-parametric MRI fusion-guided repeat biopsy over systematic 10-12-core biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Material and Methods: Four hundred and twenty-three consecutive men, with previous systematic 10-12-core TRUS-guided biopsy, and with suspicion of, or diagnosis of, low-risk prostate cancer underwent fusion-guided prostate biopsy between February 2015 and February 2017. The material was retrospectively assessed. In 220 cases no previous cancer was diagnosed, and in 203 cases confirmatory fusion guided biopsy was performed prior to active monitoring. MRI was classified according to PI-RADS. Systematic biopsy was compared to fusion guided biopsy for the detection of cancer, and PI-RADS was compared to the Gleason score. Results: Fusion guided biopsy detected significantly more cancers than systematic (p < .001). Gleason scores were higher in the fusion biopsy group (p < .001). Anterior tumors were present in 54% of patients. Fusion biopsy from these lesions showed cancer in 53% with previously negative biopsy in systematic biopsies and 66% of them were upgraded from low risk to intermediate or high-risk cancers. Conclusion: These results show superior detection rate and grading of bi-parametric MRI/TRUS fusion targeted repeat biopsy over systematic 10-12 core biopsies. Fusion guided biopsy detects more significant cancers despite using fewer cores. The risk group was changed for many patients initially selected for active surveillance due to upgrading of tumors. Bi-parametric MRI shows promising results in detecting anterior tumors in patients with suspected prostate cancer.

PCASTt/SPCG-17-a randomised trial of active surveillance in prostate cancer: rationale and design.

INTRODUCTION: Overtreatment of localised prostate cancer is substantial despite increased use of active surveillance. No randomised trials help define how to monitor patients or when to initiate treatment with curative intent. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised, multicentre, intervention trial designed to evaluate the safety of an MRI-based active surveillance protocol, with standardised triggers for repeated biopsies and radical treatment. The aim is to reduce overtreatment of prostate cancer. 2000 men will be randomly allocated to either surveillance according to current practice or to standardised triggers at centres in Sweden, Norway, Finland and the UK. Men diagnosed in the past 12 months with prostate cancer, ≤T2a, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <15 ng/mL, PSA density ≤0.2 ng/mL/cc, any International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1 are eligible. Men with ISUP grade 2 in <30% of cores on systematic biopsy and <10 mm cancer in one core on systematic or targeted biopsy are also eligible. Men diagnosed on systematic biopsy should have an MRI and targeted biopsies against Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System V.2 3-5 lesions before inclusion. Identical follow-up in the two study arms: biannual PSA testing, yearly clinical examination and MRI every second year. In the experimental arm, standardised triggers based on MRI and PSA density elicit repeated biopsies. MRI and histopathological progression trigger radical treatment. Primary outcome measure is progression-free survival. Secondary outcome measures are cumulative incidence of metastatic disease, treatments with curative intent, pT3-4 at radical prostatectomy, switch to watchful waiting, prostate cancer mortality and quality of life. Inclusion started in October 2016 and in October 2018; 275 patients have been enrolled. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained in each participating country. Results for the primary and secondary outcome measures will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02914873.