RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of the urologist's experience in selecting active surveillance (AS) versus immediate treatment (IT) for low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Men with low-risk prostate cancer were enrolled from March 2011 to August 2013 at 13 medical centers in Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The AS cohort was defined as men who had cT1-T2a stage prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, a biopsy revealing Gleason grade ≤6, fewer than three biopsy cores positive, ≤50 % cancer in any core, and not undergone immediate therapy (surgery, radiation, other) within 6 months following diagnosis. The urologist's experience (age, number of years in practice, number of robotic surgeries performed, and fellowship experience in oncology and/or robotics) was then compared between AS and IT cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 4754 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 713 men satisfied with inclusion criteria; 433 (60.7 %) and 280 (39.3 %) chose AS and IT, respectively. A total of 87 urologists were included. Univariate and multivariate adjusted analyses revealed no differences in urologist's age or years in practice. Patients who saw urologists who had performed ≥50 robotic surgeries were less likely to choose AS (OR 0.40, 95 % CI 0.25-0.66). Patients who saw urologists with a fellowship in oncology and/or robotics were more than twice as likely to choose AS (OR 2.27, 95 % CI 1.38-3.75). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the decision to pursue AS may be influenced by the urologist's experience.
