Comparison of 11 Active Surveillance Protocols in Contemporary European Men Treated With Radical Prostatectomy
作者: Sami-Ramzi Leyh-BannurahPierre I. KarakiewiczPaolo Dell'OglioAlberto BrigantiJonas SchiffmannRaisa S. PompeGuido SauterThorsten SchlommHans HeinzerHartwig HulandMarkus GraefenLars Budäus
作者单位: 1Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
2Martini-Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
3Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
4Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
5Department of Urology, Academic Hospital Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
6Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
刊名: Clinical Genitourinary Cancer, 2018, Vol.16 (1), pp.e141-e149
来源数据库: Elsevier Journal
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2017.08.005
关键词: Biochemical recurrenceGleason upgradeHead-to-head comparisonProstate cancerUpstage
英文摘要: Abstract(#br)Background(#br)The aim of this study was to compare 11 active surveillance (AS) protocols in contemporary European men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center.(#br)Patients and Methods(#br)Analyzed were 3498 RP patients, from 2005 to 2016, who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies and fulfilled at least 1 of 11 examined AS entry definitions. We tested proportions of AS eligibility, ineligibility, presence of primary Gleason 4/5, upstage, and combinations thereof at RP, as well as 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS).(#br)Results(#br)The most and least stringent criteria were very low risk National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Royal Marsden with 18.8% and 96.1% of AS-eligible patients, respectively. Rates of primary Gleason...
全文获取路径: Elsevier  (合作)
影响因子:1.429 (2012)

  • European 欧洲人
  • Active 活性的