Comparison of outcomes of different biopsy schedules among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: An analysis of the G.A.P.3 global consortium database.
Beckmann, KR
Bangma, CH
Helleman, J
Bjartell, A
Carroll, PR
Morgan, T
Nieboer, D
Santaolalla, A
Trock, BJ
Valdagni, R
Roobol, MJ
Global Action Plan Active Surveillance Prostate Cancer [G.A.P.3] Consortium,
- Publisher:
- Wiley
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Citation:
- The Prostate, 2022, 82, (7), pp. 876-879
- Issue Date:
- 2022-05
Closed Access
Filename | Description | Size | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Prostate - 2022 - Beckmann - Comparison of outcomes of different biopsy schedules among men on active surveillance for.pdf | 219.94 kB | Adobe PDF |
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Closed Access
This item is closed access and not available.
Full metadata record
Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Beckmann, KR | |
dc.contributor.author | Bangma, CH | |
dc.contributor.author | Helleman, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Bjartell, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Carroll, PR | |
dc.contributor.author | Morgan, T | |
dc.contributor.author | Nieboer, D | |
dc.contributor.author | Santaolalla, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Trock, BJ | |
dc.contributor.author | Valdagni, R | |
dc.contributor.author | Roobol, MJ | |
dc.contributor.author | Global Action Plan Active Surveillance Prostate Cancer [G.A.P.3] Consortium, | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-10-11T03:16:56Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-02-21 | |
dc.date.available | 2022-10-11T03:16:56Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-05 | |
dc.identifier.citation | The Prostate, 2022, 82, (7), pp. 876-879 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0270-4137 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1097-0045 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10453/162461 | |
dc.description.abstract | BACKGROUND: The optimal interval for repeat biopsy during active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is yet to be defined. This study examined whether risk of upgrading (to grade group ≥ 2) or risk of converting to treatment varied according to intensity of repeat biopsy using data from the GAP3 consortium's global AS database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intensity of surveillance biopsy schedules was categorized according to centers' protocols: (a) Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance project (PRIAS) protocols with biopsies at years 1, 4, and 7 (10 centers; 7532 men); (b) biennial biopsies, that is, every other year (8 centers; 4365 men); and (c) annual biopsy schedules (4 centers; 1602 men). Multivariable Cox regression was used to compare outcomes according to biopsy intensity. RESULTS: Out of the 13,508 eligible participants, 56% were managed according to PRIAS protocols (biopsies at years 1, 4, and 7), 32% via biennial biopsy, and 12% via annual biopsy. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, risk of converting to treatment was greater for those on annual compared with PRIAS biopsy schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.51-1.83; p < 0.001), while risk of upgrading did not differ (HR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.84-1.10). CONCLUSION: Results suggest more frequent biopsy schedules may deter some men from continuing AS despite no evidence of grade progression. | |
dc.format | Print-Electronic | |
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | Wiley | |
dc.relation.ispartof | The Prostate | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | 10.1002/pros.24330 | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | |
dc.subject | 1103 Clinical Sciences, 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis, 1114 Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine | |
dc.subject.classification | Oncology & Carcinogenesis | |
dc.subject.mesh | Biopsy | |
dc.subject.mesh | Disease Progression | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasm Grading | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate-Specific Antigen | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostatic Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Watchful Waiting | |
dc.subject.mesh | Biopsy | |
dc.subject.mesh | Disease Progression | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasm Grading | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate-Specific Antigen | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostatic Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Watchful Waiting | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostatic Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Disease Progression | |
dc.subject.mesh | Prostate-Specific Antigen | |
dc.subject.mesh | Biopsy | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Watchful Waiting | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasm Grading | |
dc.title | Comparison of outcomes of different biopsy schedules among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: An analysis of the G.A.P.3 global consortium database. | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
utslib.citation.volume | 82 | |
utslib.location.activity | United States | |
utslib.for | 1103 Clinical Sciences | |
utslib.for | 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis | |
utslib.for | 1114 Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Public Health | |
utslib.copyright.status | closed_access | * |
pubs.consider-herdc | false | |
dc.date.updated | 2022-10-11T03:16:55Z | |
pubs.issue | 7 | |
pubs.publication-status | Published | |
pubs.volume | 82 | |
utslib.citation.issue | 7 |
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The optimal interval for repeat biopsy during active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is yet to be defined. This study examined whether risk of upgrading (to grade group ≥ 2) or risk of converting to treatment varied according to intensity of repeat biopsy using data from the GAP3 consortium's global AS database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intensity of surveillance biopsy schedules was categorized according to centers' protocols: (a) Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance project (PRIAS) protocols with biopsies at years 1, 4, and 7 (10 centers; 7532 men); (b) biennial biopsies, that is, every other year (8 centers; 4365 men); and (c) annual biopsy schedules (4 centers; 1602 men). Multivariable Cox regression was used to compare outcomes according to biopsy intensity. RESULTS: Out of the 13,508 eligible participants, 56% were managed according to PRIAS protocols (biopsies at years 1, 4, and 7), 32% via biennial biopsy, and 12% via annual biopsy. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, risk of converting to treatment was greater for those on annual compared with PRIAS biopsy schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.51-1.83; p < 0.001), while risk of upgrading did not differ (HR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.84-1.10). CONCLUSION: Results suggest more frequent biopsy schedules may deter some men from continuing AS despite no evidence of grade progression.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Download statistics for the last 12 months
Not enough data to produce graph