Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label
Background Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low‐risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered “cancer” and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation. Methods We s...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Prostate 2023-05, Vol.83 (6), p.498-515 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 515 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 498 |
container_title | The Prostate |
container_volume | 83 |
creator | Semsarian, Caitlin R. Ma, Tara Nickel, Brooke Barratt, Alexandra Varma, Murali Delahunt, Brett Millar, Jeremy Parker, Lisa Glasziou, Paul Bell, Katy J. L. |
description | Background
Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low‐risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered “cancer” and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.
Methods
We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.
Results
AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer‐specific mortality was 0%−6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%−66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%−2.1%) and prostate cancer‐specific mortality (0%−0.1%) over follow‐up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%−9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at 79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54−72 years) reported prevalences of 12%−43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well‐conducted study found high reproducibility for low‐risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985−1995).
Conclusions
Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low‐risk prostate lesions. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/pros.24493 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10952636</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2789660356</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4493-cf6e65a786dfe281cd36ad36f9fd6524aeb30f0c7c4580a908152980560577c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kd9qFDEUh4Modq3e-AAS8EaEqSfJJDPjjZSiVVio-Oc6ZDNn2tTZZJvMdOndPoIPYF9un8RMty3qhZCQQL58nPM7hDxncMAA-JtVDOmAl2UjHpAZg6YqAEr5kMyAV1CUTFR75ElK5wAZB_6Y7AlVM1ZKMSM4D-vt5md06QedPIMZkPaYXPDpLT30FC9di94ijfmGazoE6nwX4pK2LtkxTSTNqw_J-VM6nCHdbn5Zk7_E7eaa9maB_VPyqDN9wme35z75_uH9t6OPxfzk-NPR4bywU_WF7RQqaapatR3ymtlWKJN313Stkrw0uBDQga1sKWswDdRM8qYGqUBWlZVin7zbeVfjYomtRT9E0-tVdEsTr3QwTv_94t2ZPg2XOqcmuRIqG17dGmK4GDENepnbxL43HsOYNK-qRkgOTZ3Rl_-g52GMPveXqbpRCoSchK93lM3ppojdfTUM9DQ-PcWub8aX4Rd_1n-P3s0rA2wHrF2PV_9R6c9fTr7upL8BY6qpQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2789660356</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Semsarian, Caitlin R. ; Ma, Tara ; Nickel, Brooke ; Barratt, Alexandra ; Varma, Murali ; Delahunt, Brett ; Millar, Jeremy ; Parker, Lisa ; Glasziou, Paul ; Bell, Katy J. L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Semsarian, Caitlin R. ; Ma, Tara ; Nickel, Brooke ; Barratt, Alexandra ; Varma, Murali ; Delahunt, Brett ; Millar, Jeremy ; Parker, Lisa ; Glasziou, Paul ; Bell, Katy J. L.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low‐risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered “cancer” and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.
Methods
We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.
Results
AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer‐specific mortality was 0%−6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%−66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%−2.1%) and prostate cancer‐specific mortality (0%−0.1%) over follow‐up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%−9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at <30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by >79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54−72 years) reported prevalences of 12%−43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well‐conducted study found high reproducibility for low‐risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985−1995).
Conclusions
Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low‐risk prostate lesions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0270-4137</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1097-0045</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0045</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/pros.24493</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36811453</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Autopsies ; Autopsy ; classification ; Diagnosis ; Drift ; Humans ; Lesions ; Male ; Metastases ; Middle Aged ; Mortality ; pathology ; prostate ; Prostate - pathology ; Prostate cancer ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology ; Reproducibility ; Reproducibility of Results ; Review ; Systematic review ; terminology ; treatment</subject><ispartof>The Prostate, 2023-05, Vol.83 (6), p.498-515</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4493-cf6e65a786dfe281cd36ad36f9fd6524aeb30f0c7c4580a908152980560577c53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4493-cf6e65a786dfe281cd36ad36f9fd6524aeb30f0c7c4580a908152980560577c53</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8691-0248</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fpros.24493$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fpros.24493$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36811453$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Semsarian, Caitlin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Tara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nickel, Brooke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barratt, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varma, Murali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delahunt, Brett</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millar, Jeremy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Glasziou, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Katy J. L.</creatorcontrib><title>Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label</title><title>The Prostate</title><addtitle>Prostate</addtitle><description>Background
Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low‐risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered “cancer” and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.
Methods
We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.
Results
AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer‐specific mortality was 0%−6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%−66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%−2.1%) and prostate cancer‐specific mortality (0%−0.1%) over follow‐up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%−9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at <30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by >79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54−72 years) reported prevalences of 12%−43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well‐conducted study found high reproducibility for low‐risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985−1995).
Conclusions
Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low‐risk prostate lesions.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Autopsies</subject><subject>Autopsy</subject><subject>classification</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Drift</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Metastases</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>pathology</subject><subject>prostate</subject><subject>Prostate - pathology</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Prostate-Specific Antigen</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Reproducibility</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>terminology</subject><subject>treatment</subject><issn>0270-4137</issn><issn>1097-0045</issn><issn>1097-0045</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kd9qFDEUh4Modq3e-AAS8EaEqSfJJDPjjZSiVVio-Oc6ZDNn2tTZZJvMdOndPoIPYF9un8RMty3qhZCQQL58nPM7hDxncMAA-JtVDOmAl2UjHpAZg6YqAEr5kMyAV1CUTFR75ElK5wAZB_6Y7AlVM1ZKMSM4D-vt5md06QedPIMZkPaYXPDpLT30FC9di94ijfmGazoE6nwX4pK2LtkxTSTNqw_J-VM6nCHdbn5Zk7_E7eaa9maB_VPyqDN9wme35z75_uH9t6OPxfzk-NPR4bywU_WF7RQqaapatR3ymtlWKJN313Stkrw0uBDQga1sKWswDdRM8qYGqUBWlZVin7zbeVfjYomtRT9E0-tVdEsTr3QwTv_94t2ZPg2XOqcmuRIqG17dGmK4GDENepnbxL43HsOYNK-qRkgOTZ3Rl_-g52GMPveXqbpRCoSchK93lM3ppojdfTUM9DQ-PcWub8aX4Rd_1n-P3s0rA2wHrF2PV_9R6c9fTr7upL8BY6qpQw</recordid><startdate>202305</startdate><enddate>202305</enddate><creator>Semsarian, Caitlin R.</creator><creator>Ma, Tara</creator><creator>Nickel, Brooke</creator><creator>Barratt, Alexandra</creator><creator>Varma, Murali</creator><creator>Delahunt, Brett</creator><creator>Millar, Jeremy</creator><creator>Parker, Lisa</creator><creator>Glasziou, Paul</creator><creator>Bell, Katy J. L.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8691-0248</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202305</creationdate><title>Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label</title><author>Semsarian, Caitlin R. ; Ma, Tara ; Nickel, Brooke ; Barratt, Alexandra ; Varma, Murali ; Delahunt, Brett ; Millar, Jeremy ; Parker, Lisa ; Glasziou, Paul ; Bell, Katy J. L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4493-cf6e65a786dfe281cd36ad36f9fd6524aeb30f0c7c4580a908152980560577c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Autopsies</topic><topic>Autopsy</topic><topic>classification</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Drift</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Metastases</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>pathology</topic><topic>prostate</topic><topic>Prostate - pathology</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Prostate-Specific Antigen</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Reproducibility</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>terminology</topic><topic>treatment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Semsarian, Caitlin R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Tara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nickel, Brooke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barratt, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varma, Murali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delahunt, Brett</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millar, Jeremy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Glasziou, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Katy J. L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Prostate</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Semsarian, Caitlin R.</au><au>Ma, Tara</au><au>Nickel, Brooke</au><au>Barratt, Alexandra</au><au>Varma, Murali</au><au>Delahunt, Brett</au><au>Millar, Jeremy</au><au>Parker, Lisa</au><au>Glasziou, Paul</au><au>Bell, Katy J. L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label</atitle><jtitle>The Prostate</jtitle><addtitle>Prostate</addtitle><date>2023-05</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>83</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>498</spage><epage>515</epage><pages>498-515</pages><issn>0270-4137</issn><issn>1097-0045</issn><eissn>1097-0045</eissn><abstract>Background
Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low‐risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered “cancer” and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.
Methods
We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.
Results
AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer‐specific mortality was 0%−6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%−66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%−2.1%) and prostate cancer‐specific mortality (0%−0.1%) over follow‐up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%−9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at <30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by >79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54−72 years) reported prevalences of 12%−43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well‐conducted study found high reproducibility for low‐risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985−1995).
Conclusions
Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low‐risk prostate lesions.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>36811453</pmid><doi>10.1002/pros.24493</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8691-0248</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0270-4137 |
ispartof | The Prostate, 2023-05, Vol.83 (6), p.498-515 |
issn | 0270-4137 1097-0045 1097-0045 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10952636 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals |
subjects | Aged Autopsies Autopsy classification Diagnosis Drift Humans Lesions Male Metastases Middle Aged Mortality pathology prostate Prostate - pathology Prostate cancer Prostate-Specific Antigen Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology Reproducibility Reproducibility of Results Review Systematic review terminology treatment |
title | Low‐risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the “cancer” label |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T07%3A17%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Low%E2%80%90risk%20prostate%20lesions:%20An%20evidence%20review%20to%20inform%20discussion%20on%20losing%20the%20%E2%80%9Ccancer%E2%80%9D%20label&rft.jtitle=The%20Prostate&rft.au=Semsarian,%20Caitlin%20R.&rft.date=2023-05&rft.volume=83&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=498&rft.epage=515&rft.pages=498-515&rft.issn=0270-4137&rft.eissn=1097-0045&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/pros.24493&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2789660356%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2789660356&rft_id=info:pmid/36811453&rfr_iscdi=true |