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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Prostate 2023-05, Vol.83 (6), p.498-515
Hauptverfasser: Semsarian, Caitlin R., Ma, Tara, Nickel, Brooke, Barratt, Alexandra, Varma, Murali, Delahunt, Brett, Millar, Jeremy, Parker, Lisa, Glasziou, Paul, Bell, Katy J. L.
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 &lt;30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by &gt;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 &lt;30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by &gt;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 &amp; 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 &lt;30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by &gt;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