Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?

Carcinoma prostate is considered highly aggressive in Asian countries such as India. This raises an argument whether active surveillance (AS) gives a false sense of security as opposed to upfront radical prostatectomy (RP) in Indian males with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We analyzed our prospect...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Indian journal of urology 2020-07, Vol.36 (3), p.184-190
Hauptverfasser: Singh, Shanky, Patil, Saurabh, Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil, Ahluwalia, Puneet, Gautam, Gagan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 190
container_issue 3
container_start_page 184
container_title Indian journal of urology
container_volume 36
creator Singh, Shanky
Patil, Saurabh
Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil
Ahluwalia, Puneet
Gautam, Gagan
description Carcinoma prostate is considered highly aggressive in Asian countries such as India. This raises an argument whether active surveillance (AS) gives a false sense of security as opposed to upfront radical prostatectomy (RP) in Indian males with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We analyzed our prospectively maintained robot-assisted RP (RARP) database to address this question. Five hundred and sixty-seven men underwent RARP by a single surgical team from September 2013 to September 2019. Of these, 46 (8.1%) were low risk considering the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Gleason grade group and stage were compared before and after surgery to ascertain the incidence of upgrading and upstaging. Preoperative clinical and pathological characteristics were analyzed for association with the probability of upstaging and upgrading. The mean age was 60.8 ± 6.8 years. Average prostate-specific antigen level was 6.7 ± 2.0 ng/mL. 40 (86.9%) patients had a T1 stage disease and 6 (13%) patients were clinically in T2a stage. A total of 25 (54.3%) cases were either upstaged or upgraded, 19 (41.3%) showed no change, and the remaining 2 (4.3%) had no malignancy on the final RP specimen. Upstaging occurred in 8 (17.4%) cases: 5 (10.9%) to pT3a and 3 (6.5%) to pT3b. Upgrading occurred in 23 (50%) cases: 19 (41.3%) to Grade 2; 3 (6.5%) to Grade 3; and 1 (2.2%) to Grade 4. There is a 50% likelihood of upstaging or upgrading in Indian males with low-risk PCa eligible for AS. Decision to proceed with AS should be taken carefully.
doi_str_mv 10.4103/iju.IJU_37_20
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7531380</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A628476700</galeid><sourcerecordid>A628476700</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-db7250bdbcfcff050c8b080fcb151e1ae6ed08eb6fa4a09465346ebba609b07b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkk2P0zAQhi0EYsvCkSuyxIVLyjh24oQDq9WKj6JKHGDPlu2Mi5ckLnZSxL_H0ZaKlSofxho_fsczfgl5yWAtGPC3_m5eb77cKi5VCY_IirVtU_CmFI_JCloJBatadkGepXQHIFhT1k_JBeeQN5yvyLdt-F1En37SfQxp0hNSq0eLkfqRbsbO63d0k6i2kz8gTXM8oO_7haCaHnTvOzpF1NOA40TDfvJhvHpOnjjdJ3xxjJfk9uOH7zefi-3XT5ub621hRVlORWdkWYHpjHXWOajANgYacNawiiHTWGMHDZraaaGhFXXFRY3G6BpaA9LwS_L-Xnc_mwE7m58Qda_20Q86_lFBe_XwZPQ_1C4clKw44w1kgTdHgRh-zZgmNfhkcekPw5xUKaqyla2sZEZf36M73aPyowtZ0S64uq7LRshawiJYnKF2OGIuH0Z0Pqcf8OszfF4dDt6evXAsYPNvpYju1C0DtfhBZT-okx8y_-r_EZ3ofwbgfwESErJu</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2452979757</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Medknow Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Singh, Shanky ; Patil, Saurabh ; Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil ; Ahluwalia, Puneet ; Gautam, Gagan</creator><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shanky ; Patil, Saurabh ; Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil ; Ahluwalia, Puneet ; Gautam, Gagan</creatorcontrib><description>Carcinoma prostate is considered highly aggressive in Asian countries such as India. This raises an argument whether active surveillance (AS) gives a false sense of security as opposed to upfront radical prostatectomy (RP) in Indian males with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We analyzed our prospectively maintained robot-assisted RP (RARP) database to address this question. Five hundred and sixty-seven men underwent RARP by a single surgical team from September 2013 to September 2019. Of these, 46 (8.1%) were low risk considering the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Gleason grade group and stage were compared before and after surgery to ascertain the incidence of upgrading and upstaging. Preoperative clinical and pathological characteristics were analyzed for association with the probability of upstaging and upgrading. The mean age was 60.8 ± 6.8 years. Average prostate-specific antigen level was 6.7 ± 2.0 ng/mL. 40 (86.9%) patients had a T1 stage disease and 6 (13%) patients were clinically in T2a stage. A total of 25 (54.3%) cases were either upstaged or upgraded, 19 (41.3%) showed no change, and the remaining 2 (4.3%) had no malignancy on the final RP specimen. Upstaging occurred in 8 (17.4%) cases: 5 (10.9%) to pT3a and 3 (6.5%) to pT3b. Upgrading occurred in 23 (50%) cases: 19 (41.3%) to Grade 2; 3 (6.5%) to Grade 3; and 1 (2.2%) to Grade 4. There is a 50% likelihood of upstaging or upgrading in Indian males with low-risk PCa eligible for AS. Decision to proceed with AS should be taken carefully.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0970-1591</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1998-3824</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4103/iju.IJU_37_20</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33082633</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>India: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</publisher><subject>Care and treatment ; Health aspects ; Original ; Prostate cancer ; Risk factors</subject><ispartof>Indian journal of urology, 2020-07, Vol.36 (3), p.184-190</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2020 Indian Journal of Urology.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright: © 2020 Indian Journal of Urology 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-db7250bdbcfcff050c8b080fcb151e1ae6ed08eb6fa4a09465346ebba609b07b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-db7250bdbcfcff050c8b080fcb151e1ae6ed08eb6fa4a09465346ebba609b07b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7531380/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7531380/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33082633$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shanky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patil, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahluwalia, Puneet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautam, Gagan</creatorcontrib><title>Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?</title><title>Indian journal of urology</title><addtitle>Indian J Urol</addtitle><description>Carcinoma prostate is considered highly aggressive in Asian countries such as India. This raises an argument whether active surveillance (AS) gives a false sense of security as opposed to upfront radical prostatectomy (RP) in Indian males with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We analyzed our prospectively maintained robot-assisted RP (RARP) database to address this question. Five hundred and sixty-seven men underwent RARP by a single surgical team from September 2013 to September 2019. Of these, 46 (8.1%) were low risk considering the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Gleason grade group and stage were compared before and after surgery to ascertain the incidence of upgrading and upstaging. Preoperative clinical and pathological characteristics were analyzed for association with the probability of upstaging and upgrading. The mean age was 60.8 ± 6.8 years. Average prostate-specific antigen level was 6.7 ± 2.0 ng/mL. 40 (86.9%) patients had a T1 stage disease and 6 (13%) patients were clinically in T2a stage. A total of 25 (54.3%) cases were either upstaged or upgraded, 19 (41.3%) showed no change, and the remaining 2 (4.3%) had no malignancy on the final RP specimen. Upstaging occurred in 8 (17.4%) cases: 5 (10.9%) to pT3a and 3 (6.5%) to pT3b. Upgrading occurred in 23 (50%) cases: 19 (41.3%) to Grade 2; 3 (6.5%) to Grade 3; and 1 (2.2%) to Grade 4. There is a 50% likelihood of upstaging or upgrading in Indian males with low-risk PCa eligible for AS. Decision to proceed with AS should be taken carefully.</description><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><issn>0970-1591</issn><issn>1998-3824</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkk2P0zAQhi0EYsvCkSuyxIVLyjh24oQDq9WKj6JKHGDPlu2Mi5ckLnZSxL_H0ZaKlSofxho_fsczfgl5yWAtGPC3_m5eb77cKi5VCY_IirVtU_CmFI_JCloJBatadkGepXQHIFhT1k_JBeeQN5yvyLdt-F1En37SfQxp0hNSq0eLkfqRbsbO63d0k6i2kz8gTXM8oO_7haCaHnTvOzpF1NOA40TDfvJhvHpOnjjdJ3xxjJfk9uOH7zefi-3XT5ub621hRVlORWdkWYHpjHXWOajANgYacNawiiHTWGMHDZraaaGhFXXFRY3G6BpaA9LwS_L-Xnc_mwE7m58Qda_20Q86_lFBe_XwZPQ_1C4clKw44w1kgTdHgRh-zZgmNfhkcekPw5xUKaqyla2sZEZf36M73aPyowtZ0S64uq7LRshawiJYnKF2OGIuH0Z0Pqcf8OszfF4dDt6evXAsYPNvpYju1C0DtfhBZT-okx8y_-r_EZ3ofwbgfwESErJu</recordid><startdate>20200701</startdate><enddate>20200701</enddate><creator>Singh, Shanky</creator><creator>Patil, Saurabh</creator><creator>Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil</creator><creator>Ahluwalia, Puneet</creator><creator>Gautam, Gagan</creator><general>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</general><general>Wolters Kluwer - Medknow</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200701</creationdate><title>Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?</title><author>Singh, Shanky ; Patil, Saurabh ; Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil ; Ahluwalia, Puneet ; Gautam, Gagan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-db7250bdbcfcff050c8b080fcb151e1ae6ed08eb6fa4a09465346ebba609b07b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shanky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patil, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahluwalia, Puneet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautam, Gagan</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Indian journal of urology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Singh, Shanky</au><au>Patil, Saurabh</au><au>Tamhankar, Ashwin Sunil</au><au>Ahluwalia, Puneet</au><au>Gautam, Gagan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?</atitle><jtitle>Indian journal of urology</jtitle><addtitle>Indian J Urol</addtitle><date>2020-07-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>184</spage><epage>190</epage><pages>184-190</pages><issn>0970-1591</issn><eissn>1998-3824</eissn><abstract>Carcinoma prostate is considered highly aggressive in Asian countries such as India. This raises an argument whether active surveillance (AS) gives a false sense of security as opposed to upfront radical prostatectomy (RP) in Indian males with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We analyzed our prospectively maintained robot-assisted RP (RARP) database to address this question. Five hundred and sixty-seven men underwent RARP by a single surgical team from September 2013 to September 2019. Of these, 46 (8.1%) were low risk considering the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Gleason grade group and stage were compared before and after surgery to ascertain the incidence of upgrading and upstaging. Preoperative clinical and pathological characteristics were analyzed for association with the probability of upstaging and upgrading. The mean age was 60.8 ± 6.8 years. Average prostate-specific antigen level was 6.7 ± 2.0 ng/mL. 40 (86.9%) patients had a T1 stage disease and 6 (13%) patients were clinically in T2a stage. A total of 25 (54.3%) cases were either upstaged or upgraded, 19 (41.3%) showed no change, and the remaining 2 (4.3%) had no malignancy on the final RP specimen. Upstaging occurred in 8 (17.4%) cases: 5 (10.9%) to pT3a and 3 (6.5%) to pT3b. Upgrading occurred in 23 (50%) cases: 19 (41.3%) to Grade 2; 3 (6.5%) to Grade 3; and 1 (2.2%) to Grade 4. There is a 50% likelihood of upstaging or upgrading in Indian males with low-risk PCa eligible for AS. Decision to proceed with AS should be taken carefully.</abstract><cop>India</cop><pub>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</pub><pmid>33082633</pmid><doi>10.4103/iju.IJU_37_20</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0970-1591
ispartof Indian journal of urology, 2020-07, Vol.36 (3), p.184-190
issn 0970-1591
1998-3824
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7531380
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; Medknow Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Care and treatment
Health aspects
Original
Prostate cancer
Risk factors
title Low-risk prostate cancer in India: Is active surveillance a valid treatment option?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T17%3A09%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Low-risk%20prostate%20cancer%20in%20India:%20Is%20active%20surveillance%20a%20valid%20treatment%20option?&rft.jtitle=Indian%20journal%20of%20urology&rft.au=Singh,%20Shanky&rft.date=2020-07-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=184&rft.epage=190&rft.pages=184-190&rft.issn=0970-1591&rft.eissn=1998-3824&rft_id=info:doi/10.4103/iju.IJU_37_20&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA628476700%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2452979757&rft_id=info:pmid/33082633&rft_galeid=A628476700&rfr_iscdi=true