Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review

Christopher J. Kane, Scott E. Eggener, Alan W Shindel, Gerald L. Andriole

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. Objective: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. Evidence acquisition: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. Evidence synthesis: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. Conclusions: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. Patient summary: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Decision-making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer is challenging owing to substantial heterogeneity for outcomes reported in the literature. Existing clinical parameters provide guidance; novel modalities are needed to further optimize management of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEuropean Urology Focus
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Neoplasm Grading
Prostatic Neoplasms
Pathology
Surgical Pathology
Nomograms
Manuscripts
Bibliography
PubMed
Disease Progression
Decision Making

Keywords

  • Clinical stage
  • Downstaging
  • Gleason 3 + 4
  • Gleason 4 + 3
  • Intermediate risk
  • Prognosis
  • Prostate cancer
  • Prostate-specific antigen
  • Upstaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

@article{cc8db0c7962042ac955920cee70c047b,
title = "Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review",
abstract = "Context: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. Objective: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. Evidence acquisition: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms {"}intermediate{"}, {"}Gleason 3 + 4{"}, {"}Gleason 4 + 3{"}, {"}active surveillance{"}, {"}treatment{"}, {"}adverse pathology{"}, AND {"}prostate cancer.{"} Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. Evidence synthesis: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64{\%} and 21-91{\%}, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. Conclusions: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. Patient summary: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Decision-making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer is challenging owing to substantial heterogeneity for outcomes reported in the literature. Existing clinical parameters provide guidance; novel modalities are needed to further optimize management of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.",
keywords = "Clinical stage, Downstaging, Gleason 3 + 4, Gleason 4 + 3, Intermediate risk, Prognosis, Prostate cancer, Prostate-specific antigen, Upstaging",
author = "Kane, {Christopher J.} and Eggener, {Scott E.} and Shindel, {Alan W} and Andriole, {Gerald L.}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.euf.2016.10.010",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "European Urology Focus",
issn = "2405-4569",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification

T2 - A Systematic Review

AU - Kane, Christopher J.

AU - Eggener, Scott E.

AU - Shindel, Alan W

AU - Andriole, Gerald L.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Context: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. Objective: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. Evidence acquisition: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. Evidence synthesis: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. Conclusions: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. Patient summary: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Decision-making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer is challenging owing to substantial heterogeneity for outcomes reported in the literature. Existing clinical parameters provide guidance; novel modalities are needed to further optimize management of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

AB - Context: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options. Objective: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. Evidence acquisition: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. Evidence synthesis: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results. Conclusions: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. Patient summary: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Decision-making in intermediate-risk prostate cancer is challenging owing to substantial heterogeneity for outcomes reported in the literature. Existing clinical parameters provide guidance; novel modalities are needed to further optimize management of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

KW - Clinical stage

KW - Downstaging

KW - Gleason 3 + 4

KW - Gleason 4 + 3

KW - Intermediate risk

KW - Prognosis

KW - Prostate cancer

KW - Prostate-specific antigen

KW - Upstaging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014791703&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85014791703&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.euf.2016.10.010

DO - 10.1016/j.euf.2016.10.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 28753804

AN - SCOPUS:85014791703

JO - European Urology Focus

JF - European Urology Focus

SN - 2405-4569

ER -