Active surveillance for localized prostate cancer: An analysis of patient contacts and utilization of healthcare resources

References

• Outzen M, Brasso K, Martinussen N, Christensen J, Tjønneland A, Friis S, et al. Prostate cancer in Denmark 1978–2009 – trends in incidence and mortality. Acta Oncol 2013;52:831–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Meng MV, Mehta SS, Carroll PR. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2141–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;367:203–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, Rider JR, Taari K, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014;370:932–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers A, Bennette C, Steineck G, Adami H-O, Johansson J-E, Bill-Axelson A, et al. Individualized estimation of the benefit of radical prostatectomy from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group randomized trial. Eur Urol 2012;62:204–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998;280:969–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauval J-B, Ploussard G, Soulié M, Pfister C, Van Agt S, Vincendeau S, et al. Pathologic findings in radical prostatectomy specimens from patients eligible for active surveillance with highly selective criteria: a multicenter study. Urology 2012;80:656–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullins JK, Han M, Pierorazio PM, Partin AW, Carter HB. Radical prostatectomy outcome in men 65 years old or older with low risk prostate cancer. Urology 2012;187:1620–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brasso K, Friis S, Juel K, Jørgensen T, Iversen P. Mortality of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with observation for 10 years or longer: a population based registry study. J Urol 1999;161:524–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005;293:2095–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choo R, Klotz L, Danjoux C, Morton GC, DeBoer G, Szumacher E, et al. Feasibility study: watchful waiting for localized low to intermediate grade prostate carcinoma with selective delayed intervention based on prostate specific antigen, histological and/or clinical progression. J Urol 2002;167:1664–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. 1992. Chest 2009;136:e28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Røder MA, Berg KD, Gruschy L, Brasso K, Iversen P. First Danish single-institution experience with radical prostatectomy: biochemical outcome in 1200 consecutive patients. Prostate Cancer 2011;2011:236357.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Southern DA, Faris PD, Brant R, Galbraith PD, Norris CM, Knudtson ML, et al. Kaplan–Meier methods yielded misleading results in competing risk scenarios. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:1110–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW, et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2185–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godtman RA, Holmberg E, Khatami A, Stranne J, Hugosson J, Arnsrud R. Outcome following active surveillance of men with screen-detected prostate cancer. Results from the Göteborg Randomised Population-based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial. Eur Urol 2013;63:101–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:126–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selvadurai ED, Singhera M, Thomas K, Mohammed K, Woode-Amissah R, Horwich A, et al. Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2013;64:981–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH, et al. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2013;189:S12–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehdaie B, Vertosick E, Spaliviero M, Giallo-Uvino A, Taur Y, O’Sullivan M, et al. The impact of repeat biopsies on infectious complications in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol 2014;191:660–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bul M, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Staerman F, Valdagni R, Pickles T, et al. Radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer following initial active surveillance: results from a prospective observational study. Eur Urol 2012;62:195–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomsen FB, Christensen IJ, Brasso K, Røder MA, Iversen P. PSA doubling time as a progression criterion in an active surveillance programme for patients with localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 2014;113:E98–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomsen FB, Marcussen N, Berg KD, Christensen IJ, Vainer B, Iversen P, et al. Repeated biopsies in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance: clinical implications of interobserver variation in histopathological assessment. BJU Int 2014; doi:10.1111/bju.12820. [Epub ahead of print].
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore CM, Robertson NL, Arsanious N, Middleton T, Villers A, Klotz L, et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013;63:125–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson S, Aus G, Wessman C, Hugosson J. Anxiety associated with prostate cancer screening with special reference to men with a positive screening test (elevated PSA) – results from a prospective, population-based, randomised study. Eur J Cancer 2007;43:2109–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasarainen H, Lokman U, Ruutu M, Taari K, Rannikko A. Prostate cancer active surveillance and health-related quality of life: results of the Finnish arm of the prospective trial. BJU Int 2012;109:1614–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acar C, Schoffelmeer CC, Tillier C, de Blok W, van Muilekom E, van der Poel HG. Quality of life in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. A comparative retrospective study: brachytherapy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus active surveillance. J Endourol 2014;28:117–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomsen FB, Brasso K, Klotz LH, Andreas Røder M, Berg KD, Iversen P. Active surveillance for clinically localized prostate cancer – a systematic review. J Surg Oncol 2014;109:830–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bratt O, Carlsson S, Holmberg E, Holmberg L, Johansson E, Josefsson A, et al. The Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS): a randomized study comparing two different follow-up schedules for active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer. Scand J Urol 2013;47:347–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keegan KA, Dall’Era MA, Durbin-Johnson B, Evans CP. Active surveillance for prostate cancer compared with immediate treatment: an economic analysis. Cancer 2012;118:3512–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar