Advanced

The Contemporary Concept of Significant Versus Insignificant Prostate Cancer

Ploussard, Guillaume; Epstein, Jonathan I.; Montironi, Rodolfo; Carroll, Peter R.; Wirth, Manfred; Grimm, Marc-Oliver; Bjartell, Anders LU ; Montorsi, Francesco; Freedland, Stephen J. and Erbersdobler, Andreas, et al. (2011) In European Urology 60(2). p.291-303
Abstract
Context: The notion of insignificant prostate cancer (Ins-PCa) has progressively emerged in the past two decades. The clinical relevance of such a definition was based on the fact that low-grade, small-volume, and organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) may be indolent and unlikely to progress to biologic significance in the absence of treatment. Objective: To review the definition of Ins-PCa, its incidence, and the clinical impact of Ins-PCa on the contemporary management of PCa. Evidence acquisition: A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases with no restriction on language up to September 2010. The literature search used the following terms: insignificant, indolent, minute, microfocal,... (More)
Context: The notion of insignificant prostate cancer (Ins-PCa) has progressively emerged in the past two decades. The clinical relevance of such a definition was based on the fact that low-grade, small-volume, and organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) may be indolent and unlikely to progress to biologic significance in the absence of treatment. Objective: To review the definition of Ins-PCa, its incidence, and the clinical impact of Ins-PCa on the contemporary management of PCa. Evidence acquisition: A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases with no restriction on language up to September 2010. The literature search used the following terms: insignificant, indolent, minute, microfocal, minimal, low volume, low risk, and prostate cancer. Evidence synthesis: The most commonly used criteria to define Ins-PCa are based on the pathologic assessment of the radical prostatectomy specimen: (1) Gleason score <= 6 without Gleason pattern 4 or 5, (2) organ-confined disease, and (3) tumour volume < 0.5 cm(3). Several preoperative criteria and prognostication tools for predicting Ins-PCa have been suggested. Nomograms are best placed to estimate the risk of progression on an individualised basis, but a substantial proportion of men with a high probability of harbouring Ins-PCa are at risk for pathologic understaging and/or undergrading. Thus, there is an ongoing need for identifying novel and more accurate predictors of Ins-PCa to improve the distinction between insignificant versus significant disease and thus to promote the adequate management of PCa patients at low risk for progression. Conclusions: The exciting challenge of obtaining the pretreatment diagnostic tools that can really distinguish insignificant from significant PCa should be one of the main objectives of urologists in the following years to decrease the risk of overtreatment of Ins-PCa. (C) 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
, et al. (More)
(Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Prostate cancer, Insignificant, Active surveillance, Indolent, Significant, Prediction, Tumour volume
in
European Urology
volume
60
issue
2
pages
291 - 303
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • wos:000291977400028
  • scopus:79959549565
ISSN
1873-7560
DOI
10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.006
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
496fbecf-abf2-4fd8-a855-44c0b5de2b65 (old id 2042342)
date added to LUP
2011-08-02 08:59:14
date last changed
2017-11-12 03:49:51
@article{496fbecf-abf2-4fd8-a855-44c0b5de2b65,
  abstract     = {Context: The notion of insignificant prostate cancer (Ins-PCa) has progressively emerged in the past two decades. The clinical relevance of such a definition was based on the fact that low-grade, small-volume, and organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) may be indolent and unlikely to progress to biologic significance in the absence of treatment. Objective: To review the definition of Ins-PCa, its incidence, and the clinical impact of Ins-PCa on the contemporary management of PCa. Evidence acquisition: A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases with no restriction on language up to September 2010. The literature search used the following terms: insignificant, indolent, minute, microfocal, minimal, low volume, low risk, and prostate cancer. Evidence synthesis: The most commonly used criteria to define Ins-PCa are based on the pathologic assessment of the radical prostatectomy specimen: (1) Gleason score &lt;= 6 without Gleason pattern 4 or 5, (2) organ-confined disease, and (3) tumour volume &lt; 0.5 cm(3). Several preoperative criteria and prognostication tools for predicting Ins-PCa have been suggested. Nomograms are best placed to estimate the risk of progression on an individualised basis, but a substantial proportion of men with a high probability of harbouring Ins-PCa are at risk for pathologic understaging and/or undergrading. Thus, there is an ongoing need for identifying novel and more accurate predictors of Ins-PCa to improve the distinction between insignificant versus significant disease and thus to promote the adequate management of PCa patients at low risk for progression. Conclusions: The exciting challenge of obtaining the pretreatment diagnostic tools that can really distinguish insignificant from significant PCa should be one of the main objectives of urologists in the following years to decrease the risk of overtreatment of Ins-PCa. (C) 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.},
  author       = {Ploussard, Guillaume and Epstein, Jonathan I. and Montironi, Rodolfo and Carroll, Peter R. and Wirth, Manfred and Grimm, Marc-Oliver and Bjartell, Anders and Montorsi, Francesco and Freedland, Stephen J. and Erbersdobler, Andreas and van der Kwast, Theodorus H.},
  issn         = {1873-7560},
  keyword      = {Prostate cancer,Insignificant,Active surveillance,Indolent,Significant,Prediction,Tumour volume},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {291--303},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {European Urology},
  title        = {The Contemporary Concept of Significant Versus Insignificant Prostate Cancer},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.006},
  volume       = {60},
  year         = {2011},
}