Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016;1(6):505-515.
doi: 10.1080/23808993.2016.1267562. Epub 2016 Dec 12.

PRECISION MANAGEMENT OF LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER

Affiliations

PRECISION MANAGEMENT OF LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER

David J VanderWeele et al. Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev. 2016.

Abstract

Introduction: The vast majority of men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer die of other causes, highlighting the importance of determining which patient has a risk of death from prostate cancer. Precision management of prostate cancer patients includes distinguishing which men have potentially lethal disease and employing strategies for determining which treatment modality appropriately balances the desire to achieve a durable response while preventing unnecessary overtreatment.

Areas covered: In this review, we highlight precision approaches to risk assessment and a context for the precision-guided application of definitive therapy. We focus on three dilemmas relevant to the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer: screening, the decision to treat, and postoperative management.

Expert commentary: In the last five years, numerous precision tools have emerged with potential benefit to the patient. However, to achieve optimal outcome, the decision to employ one or more of these tests must be considered in the context of prevailing conventional factors. Moreover, performance and interpretation of a molecular or imaging precision test remains practitioner-dependent. The next five years will witness increased marriage of molecular and imaging biomarkers for improved multi-modal diagnosis and discrimination of disease that is aggressive versus truly indolent.

Keywords: clinical management; high-risk; imaging biomarkers; molecular biomarkers; mpMRI; prostate cancer; risk stratification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Robinson JG, Hodges EA, Davison J. Prostate-specific antigen screening: a critical review of current research and guidelines. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2014;26:574–81. - PubMed
    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:7–30. - PubMed
    1. Safdieh JJ, Schwartz D, Weiner JP, Nwokedi E, Schreiber D. The need for more aggressive therapy for men with Gleason 9–10 disease compared to Gleason </=8 high-risk prostate cancer. Tumori. 2016;102:168–73. - PubMed
    1. Wong MC, Goggins WB, Wang HH, Fung FD, Leung C, Wong SY, Ng CF, Sung JJ. Global Incidence and Mortality for Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Temporal Patterns and Trends in 36 Countries. European urology. 2016 - PubMed
    1. Welch HG, Gorski DH, Albertsen PC. Trends in Metastatic Breast and Prostate Cancer--Lessons in Cancer Dynamics. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1685–7. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources