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
Review
. 2018 Apr;7(2):243-255.
doi: 10.21037/tau.2018.03.02.

Active surveillance review: contemporary selection criteria, follow-up, compliance and outcomes

Affiliations
Review

Active surveillance review: contemporary selection criteria, follow-up, compliance and outcomes

Maria Komisarenko et al. Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Apr.

Abstract

The primary goal of active surveillance (AS) is to prevent overtreatment by selecting patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) and closely monitoring them so that definitive treatment can be offered when needed. With the increasing popularity of AS as a management strategy for men with localized PCa, it is important to understand all the contemporary guidelines and criteria that exist for AS and the differences among them. No single optimal management strategy for clinically localized, early-stage disease has been universally accepted. The implementation of AS varies widely between institutions, from inclusion criteria to follow-up protocols, with the most notable differences seen in maximum accepted Gleason score, T-stage and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) parameters. The objectives of this review were to systematically summarize the current literature on AS strategy, present an overview of the various published guidelines and criteria that are used for AS at several major institutions as well as discuss goals and trade-offs of the various criteria. A comprehensive search of the PubMed and Embase databases from 1990 to 2017 was performed to identify studies pertaining to AS criteria and trends. Trends in AS uptake and use in Canada, USA and Europe were reviewed to demonstrate the current trends and outcomes of AS to offer greater insight into the differences, nature and efficacy of various AS protocols. AS is a compelling antidote to the current PCa overtreatment phenomena; however, when considering patients for AS it is important to understand the differences between protocols, and review published results to appreciate the impact on follow-up.

Keywords: Active surveillance (AS); prostate cancer (PCa); prostatic neoplasms; review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Ross HM, Kryvenko ON, Cowan JE, et al. Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) ≤6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes? Am J Surg Pathol 2012;36:1346-52. 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182556dcd - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2011;185:869-75. 10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.057 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, et al. Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality decline. Cancer Causes Control 2008;19:175-81. 10.1007/s10552-007-9083-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hugosson J, Carlsson S. Overdetection in screening for prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2014;24:256-63. 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000054 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Iremashvili V, Pelaez L, Manoharan M, et al. Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols. Eur Urol 2012;62:462-8. 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.011 - DOI - PubMed