URO ONCO

Welcome, this website is intended for all international healthcare professionals in uro-oncology. By clicking the link below you are declaring and confirming that you are a healthcare professional.

You are here

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

Scand J Urol. 2015 Feb;49(1):43-50

Scand J Urol. 2015 Feb;49(1):43-50

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Evidence supports active surveillance (AS) as a means to reduce overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The consequences of close and long-standing follow-up with regard to outpatient visits, tests and repeated biopsies are widely unknown. This study investigated the trajectory and costs of AS in patients with localized PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

In total, 317 PCa patients were followed in a prospective, single-arm AS cohort. The primary outcomes were number of patient contacts, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests, biopsies, hospital admissions due to biopsy complications and patients eventually undergoing curative treatment. The secondary outcome was cost.

RESULTS:

The 5 year cumulative incidence of discontinued AS in a competing-risk model was 40%. During the first 5 years of AS patients underwent a median of two biopsy sets, and patients were seen in an outpatient clinic including PSA testing three to four times annually. In total, 38 of the 406 biopsy sessions led to hospital admission and 87 of the 317 patients required treatment for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). With a median of 3.7 years' follow-up, the total cost of AS was euro (€) 1,240,286. Assuming all patients had otherwise undergone primary radical prostatectomy, the cost difference favoured AS with a net benefit of €662,661 (35% reduction).

CONCLUSIONS:

AS entails a close clinical follow-up with a considerable risk of rebiopsy complication, treatment of BOO and subsequent delayed definitive therapy. This risk should be weighed against a potential economic benefit and reduction in the risk of overtreatment compared to immediate radical treatment.

KEYWORDS:

Active surveillance; complications; healthcare resources; prostate cancer; treatment

Comment from Henk van der Poel: Randomized studies on active surveillance are lacking. Progression to treatment after AS is high in the first 5 years, however AS provided a 35% cost reduction in the first years as compared to immediate treatment.

E-Alert

Subscribe to our E-Alert to keep up to date with the new items in the Resource Centre

Subscribe

URO ONCO is made possible by an unrestricted educational grant from:

The editorial independence of the resource centre is mandatory and recognized by the EAU and Elsevier.

The journal articles, videos and statements published on the resource centre have been selected independently and without influence from Elsevier, European Urology Editors or the sponsor and do not necessarily reflect their opinions or views.