Has Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Become Safer? Lessons Learned from a Global Clinical Registry
Authors
Bangma, Chris ; Doan, Paul ; Zhu, Lin ; Remmers, Sebastiaan ; Nieboer, Daan ; Helleman, Jozien ; Roobol, Monique J. ; Sugimoto, Mikio ; Ha Chung, Byung ; Lee, Lui Shiong ; Frydenberg, Mark ; Klotz, Laurence ; Peacock, Michael ; Perry, Antoinette ; Bjartell, Anders ; Rannikko, Antti ; Van Hemelrijck, Mieke ; Dasgupta, Prokar ; Moore, Caroline ; Trock, Bruce J. ; Pavlovich, Christian ; Steyerberg, Ewout ; Carroll, Peter ; Koo, Kyo Chul ; Hayen, Andrew ; Thompson, James
Citation
EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, Vol.8(2) : 324-337, 2025-04
Prostate cancer ; Active surveillance ; Global registry ; Long-term outcome
Abstract
Background and objective: Active surveillance (AS) has evolved into a widely applied treatment strategy for many men around the world with low-risk prostate cancer (or in selected cases intermediate-risk disease). Here, we report on the safety and acceptability of AS, and treatment outcomes for low- and intermediate-risk tumours over time in 14 623 men with follow-up of over 6 yr. Methods: Clinical data from 26 999 men on AS from 25 cohorts in 15 countries have been collected in an international database from 2000 onwards. Key findings and limitations: Across our predefined four time periods of 4 yr each (covering the period 2000-2016), there was no significant change in overall survival (OS). However, metastasis-free survival (MFS) rates have improved since the second period and were excellent (>99%). Treatment-free survival rates for earlier periods showed a slightly more rapid shift to radical treatment. Over time, there was a constant proportion of 5% of men for whom anxiety was registered as the reason for treatment alteration. There was, however, also a subset of 10-15% in whom treatment was changed, for which no apparent reason was available. In a subset of men (10-15%), tumour progression was the trigger for treatment. In men who opted for radical treatment, surgery was the most common treatment modality. In those men who underwent radical treatment, 90% were free from biochemical recurrence at 5 yr after treatment. Conclusions and clinical implications: Our study confirms that AS was a safe management option over the full duration in this large multicentre cohort with long-term follow-up, given the 84.1% OS and 99.4% MFS at 10 yr. The probability of treatment at 10 yr was 20% in men with initial low-risk tumours and 31% in men with intermediate-risk tumours. New diagnostic modalities may improve the acceptability of follow-up using individual risk assessments, while safely broadening the use of AS in higher-risk tumours. Patient summary: Active surveillance (AS) has evolved into a widely applied treatment strategy for many men with prostate cancer around the world. In this report, we show the long-term safety of following AS for men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Our study confirms AS as a safe management option for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. New diagnostic modalities may improve the acceptability of follow-up using individual risk assessments, while safely broadening the use of AS in higher-risk tumours.