Timing of Curative Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

RCN Bergh, PC Albertsen, CH Bangma VERVALLEN, SJ Freedland, M Graefen, A Vickers, HG van der Poel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

81 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context: Delaying definitive therapy unfavourably affects outcomes in many malignancies. Diagnostic, psychological, and logistical reasons but also active surveillance (AS) strategies can lead to treatment delay, an increase in the interval between the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: To review and summarise the current literature on the impact of treatment delay on PCa oncologic outcomes. Evidence acquisition: A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase databases until 30 September 2012 was performed. Studies comparing pathologic, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and mortality outcomes between patients receiving direct and delayed curative treatment were included. Studies presenting single-arm results following AS were excluded. Evidence synthesis: Seventeen studies were included: 13 on radical prostatectomy, 3 on radiation therapy, and 1 combined both. A total of 34 517 PCa patients receiving radical local therapy between 1981 and 2009 were described. Some studies included low-risk PCa only; others included a wider spectrum of disease. Four studies found a significant effect of treatment delay on outcomes in multivariate analysis. Two included low-risk patients only, but it was unknown whether AS was applied or repeat Conclusions: Treatment delay of several months or even years does not appear to affect outcomes of men with low-risk PCa. Limited data suggest treatment delay may have an impact on men with non-low-risk PCa. Most AS protocols suggest a confirmatory biopsy to avoid delaying treatment in those who harbour higher risk disease that was initially misclassified. (c) 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)204-215
Number of pages12
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume64
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Cite this