Search

OBJECTIVES To determine the 3-year outcomes of men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance (AS) in a cohort of geographically diverse community-based urology practices. AS is the management of choice for a majority of men with lower risk prostate cancer.1,2,3 Little is known about the contemporary "real-world" follow-up and adherence rates in the most common setting of urologic care, community (private) practice.4 METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated outcomes for men diagnosed between January 1, 2013 and May 31, 2014 with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) very low, low and intermediate risk prostate cancer who selected AS in 9 large community urology practices. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to describe associations between race, age, insurance status, family history, comorbidity, clinical stage, Gleason score, NCCN risk-group, and PSA density with discontinuation of AS. RESULTS Five hundred and forty-eight men on AS were followed for a median of 3.35 years. 89% (492) continued to follow-up with diagnosing practice. 32% (171) discontinued AS. On multivariate analysis, increasing NCCN risk classification (Hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, P = 0.02 and HR 2.09, P < 0.01 for low and intermediate risk vs very low risk) was significantly associated with discontinuation. Among those who discontinued AS, surgery and radiation were utilized equally (47% and 53%, respectively, P = 0.48). CONCLUSION In this community-based cohort of men on AS, a minority was lost to follow-up and adherence to AS was similar to other reports. Disease characteristics more than sociodemographic characteristics correlated with adherence to AS, while surgery and radiotherapy were utilized equally among those discontinuing AS, both suggesting guideline concordant practice of medicine.

Objective To characterize the contemporary management of prostate cancer patients in large community practices. The optimal management of incident prostate cancer has changed in the last decades to include active surveillance for a large number of men. At the same time, many community practices have merged into larger groups. The adoption of evidence-based guidelines is of increasing importance, but poorly understood in this newer practice setting. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of men ≤75 years old with very low, low, and intermediate risk incident prostate cancer diagnosed between December 1, 2012 and March 31, 2014, in 9 geographically distributed large urology practices. We used descriptive statistics and multivariable regression to assess predictors of primary management choice. Results 2029 men were in the study cohort. A majority were white (68.7%). Total of 45.7% had intermediate risk, 36.2% low risk, and 17.9% had very low risk disease cancer. Active surveillance (AS) was the initial treatment for 74.7% of men with very low risk disease, 43.5% of men with low risk disease and 10.8% of men with intermediate risk disease. The probability of choosing surgery vs radiation for men with lower and intermediate risk disease was 0.54 (95% confidence interval: 0.42, 0.65) and 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.48, 0.69), respectively. Conclusion We found that the initial management of lower risk prostate cancer in large community urology practices largely followed clinical characteristics, widespread adoption of active surveillance, and equal use of surgery and radiation. However, some variation by practice suggested a need for further investigation and continued improvement.