ASWBP: Conducting Active Surveillance Without Prostate Biopsy for Patients With Low-risk of Prostate Cancer
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
The goal of this observational study is to conduct an active surveillance without prostate biopsy for patients with low-risk of prostate cancer based on USTC diagnostic model in participant population. The main questions it aims to answer is:
• The safety and feasibility of conducting biopsy free active monitoring in patients with low-risk prostate cancer evaluated by the USTC diagnostic model.
Participants will need to detect serum PSA every 3 months. Dynamic change of PI-RADS score and biopsy results will be recorded too.
Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
---|---|---|
|
Study Design
Arms and Interventions
Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
---|---|
Patients with low-risk of prostate cancer based on USTC diagnostic model Predictive probability was less than 0.05 based on USTC diagnostic model (https://ustcprostatecancerprediction.shinyapps.io/dynnomapp/). |
Behavioral: active surveillance
active surveillance without prostate biopsy
|
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- prostate cancer diagnostic free survival time [through study completion, an average of 2 year]
survival analysis by K-M curves and log-rank tests
Secondary Outcome Measures
- dynamic change of serum total PSA [every 3 months up to 2 years]
dynamic change serum PSA level after active surveillance
- dynamic change of PI-RADS score [every 3 months up to 2 years]
dynamic change PI-RADS score after active surveillance
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Patients with clinically suspected PCa have indications for prostate biopsy;
-
Complete serum PSA testing and mpMRI examination in the outpatient department;
-
4 ng/ml ≤ serum total PSA < 100 ng/ml;
-
The probability of prostate cancer calculated by USTC diagnostic models is less than 0.05;
-
There is no family history of prostate cancer and no history of other malignant tumors.
Exclusion Criteria:
-
The patient has previous history of prostate biopsy;
-
Lack of complete clinical information, such as failure to perform mpMRI;
-
Patients with serum total PSA < 4ng/ml or > 100ng/ml.
-
According to USTC diagnostic model, the probability of prostate cancer is equal or more than 0.05.
Contacts and Locations
Locations
Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC | Hefei | Anhui | China | 230001 |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- Anhui Provincial Hospital
- Zhongda Hospital
- Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College
- Wuhu City Second People's Hospital
Investigators
- Study Chair: Tao Tao, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC
Study Documents (Full-Text)
None provided.More Information
Publications
- Berry B, Parry MG, Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Cowling TE, Aggarwal A, Cathcart P, Payne H, van der Meulen J, Clarke N. Comparison of complications after transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy: a national population-based study. BJU Int. 2020 Jul;126(1):97-103. doi: 10.1111/bju.15039. Epub 2020 Apr 6.
- Duffy MJ. Biomarkers for prostate cancer: prostate-specific antigen and beyond. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020 Feb 25;58(3):326-339. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2019-0693.
- Hubner N, Shariat S, Remzi M. Prostate biopsy: guidelines and evidence. Curr Opin Urol. 2018 Jul;28(4):354-359. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000510.
- Ilic D, Djulbegovic M, Jung JH, Hwang EC, Zhou Q, Cleves A, Agoritsas T, Dahm P. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018 Sep 5;362:k3519. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k3519.
- Mazzone E, Stabile A, Pellegrino F, Basile G, Cignoli D, Cirulli GO, Sorce G, Barletta F, Scuderi S, Bravi CA, Cucchiara V, Fossati N, Gandaglia G, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Positive Predictive Value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021 Oct;4(5):697-713. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.12.004. Epub 2020 Dec 25.
- Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, Fanti S, Fossati N, Gandaglia G, Gillessen S, Grivas N, Grummet J, Henry AM, van der Kwast TH, Lam TB, Lardas M, Liew M, Mason MD, Moris L, Oprea-Lager DE, van der Poel HG, Rouviere O, Schoots IG, Tilki D, Wiegel T, Willemse PM, Cornford P. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2021 Feb;79(2):243-262. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042. Epub 2020 Nov 7.
- Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E, Davies L, Kasivisvanathan V, Punwani S, Moore CM, Kastner C, Barrett T, Van Den Bergh RC, Eddy BA, Gleeson F, Macpherson R, Bryant RJ, Catto JWF, Murphy DG, Hamdy FC, Ahmed HU, Lamb AD. Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020 Sep;78(3):402-414. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048. Epub 2020 May 20.
- Tao T, Wang C, Liu W, Yuan L, Ge Q, Zhang L, He B, Wang L, Wang L, Xiang C, Wang H, Chen S, Xiao J. Construction and Validation of a Clinical Predictive Nomogram for Improving the Cancer Detection of Prostate Naive Biopsy Based on Chinese Multicenter Clinical Data. Front Oncol. 2022 Jan 21;11:811866. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.811866. eCollection 2021.
- Xia C, Dong X, Li H, Cao M, Sun D, He S, Yang F, Yan X, Zhang S, Li N, Chen W. Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants. Chin Med J (Engl). 2022 Feb 9;135(5):584-590. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002108.
- SNOTOB-II