Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)

, Volume 184, Issue 3, pp 715–717 | Cite as

Prostate cancer: active surveillance may prove organisationally impossible

  • W. P. Tormey
Letter to the Editor


There is no gold standard for prostate cancer identification, investigation and treatments. Despite the recent practice conclusions of ‘no screening’ from the two randomised controlled trials of PSA screening, the volume of PSA estimations from primary care is very large. Active surveillance is an option for low-risk prostate cancers which are very common. Three issues immediately arise. The Irish incidence of prostate cancer is 156.4 per 100,000 per year and the death rate is 25.5 per 100,000 per year [1]. In a population of 4.6 million people and growing, there will be about 7194 new cases per year with 80 % confined to the prostate only. As the population ages, the accumulation of prostate cancer cases will be very big. At age 65–69, the prostate cancer incidence is 560 per 100,000 [2].

Currently, there are 3267 new cases per year listed in the National Cancer Registry Ireland which is an under-ascertainment as the incidence rate in cases per 100,000 per year is listed...


Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Early Prostate Cancer Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Active Surveillance Protocol 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Tormey WP (2014) The complexity of PSA interpretation in clinical practice. Surgeon 12:323–327. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2014.04.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    National Cancer Registry Ireland. Cancer factsheet prostate. Updated December 2013.
  4. 4.
    Singh AK, Kruecker J, Xu S, Glossop N, Guion P, Ullman K, Choyke PL, Wood BJ (2008) Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int 101:841–845PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nice (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence). Guidelines [CG175] (2014). (Accessed 20 Sept 2014)
  6. 6.
    Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, For the ERSPC Investigators et al (2014) Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 384(9959):2027–2035. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd et al (2012) Prostate cancer screening in the randomised prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:125–132PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murphy DG, Ahlering T, Catalona EJ, Crowe H, Crowe J, Clarke N, Cooperberg M, Gillatt D, Gleave M, Loeb S, Roobol M, Sartor O, Pickles T, Wootten A, Walsh PC, Costello AJ (2014) The Melbourne Consensus Statement on the early detection of prostate cancer. BJU Int 113:186–188. doi: 10.1111/bju.12556 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ahmed HU (2014) Prostate cancer: Melbourne consensus- noble but misguided. Nat Rev Urol 11:250–251. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2014.65 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Etzioni R, Freedland SJ, Greene KL, Holmberg L, Kantoff P, Konety BR, Murad MH, Penson DF, Zietman AL (2013) Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol 190:419–426. doi: 10.1016/j.uro.2013.04.119 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gorin MA, Eldefrawy A, Ekwenna O et al (2012) Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 15:177–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Azmi A, Dillon RA, Borghesi S, Dunne M, Power RE, Marignol L, O’Neill BD (2014) Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: diversity of practice across Europe. Ir J Med Sci (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, Bokhurst LP, Rannikko A, Klotz L, Villers A, Hugosson J, Moore CM (2014) Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.050 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Parnes HL, Minasian LM, Ford LG, Lippman SM, Crawford ED, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA Jr (2004) Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level of ≤4.0 ng per millilitre. N Engl J Med 350:2239–2246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klotz L (2005) Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: developments to date. Eur Urol 47:16–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Forde JC, Daly PJ, White S et al (2014) A single centre experience of active surveillance as management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer in Ireland. Ir J Med Sci 183:377–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Irving G, Holden J (2011) Calling time on the 10-minute consultation. Br J Gen Pract 62:238–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical PathologyBeaumont HospitalDublin 9Ireland
  2. 2.Biomedical SciencesUniversity of UlsterColeraineNorthern Ireland, UK

Personalised recommendations