Skip to main content
Log in

Ein Paradigmenwechsel

Defensive Strategien zur Behandlung des lokal begrenzten Prostatakarzinoms in der neuen S3-Leitlinie

A paradigm shift

Defensive strategies for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in the new S3 guideline

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Durch die PSA-gestützte Früherkennung werden immer mehr Karzinome entdeckt, die ohne Screening unerkannt geblieben wären. Vor diesem Hintergrund gewinnen defensive Strategien an Bedeutung. Die aktuelle S3-Leitlinie trägt dieser Entwicklung Rechnung, indem sie „active surveillance“ (AS) und „watchful waiting“ (WW) als gleichberechtigte Therapieoptionen beim lokal begrenzten Prostatakarzinom empfiehlt. Die verfügbaren Daten zu AS, auf denen die Leitlinienempfehlungen beruhen, weisen darauf hin, dass es sich für eine definierte Patientenklientel mit Tumoren geringen Risikoprofils um eine sichere Therapieoption handelt. Dennoch sind in der Praxis die Vorbehalte gegen defensive Strategien hoch, obwohl eine kurative Maßnahme bei Patienten mit Low-risk-Tumoren von geringem therapeutischem Nutzen ist.

Abstract

Early detection based on measurement of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has resulted in more cases of prostate cancer being discovered that would have remained unnoticed without screening. Against this background, defensive strategies gain in importance. The current S3 guideline takes this development into account by recommending “active surveillance” (AS) and “watchful waiting” (WW) as equally accepted treatment options for localized prostate cancer. The available data concerning AS, on which the guideline recommendations rely, indicate that it is a safe treatment option for a well-defined patient cohort with low-risk tumors. Nevertheless, defensive strategies are regarded with considerable reservation in clinical practice, although curative measures in patients with low-risk tumors are of little therapeutic value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literatur

  1. Beck-Bornholdt HP (2003) Der Schein der Weisen. Rowohldt, Leipzig

  2. Berglund RK, Masterson TA, Vora KC (2008) Pathological upgrading an up staging with immediate repeat biopsy in patients eligible for AS. J Urol 180(5):1964–1967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Beske F, Katalinic A, Peters E, Pritzkuleit R (2009) Morbiditätsprognose 2050, Bd. 114. Ausgewählte Krankheiten für Deutschland, Brandenburg und Schleswig-Holstein. Schriftenreihe/Fritz Beske Institut für Gesundheits-System-Forschung, Kiel

  4. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M et al (2005) Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. Scandinavian prostate cancer group study no. 4. N Engl J Med 352(19):1977–1984

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filén F et al (2008) Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. Scandinavian prostate cancer group study number 4. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(16):1144–1154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Capitanio U, Scattoni V, Freschi M et al (2008) Radical prostatectomy for incidental (stage T1a–T1b) prostate cancer: analysis of predictors for residual disease and biochemical recurrence. Eur Urol 54(1):118–125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Litwin MS et al (2004) The contemporary management of prostate cancer in the United States: Lessons from the Cancer of the Prostate Urologic Strategic Research Endeavour (CaPSURE), a National Disease Registry. J Urol 171:1393–1401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dall’Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE et al (2008) Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 112(12):2664–2670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. DRG-Statistik (2006) InEK: Datenveröffentlichung gem. §21 KHEntgG http://www.g-drg.de/cms/index.php/inek_site_de/content/view/full/1629

  10. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Shiaishi T et al (2008) Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for AS in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 38(2):122–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Klotz L, Nam R, Lam A et al (2009) Clinical results of long term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort. J Urol 184(4):606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. NICE (2009) NICE Guideline No. 58. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=byID&o=11924

  13. Otabi M, Ross P et al (2008) Role of repeated biopsy of the prostate in predicting disease progression in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Cancer 113:286–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Parker C (2004) Active surveillance: towards a new paradigm in the management of early prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol 5:101–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Parker C, Muston D, Melia J et al (2006) A model of the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer and the effect of radical treatment on overall survival. Br J Cancer 94(10):1361–1368

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Robool MJ (2009) Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360(13):1320–1328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schröder FH (2008) Screening for prostate cancer (PC)–an update on recent findings of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Urol Oncol 26(5):533–541

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. SEER (2009) SEER-Datenbank, http://www.seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html?statfacts_page=prost.html& x=18&y=16

  19. Sengupta S, Blute ML, Bagniewski SM et al (2008) After radical retropubic prostatectomy „insignificant“ prostate cancer has a risk of progression similar to low risk „significant“ cancer. BJU Int 101:170–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S et al (2008) Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the miami experience. BJU Int 101(2):165–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Kattan MW (2007) Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 177(1):107–112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Studer UE, Whelan P, Albrecht W et al (2006) Immediate or deferred androgen deprivation for patients with prostate cancer not suitable for local treatment with curative intent: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Trial 30891. J Clin Oncol 24(12):1868–1876

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tumorzentrum Brandenburg (2008) Tumorzentrum Brandenburg Qualitätsbericht, http://www.tumorzentrum-brandenburg.de/PWP/(S(y2haxr55u55c2dukrq0tl5jx))/uploads/Sachbericht_2008%5B1%5D.pdf

  24. Bergh RC van den, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ et al (2008) Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol 55(1):1–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Walsh PC, DeWeese TL, Eisenberger MA (2007) Clinical practice. Localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 357:2696–2705

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zietman A (2008) AS – a safe, low-cost prognostic test for prostate cancer. BJU Int 101(9):1059–1060

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor weist auf folgende Beziehungen hin: Er ist Mitglied des Advisory Boards der Fa. Astra-Zeneca und der Fa. Novartis und Mitglied der Steuergruppe zur Erstellung der S3-PCA-Leitlinie. Trotz des möglichen Interessenkonflikts ist der Beitrag unabhängig und produktneutral.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Weißbach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weißbach, L., Schaefer, C. & Heidenreich, A. Ein Paradigmenwechsel. Urologe 49, 199–205 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-010-2236-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-010-2236-5

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation