Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Guidance on Patient Consultation. Current Evidence for Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Healthy Men and Treatment Options for Men with Proven Localised Prostate Cancer

  • Urosurgery (J Collins, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main objective of this review is to summarise, for primary and secondary care doctors, the management options and current supporting evidence for clinically localised prostate cancer. We review all aspects of management including current guidelines on early cancer detection and the importance of informed consent on PSA-based screening and assess the most common treatment options and the evidence for managing patients with low-, medium-, and high-risk disease.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

PCa:

Prostate cancer

PSA:

Prostate-specific antigen

EAU:

European Urology Association

QoL:

Quality of life

AS:

Active surveillance

RT:

Radiation therapy

RP:

Radical prostatectomy

RCT:

Randomised clinical trial

AUA:

American Urological Association

NCCN:

National Comprehensive Cancer Network

OS:

Overall survival

DRE:

Digital rectal examination

LE:

Level of evidence

ASAP:

Atypical small acinar proliferation

PIN:

Prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia

TRUS:

Transrectal ultrasound

MR:

Magnetic resonance

Gs:

Gleason score

CT:

Computer tomography

ED:

Erectile dysfunction

WW:

Watchful waiting

PCSS:

Prostate cancer-specific survival

PCSM:

Prostate cancer-specific mortality

DMFS:

Distant metastasis-free survival

PSM:

Positive surgical margins

BPFS:

Biochemical progression free survival

eLND:

Extended pelvic lymph node dissection

EBRT:

External beam radiation therapy

LDR-BT:

Low-dose rate brachytherapy

HDR-BT:

High-dose rate brachytherapy

IMRT:

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy

IGRT:

Image guidance radiation therapy

SBRT:

Stereotactic body radiation therapy

ADT:

Androgen deprivation therapy

PLN:

Pelvic lymph node

CSAP:

Cryosurgery

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124–37. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.046. Latest EAU Guideline for clinical localized PCa.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology. 2007;69(6):1095–101.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guidelines. J Urol. 2013;190(2):419–26. Latest AUA Guideline for clinical localized PCa.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Zappa M. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0. Important update of a large RCT confirming substantial reduction in PCa mortality attributable to testing of PSA in selected men.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Muntener M, Epstein JI, Hernandez DJ, Gonzalgo ML, Mangold L, Humphreys E, et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason score discrepancies between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;53:767–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Colaco M, Sandberg J, Badlani G. Influencing factors leading to malpractice litigation in radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.003.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb 3rd RL, and the PLCO Project Team, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:125–32.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ilic D, O’Connor D, Green S, Wilt T. Screening for prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review. Cancer Causes Control. 2007;18:279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, van der Cruijsen IW, Damhuis RA, Schroder FH, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:868–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Edwards A, Hood K, Matthews E, et al. The effectiveness of one-to-one risk communication interventions in health care: a systematic review. Med Decis Mak. 2000;20:290–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fridriksson J, Gunseus K, Stattin P. Information on pros and cons of prostate-specific antigen testing to men prior to blood draw: a study from the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) of Sweden. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2012;46:326–31.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yatani R, Chigusa I, Akazaki K, et al. Geographic pathology of latent prostatic carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 1982;29:611–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Heidenreich A, Abrahamsson PA, Artibani W, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: European association of urology recommendation. Eur Urol. 2013;64:347–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Prostata cancer guideline version 1.2015, http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf. Latest NCCN guideline for PCa.

  15. Bratt O. Hereditary prostate cancer: clinical aspects. J Urol. 2002;168:906–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Alvarez-Cubero MJ, Saiz M, Martinez-Gonzalez LJ, Alvarez JC, Lorente JA, Cozar JM. Genetic analysis of the principal genes related to prostate cancer: a review. Urol Oncol. 2013;31(8):1419–29. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2012.07.011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kozarewa I, Fenwick K, Assiotis I, Barrowdale D, Govindasami K, Guy M, et al. Frequent germline deleterious mutations in DNA repair genes in familial prostate cancer cases are associated with advanced disease. Br J Cancer. 2014;110(6):1663–72. doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.30.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Eeles RA, Olama AA, Benlloch S, et al. Identification of 23 new prostate cancer susceptibility loci using the iCOGS custom genotyping array. Nat Genet. 2013;45:385–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, et al. International variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1079–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cuzick J, Thorat MA, Andriole G, Brawley OW, Brown PH, Culig Z, et al. Prevention and early detection of prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(11):e484–92. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70211-6. Review. Excellent review on present evidence and research questions regarding prevention and early detection of PCa.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sutcliff ES, Neace C, Magnuson NS, Reeves R, Alderete JF. Trichomonosis, a common curable STI, and prostate carcinogenesis—a proposed molecular mechanism. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8.

  22. Esposito K, Chiodini P, Capuano A, et al. Effect of metabolic syndrome and its components on prostate cancer risk: meta-analysis. J Endocrinol Invest. 2013;36(2):132–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Discacciati A, Wolk A. Lifestyle and dietary factors in prostate cancer prevention. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2014;202:27–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Masko EM, Allott EH, Freedland SJ. The relationship between nutrition and prostate cancer: is more always better? Eur Urol. 2013;63(5):810–20. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.012.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roddam AW, Allen NE, Appleby P, et al. Insulin-like growth factors, their binding proteins, and prostate cancer risk: analysis of individual patient data from 12 prospective studies. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:461–71.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Redman MW, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ, Lucia MS, Coltman Jr CA, Thompson IM. Finasteride does not increase the risk of high-grade prostate cancer: a bias-adjusted modeling approach. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2008;1:174–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:215–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Andriole GL, Bostwick DG, Brawley OW, et al. and the REDUCE Study Group. Effect of dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1192–202.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Marberger M, Freedland SJ, Andriole GL, et al. Usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rise as a marker of prostate cancer in men treated with dutasteride: lessons from the REDUCE study. BJU Int. 2012;109:1162–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rothwell PM, Fowkes FG, Belch JF, Ogawa H, Warlow CP, Meade TW. Eff ect of daily aspirin on long-term risk of death due to cancer: analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;377:31–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, Catto J, Emberton M, Nam R, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013;64(6):876–92. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.049. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Welch HG, Albertsen PC. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen screening: 1986–2005. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(19):1325–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Loeb S, Catalona WJ. What is the role of digital rectal examination in men undergoing serial screening of serum PSA levels? Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2009;6:68–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Stephan C, Köpke T, Semjonow A, Lein M, Deger S, Schrader M, et al. Discordant total and free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) assays: does calibration with WHO reference materials diminish the problem? Clin Chem Lab Med. 2009;47(11):1325–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level <4.0 ng per millilitre. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2239–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Slawin KM, Brawer MK, Flanigan RC, Patel A, et al. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. JAMA. 1998;279(19):1542–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Perdonà S, Bruzzese D, Ferro M, et al. Prostate health index (phi) and prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) significantly improve diagnostic accuracy in patients undergoing prostate biopsy. Prostate. 2013;73:227–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Vedder MM, de Bekker-Grob EW, Lilja HG, Vickers AJ, van Leenders GJ, Steyerberg EW, et al. The added value of percentage of free to total prostate-specific antigen, PCA3, and a kallikrein panel to the ERSPC risk calculator for prostate cancer in prescreened men. Eur Urol. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.011.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Leyten GH, Hessels D, Jannink SA, et al. Prospective multicentre evaluation of PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions as diagnostic and prognostic urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014;65:534–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Stephenson SK, Chang EK, Marks LS. Screening and detection advances in magnetic resonance image-guided prostate biopsy. Urol Clin North Am. 2014;41(2):315–26. doi:10.1016/j.ucl.2014.01.007. Review.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bouye S, Potiron E, Puech P, Leroy X, Lemaitre L, Villers A. Transition zone and anterior stromal prostate cancers: zone of origin and intraprostatic patterns of spread at histopathology. Prostate. 2009;69:105–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Walz J, Bladou F, Rousseau B, Laroche J, Salem N, Gravis G, et al. Head to head comparison of nomograms predicting probability of lymph node invasion of prostate cancer in patients undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Urology. 2012;79(3):546–51. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2011.11.036.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer (PIVOT). N Engl J Med. 2012;367(3):203–13. Important study underlying the controversial role of radical prostatectomy in young patients with clinical localized PCa.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Droz J-P, Aapro M, Balducci L, et al. Management of prostate cancer in senior adults: updated recommendations of a working group of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG). The Lancet Oncology 2014. In press. Latest indication from SIOG in the management of PCa in the elderly patients.

  45. Chodak GW, Thisted RA, Gerber GS, et al. Results of conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1994;330:242–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Onco. 2010;28(1):126–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Johansson JE, Andrén O, Andersson SO, et al. Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2004;291(22):2713–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S, et al. START Consortium. Standards of reporting for MRI targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an international working group. Eur Urol. 2013;64(4):544–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol. 2013;63:597–603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. van den Bergh RC, Korfage IJ, Bangma CH. Psychological aspects of active surveillance. Curr Opin Urol. 2012;22(3):237–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Braun K, Ahallal Y, Sjoberg DD, et al. Effect of repeated prostate biopsies on erectile function in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2014;191(3):744–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer (SPCG-4). N Engl J Med. 2011;364(18):1708–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Epstein JI, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Pierorazio PM. Upgrading and downgrading of prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: incidence and predictive factors using the modified Gleason grading system and factoring in tertiary grades. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1019–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Graversen PH, Nielsen KT, Gasser TC, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus expectant primary treatment in stages I and II prostatic cancer. A fifteen-year follow-up. Urology. 1990;36(6):493–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):418–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Ficarra V, Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):405–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):480–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Spratt DE, Pei X, Yamada J, Kollmeier MA, Cox B, Zelefsky MJ. Long-term survival and toxicity in patients treated with high-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2013;85(3):686–92. Longest follow-up available of high-dose IMRT for localized PCa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Zelefsky MJ, Kollmeier M, Cox B, Fidaleo A, Sperling D, Pei X, et al. Improved clinical outcomes with high-dose image guided radiotherapy compared with non-IGRT for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2012;84(1):125–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Viani GA, Stefano EJ, Afonso SL. Higher-than-conventional radiation doses in localized prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2009;74(5):1405–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Prada PJ, Juan G, González-Suárez H, Fernández J, Jimenez I, Amón J, et al. Prostate-specific antigen relapse-free survival and side-effects in 734 patients with up to 10 years of follow-up with localized prostate cancer treated by permanent iodine implants. BJU Int. 2010;106(1):32–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Ghadjar P, Jackson A, Spratt DE, Oh JH, Munck AF, Rosenschöld P, et al. Patterns and predictors of amelioration of genitourinary toxicity after high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: implications for defining postradiotherapy urinary toxicity. Eur Urol. 2013;64(6):931–8. Reduction of genitourinary toxicity after of high-dose IMRT.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ghadjar P, Oesch SL, Rentsch CA, Isaak B, Cihoric N, Manser P, et al. Late toxicity and five year outcomes after high-dose-rate brachytherapy as a monotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2014;9:122.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Buyyounouski MK, Price Jr RA, Harris EE, Miller R, Tomé W, Schefter T, et al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for primary management of early-stage, low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer: report of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Emerging Technology Committee. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2010;76(5):1297–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Sooriakumaran P, Nyberg T, Akre O, Haendler L, Heus I, Olsson M, et al. Comparative effectiveness of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in prostate cancer: observational study of mortality outcomes. BMJ. 2014;348:g1502. doi:10.1136/bmj.g1502.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zelefsky MJ, Eastham JA, Cronin AM, Fuks Z, Zhang Z, Yamada Y, et al. Metastasis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiotherapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparison of clinical cohorts adjusted for case mix. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1508–13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Bahn DK, Lee F, Baldalament R, et al. Targeted cryoablation of the prostate: 7-year outcomes in the primary treatment of prostate cancer. Urology. 2002;60(2 Suppl 1):3–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Crouzet S, Chapelon JY, Rouvière O, et al. Whole-gland ablation of localized prostate cancer with high-intensity focused ultrasound: oncologic outcomes and morbidity in 1002 patients. Eur Urol. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.039.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Pfeiffer D, Berger J, Gross AJ. Single application of high-intensity focused ultrasound as a first-line therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes. BJU Int. 2012;110(11):1702–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Graversen PH, Nielsen KT, Gasser TC, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus expectant primary treatment in stages I and II prostatic cancer. A fifteen-year follow-up. Urology. 1990;36(6):493–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. D’Amico AV, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, Loffredo M, Kantoff PW. Androgen suppression and radiation vs radiation alone for prostate cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;299(3):289–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Zumsteg ZS, Spratt DE, Pei X, Yamada Y, Kalikstein A, Kuk D, et al. Short-term androgen-deprivation therapy improves prostate cancer-specific mortality in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2013;85(4):1012–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Lawton CA, Bae K, Pilepich M, Hanks G, Shipley W. Long-term treatment sequelae after external beam irradiation with or without hormonal manipulation for adenocarcinoma of the prostate: analysis of radiation therapy oncology group studies 85-31, 86-10, and 92-02. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2008;70(2):437–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Nanda A, Chen MH, Braccioforte MH, Moran BJ, D’Amico AV. Hormonal therapy use for prostate cancer and mortality in men with coronary artery disease-induced congestive heart failure or myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2009;302(8):866–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Spratt DE, Zumsteg ZS, Ghadjar P, Kollmeier MA, Pei X, Cohen G, et al. Comparison of high-dose (86.4 Gy) IMRT vs combined brachytherapy plus IMRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2014;114(3):360–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Buyyounouski MK, Price Jr RA, Harris EE, Miller R, Tomé W, Schefter T, et al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for primary management of early-stage, low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer: report of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Emerging Technology Committee. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2010;76(5):1297–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Pommier P, Chabaud S, Lagrange JL, Richaud P, Lesaunier F, Le PE, et al. Is there a role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate adenocarcinoma? Preliminary results of GETUG-01. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(34):5366–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Lawton CA, DeSilvio M, Roach III M, Uhl V, Kirsch R, Seider M, et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: updated analysis of RTOG 94-13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys. 2007;69(3):646–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Donohue JF, Bianco Jr FJ, Kuroiwa K, et al. Poorly differentiated prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: long-term outcome and incidence of pathological downgrading. J Urol. 2006;176:991–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Ji J, Yuan H, Wang L, et al. Is the impact of the extent of lymphadenectomy in radical prostatectomy related to the disease risk? A single center prospective study. J Surg Res. 2012;178(2):779–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Yuh B, Artibani W, Heidenreich A, Kimm S, Menon M, Novara G, et al. The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in the management of high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):918–27. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.026. Role of pelvic lymph node dissection in high-risk PCa.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Bolla M, Collette L, Blank L, Warde P, Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO, et al. Long-term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): a phase III randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;360(9327):103–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Bolla M, Van Tienhoven G, Warde P, Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO, Storme G, et al. External irradiation with or without long-term androgen suppression for prostate cancer with high metastatic risk: 10-year results of an EORTC randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(11):1066–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, Damber JE, Angelsen A, Fransson P, et al. Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet. 2009;373:301–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Warde P, Mason M, Ding K, Kirkbride P, Brundage M, Cowan R, et al. Combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2011;378:2104–11.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Giovannalberto Pini, Dr. Pirus Ghadjar and Dr. Peter Wiklund each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Dr. Justin Collins is a section editor for Current Urology Reports.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Karolinska Institute, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Section of Urology, Solna, Stockholm, Sweden

    Giovannalberto Pini, Justin Collins & Peter Wiklund

  2. UroClinic AB Sverige, Robotic Surgery, Sophiahemmet Hospital, 171 76, Stockholm, Sweden

    Giovannalberto Pini

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiotherapy, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Pirus Ghadjar

Authors
  1. Giovannalberto Pini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Justin Collins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pirus Ghadjar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter Wiklund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovannalberto Pini.

Additional information

Giovannalberto Pini is a member of ‘The Robotic working group’ of the Young Academic Urologist (YAU) working party of European Association of Urology (EAU)

Pirus Ghadjar is a member of the ‘The Prostate Cancer working group’ of the Young Academic Urologist (YAU) working party of European Association of Urology (EAU)

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Urosurgery

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pini, G., Collins, J., Ghadjar, P. et al. Guidance on Patient Consultation. Current Evidence for Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Healthy Men and Treatment Options for Men with Proven Localised Prostate Cancer. Curr Urol Rep 16, 28 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0502-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0502-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation