Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2024 article

Reducing Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer Patients: Revisiting the European Association of Urology Pretreatment Risk Group Classification Using Long-term Follow-up Data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam

6Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : nl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Tailored treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) requires accurate risk stratification. This study examines the effectiveness of the European Association of Urology (EAU) classification in predicting long-term PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) and assesses whether an alternative system can improve the identification of patients with low-risk disease. METHODS: This study included two cohorts of patients with localized PCa: one with screen-detected PCa (n = 1563; S-cohort) and the other with clinically detected PCa (n = 755; C-cohort), all from a population-based, randomized screening study, who underwent primary radical prostatectomy or radiation monotherapy. Patients were stratified according to the traditional EAU risk classification and an alternative risk classification where low-risk disease is adjusted according to contemporary active surveillance (AS) eligibility criteria. The 15-yr time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) and the cumulative incidence of PCSM at 15 yr after diagnosis were assessed for each risk classification and cohort. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: With a median follow-up of 20 yr in the S-cohort and 12 yr in the C-cohort, the EAU classification demonstrated 15-yr AUCs of 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.80) and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.65-0.79), respectively, for predicting PCSM. The alternative classification showed a 15-yr AUC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.69-0.79) in the S-cohort and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.68-0.81) in the C-cohort. The alternative classification identified 45% more men having a low risk in the S-cohort and 83% more in the C-cohort than the EAU classification, with no statistically significant increase in the 15-yr PCSM incidence (S-cohort subhazard ratio: 1.33 [95% CI: 0.66-2.68]; C-cohort subhazard ratio: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.29-3.38]). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The EAU classification predicts PCSM accurately, but an alternative classification, adjusted for AS eligibility, identifies substantially more men as having a low risk. This could enhance AS acceptance and utilization in clinical practice, reducing overtreatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study shows that while a commonly used pretreatment risk classification for prostate cancer predict disease prognosis accurately, an alternative system based on active surveillance eligibility criteria identifies many more men as having a low risk. Adopting this classification could enhance the acceptance and use of active surveillance, reducing unnecessary treatments.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Reducing Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer Patients: Revisiting the European Association of Urology Pretreatment Risk Group Classification Using Long-term Follow-up Data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam
Date Crossref
01/06/2025
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.