The Critical Role of the Pathologist in Determining Eligibility for Active Surveillance as a Management Option in Patients With Prostate Cancer: Consensus Statement With Recommendations Supported by the College of American Pathologists, International Society of Urological Pathology, Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology, the New Zealand Society of Pathologists, and the Prostate Cancer Foundation

Mahul B. Amin(Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), Daniel W. Lin(University of Washington), John L. Gore(University of Washington), John R. Srigley(Trillium Health Centre), Hemamali Samaratunga(The University of Queensland), Lars Egevad(Trillium Health Centre), Mark A. Rubin(NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital), John N. Nacey(Trillium Health Centre), H. Ballentine Carter(Johns Hopkins University), Laurence Klotz(University of Toronto), Howard M. Sandler(Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), Anthony L. Zietman(Trillium Health Centre), Stuart Holden(Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), Rodolfo Montironi(Marche Polytechnic University), Peter A. Humphrey(Trillium Health Centre), Andrew Evans(University of Toronto), Jonathan I. Epstein(Johns Hopkins University), Brett Delahunt(Trillium Health Centre), Jesse K. McKenney(Cleveland Clinic), Daniel M. Berney(Trillium Health Centre), Thomas M. Wheeler(Baylor College of Medicine), Arul M. Chinnaiyan(University of Michigan), Lawrence D. True(University of Washington), Beatrice S. Knudsen(Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), M. Elizabeth H. Hammond(University of Utah)
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
August 5, 2014
Cited by 124

Abstract

CONTEXT: Prostate cancer remains a significant public health problem. Recent publications of randomized trials and the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations have drawn attention to overtreatment of localized, low-risk prostate cancer. Active surveillance, in which patients undergo regular visits with serum prostate-specific antigen tests and repeat prostate biopsies, rather than aggressive treatment with curative intent, may address overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer. It is apparent that a greater awareness of the critical role of pathologists in determining eligibility for active surveillance is needed. OBJECTIVES: To review the state of current knowledge about the role of active surveillance in the management of prostate cancer and to provide a multidisciplinary report focusing on pathologic parameters important to the successful identification of patients likely to succeed with active surveillance, to determine the role of molecular tests in increasing the safety of active surveillance, and to provide future directions. DESIGN: Systematic review of literature on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer, pathologic parameters important for appropriate stratification, and issues regarding interobserver reproducibility. Expert panels were created to delineate the fundamental questions confronting the clinical and pathologic aspects of management of men on active surveillance. RESULTS: Expert panelists identified pathologic parameters important for management and the related diagnostic and reporting issues. Consensus recommendations were generated where appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Active surveillance is an important management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Vital to this process is the critical role pathologic parameters have in identifying appropriate candidates for active surveillance. These findings need to be reproducible and consistently reported by surgical pathologists with accurate pathology reporting.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis