ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2012
Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Current Advances in Thyroid Cancer Management. Are We Ready for the Epidemic Rise of Diagnoses?International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- Qualitative study on decision-making by prostate cancer physicians during active surveillance.BJU international · 2017Article
- Prostate Biopsy in Active Surveillance Protocols: Immediate Re-biopsy and Timing of Subsequent Biopsies.Current urology reports · 2017Review
- Physicians' perspectives on the informational needs of low-risk prostate cancer patients.Health education research · 2017Article
- Performance of biopsy factors in predicting unfavorable disease in patients eligible for active surveillance according to the PRIAS criteria.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2015Article
- Prostate cancer: active surveillance may prove organisationally impossible.Irish journal of medical science · 2015Article
- Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: diversity of practice across Europe.Irish journal of medical science · 2015Article
- Heterogeneity in active surveillance protocols worldwide.Reviews in urology · 2014Review
- [Prostate biopsy - an unending story].Der Pathologe · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to survey urologists regarding their knowledge, acceptance and practice of active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer.
methodsAn email-based survey was distributed to 4987 urologists. Respondents were surveyed regarding their knowledge and acceptance of AS. Those who felt AS was a reasonable strategy were asked their opinions on the criteria for AS enrollment and the details of their practice of AS. Respondents who felt AS was not a reasonable alternative were queried as to the reasons why.
resultsA total of 425 (9%) urologists successfully completed the survey and 387 (91%) were both familiar with AS and aware that AS differed from watchful waiting. Of this latter group, 370 (96%) respondents felt AS was a reasonable management strategy, 95% of whom manage patients with this approach. A minority of respondents (6%) felt that patients with a PSA>10 ng ml(-1) were eligible for AS. Further, most participants (74%) felt that patients required a Gleason score ≤6. There was little agreement on the timing of follow-up biopsies. Respondents who objected to AS were most commonly concerned with missing an opportunity for curative treatment (76%) and the risk of tumor undergrading (65%).
conclusionsThe majority of participants were knowledgeable and accepting of AS. Respondents were in relative agreement regarding the PSA and Gleason score criteria for AS enrollment. In contrast, there was a lack of agreement on the timing of follow-up biopsies. In the future, comparative studies are required to determine the optimal enrollment criteria and follow-up protocol for patients managed with AS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22143447What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.