ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2018
Can active surveillance really reduce the harms of overdiagnosing prostate cancer? A reflection of real life clinical practice in the PRIAS study.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04113811 (Microwave Needle Thermoablation for Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer Under the Guidance of MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Organbased Tracking), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Microwave Needle Thermoablation for Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer Under the Guidance of MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Organbased Tracking: A Phase 2 Trial.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training for localized prostate cancer under active surveillance: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Defining and Measuring Adherence in Observational Studies Assessing Outcomes of Real-world Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.European urology oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Comprehensive biochemical insights into derivatives of PSA and glycosylation-specific changes in PSA: role in diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.Clinical proteomics · 2026Review
- Factors influencing Gleason score up/downgrade in radical prostatectomy.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Considerable decline in prostate cancer mortality in Nordic countries after 2000.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- A 2-year prospective evaluation of the Prostate Health Index in guiding biopsy decisions in a large cohort.BJU international · 2025Article
- Development of an effective predictive screening tool for prostate cancer using the ClarityDX machine learning platform.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- The Patient Journey from Randomization to Detection of Prostate Cancer and Death: Results from ERSPC Rotterdam.European urology open science · 2023Article
- Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Past, Current, and Future Trends.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Delta radiomic patterns on serial bi-parametric MRI are associated with pathologic upgrading in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance: preliminary findings.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Active surveillance for prostate cancer-will the discoveries of the last 5 years change the future?Translational andrology and urology · 2021Article
- Changements dans les pratiques de dépistage de l'antigène prostatique spécifique en Ontario entre 2003 et 2012.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2020Article
- Changes in the uptake of screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen in Ontario between 2003 to 2012.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2020Article
- PCASTt/SPCG-17-a randomised trial of active surveillance in prostate cancer: rationale and design.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Role of the 4Kscore test as a predictor of reclassification in prostate cancer active surveillance.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Article
- The Quality of Life among Men Receiving Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: An Integrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- The Association of the Long Prostate Cancer Expressed PDE4D Transcripts to Poor Patient Outcome Depends on the Tumour's TMPRSS2-ERG Fusion Status.Prostate cancer · 2019Article
- Framework for improving outcome prediction for acute to chronic low back pain transitions.Pain reportsReview
- Impact of the Prevalence of Cognitive Impairment on the Accuracy of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment: The Advantage of Using two MoCA Thresholds to Identify Error-prone Test Scores.Alzheimer disease and associated disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundActive surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) appears to provide excellent long-term PCa-specific and overall survival. The choice for AS as initial treatment is mainly based on avoiding side effects from invasive treatment; but AS entails regular check-ups and the possibility of still having to switch or deciding to switch to invasive treatment. Here, we assessed the long-term follow-up data from AS in real life clinical practices.
methodsData from the first 500 men, enrolled in PRIAS before July 2008 by 30 centers across 8 countries, were analyzed to provide long-term follow-up results. Men were advised to be regularly examined with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests, digital rectal examinations, and prostate biopsies. Men were advised to switch to invasive treatment if they had disease reclassification [Gleason score (GS) ≥3+4 on biopsy, more than two positive biopsy cores, a stage higher than cT2] or a PSA-doubling time of 0-3 years. We assessed time on AS, outcomes and reasons for discontinuing AS, and rates of potential unnecessary biopsies and treatments.
resultsThe median follow-up time was 6.5 years. During this period, 325 (65%) men discontinued after a median of 2.3 years and 121 (24%) men had no recent (>1 year) data-update after a median of 7.3 years. The remaining 54 (11%) men were confirmed to be still on AS. Most men discontinued based on protocol advice; 38% had other reasons. During follow-up, 838 biopsy sessions were performed of which 79% to 90% did not lead to reclassification, depending on the criteria. Of the 325 discontinued men, 112 subsequently underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), 126 underwent radiotherapy, 57 switched to watchful waiting (WW) or died, and 30 had another or unknown treatment. RP results were available of 99 men: 34% to 68%, depending on definition, had favorable outcomes; 50% of unfavorable the outcomes occurred in the first 2 years. Of the 30 (6%) men who died, 1 man died due to PCa.
conclusionsThese data, reflecting real life clinical practice, show that more than half of men switched to invasive treatment within 2.3 years, indicating limitations to the extent in which AS is able to reduce the adverse effects of overdiagnosis. Therefore, despite guidelines stating that PCa diagnosis must be uncoupled from treatment, it remains important to avoid overdiagnosing PCa as much as possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.