Does Time Spent on Active Surveillance Adversely Affect the Pathological and Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Delayed Radical Prostatectomy?
The Journal of urology
URL with Digital Object Identifier
PURPOSE: Pathological and oncologic outcomes of delayed radical prostatectomy following prostate cancer active surveillance are not well established. We determined the pathological and oncologic outcomes of favorable risk, Grade Group 1, prostate cancer managed with active surveillance and progressing to radical prostatectomy for clinically significant prostate cancer (Grade Group 2 or greater). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1992 and 2015, 170 men with favorable risk prostate cancer underwent delayed radical prostatectomy for clinically significant prostate cancer (ASRP) at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Pathological and oncologic outcomes of the ASRP cohort were compared with a matched cohort treated with up-front radical prostatectomy (405) immediately before surgery. Biochemical recurrence-free survival, overall survival and cancer specific survival were compared. We examined the association between delayed radical prostatectomy and adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy and biochemical recurrence using logistic and Cox regression analyses, respectively. RESULTS: Median time spent on active surveillance before radical prostatectomy was 31.0 months. At radical prostatectomy pT3 (extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion), positive surgical margin and pN1 rates were comparable between the 2 cohorts. Median followup after radical prostatectomy was 5.6 years. The 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rate in the ASRP cohort and up-front radical prostatectomy cohort were 85.8% and 82.4%, respectively (p=0.38). Overall survival and cancer specific survival were comparable between the 2 groups. Delayed radical prostatectomy was not associated with adverse pathological outcomes and biochemical recurrence on regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Curative intent radical prostatectomy after a period of active surveillance results in excellent pathological and oncologic outcomes at 5 years. A period of active surveillance does not result in inferior outcomes compared to patients with similar risk characteristics undergoing up-front radical prostatectomy.