Conference Coverage

Most men with low-risk prostate tumors now forgoing treatment


 

FROM THE AUA ANNUAL MEETING

Aiming higher

William Catalona, MD, a panel member from Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, said the AUA’s Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Project has set a goal of 80% uptake of AS in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Dr. Catalona, an early critic of AS, called that figure “optimal and realistic,” something that should happen “as soon as possible.”

Dr. Catalona said the 80% benchmark matches acceptance of AS within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.

However, Dr. Klotz said the American culture of treatment, which is driven at least in part by financial incentives on the part of physicians, may prevent the growth of AS above 80% in this country.

Dr. Cooperberg said financial incentives are real. “I think it’s a small minority of docs that are heavily driven by the financial incentive, but it certainly exists,” he told this news organization. When you look at the extreme variation of active surveillance rates, there is no question that factors like reimbursement are going to play a role.”

Dr. Catalona, who through the first decade of the 2000s regularly debated Dr. Klotz about the concept of AS, said he today recommends AS when appropriate.

“The variability of AS adoption among practices and physicians varies from 0% to 100%. Therefore, some are too ‘tight’ in recommending AS and some are ‘too loose.’ I do not attempt to steer [patients] into treatment unless I believe that would be their best option. Nevertheless, some opt for surveillance when I believe they are making a mistake, and some opt for treatment when I believe surveillance would have been a rational choice.”

Dr. Cooperberg agreed that a personalized approach is important and that both physicians and patients should be flexible in their decisionmaking. “There will always be some men with low-grade disease who should get immediate treatment. For example, a young man with very high-volume disease, even if it’s Gleason 3+3,” he said. “If it is clearly inevitable that he’s going to need treatment, he could reasonably make a decision to get immediate treatment.”

Dr. Cooperberg, Dr. Klotz, and Dr. Catalona have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Cancer risk tied to some manufactured foods
MDedge Family Medicine
For equality in prostate cancer outcomes, seek equality in treatment
MDedge Family Medicine
AI holds its own against pathologists for prostate cancer diagnosis
MDedge Family Medicine
Testicular cancer deaths rising among Hispanic men
MDedge Family Medicine
Filling opioid prescriptions akin to a Sisyphean task
MDedge Family Medicine
As predicted: jump in metastatic prostate cancer diagnoses
MDedge Family Medicine
Artificial sweeteners: A modifiable cancer risk?
MDedge Family Medicine
Obesity increasing the risk for cancer: It’s complicated
MDedge Family Medicine
Better survival in older cancer patients who take metformin
MDedge Family Medicine
Is it time to remove ‘cancer’ label from low-risk prostate tumors?
MDedge Family Medicine