Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy .
A biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention , whereas the role of PSA doubling time is controversial .
In men with locally advanced PCa for whom local therapy is not m and atory , watchful waiting ( WW ) is a treatment alternative to and rogen-deprivation therapy ( ADT ) , with equivalent oncologic efficacy .
Active treatment is recommended mostly for patients with localized disease and a long life expectancy , with radical prostatectomy ( RP ) shown to be superior to WW in prospect i ve r and omized trials .
Nerve-sparing RP is the approach of choice in organ-confined disease , while neoadjuvant ADT provides no improvement in outcome variables .
For locally advanced disease , adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior rates for disease-specific and overall survival and is the treatment of choice .
Active surveillance is an option in low-risk PCa and watchful waiting is an alternative to and rogen-deprivation therapy in locally advanced PCa not requiring immediate local treatment .
CONTEXT The most recent summary of the European Association of Urology ( EAU ) guidelines on prostate cancer ( PCa ) was published in 2011 .
OBJECTIVE To present a summary of the 2013 version of the EAU guidelines on screening , diagnosis , and local treatment with curative intent of clinical ly organ-confined PCa .
Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population -based screening by prostate-specific antigen ( PSA ) for PCa .
Systematic prostate biopsies under ultrasound guidance and local anesthesia are the preferred diagnostic method .
CONCLUSIONS Knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing .
Multicentric oncologic outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer in 803 patients.
BACKGROUND High-intensity focused ultrasound ( HIFU ) is an emerging treatment for select patients with localized prostate cancer ( PCa ) . OBJECTIVES To report the oncologic outcome of HIFU as a primary care option for localized prostate cancer from a multicenter data base . DESIGN , SETTING , AND PARTICIPANTS Patients with localized PCa treated with curative intent and presenting at least a 2-yr follow-up from February 1993 were considered in this study . Previously irradiated patients were excluded from this analysis . In case of any residual or recurrent PCa , patients were systematic ally offered a second session . Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine disease-free survival rates ( DFSR ) . MEASUREMENTS Prostate-specific antigen ( PSA ) , clinical stage , and pathologic results were measured pre- and post-HIFU . RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 803 patients from six urologic departments met the inclusion criteria . Stratification according to d'Amico 's risk group was low , intermediate , and high in 40.2 % , 46.3 % , and 13.5 % of patients , respectively . Mean follow-up was 42+/-33 mo . Mean PSA nadir was 1.0+/-2.8 ng/ml with 54.3 % reaching a nadir of < or = 0.3 ng/ml . Control biopsies were negative in 85 % of cases . The overall and cancer-specific survival rates at 8 yr were 89 % and 99 % , respectively . The metastasis-free survival rate at 8 yr was 97 % . Initial PSA value and Gleason score value significantly influence the DFSR . The 5- and 7-yr biochemical-free survival rates ( Phoenix criteria ) were 83 - 75 % , 72 - 63 % , and 68 - 62 % ( p=0.03 ) and the additional treatment-free survival rates were 84 - 79 % , 68 - 61 % , and 52 - 54 % ( p<0.001 ) for low- , intermediate- , and high-risk patients , respectively . PSA nadir was a major predictive factor for HIFU success : negative biopsies , stable PSA , and no additional therapy . CONCLUSIONS Local control and DFSR achieved with HIFU were similar to those expected with conformal external-beam radiation therapy ( EBRT ) . The excellent cancer-specific survival rate is also explained by the possibility to repeat HIFU and use salvage EBRT
Active surveillance represents a viable option in men with low-risk PCa and a long life expectancy .
A biopsy progression indicates the need for active intervention , whereas the role of PSA doubling time is controversial .
In men with locally advanced PCa for whom local therapy is not m and atory , watchful waiting ( WW ) is a treatment alternative to and rogen-deprivation therapy ( ADT ) , with equivalent oncologic efficacy .
Active treatment is recommended mostly for patients with localized disease and a long life expectancy , with radical prostatectomy ( RP ) shown to be superior to WW in prospect i ve r and omized trials .
Nerve-sparing RP is the approach of choice in organ-confined disease , while neoadjuvant ADT provides no improvement in outcome variables .
For locally advanced disease , adjuvant ADT for 3 yr results in superior rates for disease-specific and overall survival and is the treatment of choice .
Active surveillance is an option in low-risk PCa and watchful waiting is an alternative to and rogen-deprivation therapy in locally advanced PCa not requiring immediate local treatment .
CONTEXT The most recent summary of the European Association of Urology ( EAU ) guidelines on prostate cancer ( PCa ) was published in 2011 .
OBJECTIVE To present a summary of the 2013 version of the EAU guidelines on screening , diagnosis , and local treatment with curative intent of clinical ly organ-confined PCa .
Current evidence is insufficient to warrant widespread population -based screening by prostate-specific antigen ( PSA ) for PCa .
Systematic prostate biopsies under ultrasound guidance and local anesthesia are the preferred diagnostic method .
CONCLUSIONS Knowledge in the field of PCa is rapidly changing .