Table 11Monitoring parameters in cohorts that did not report information on triggers for intervention in chronological order of starting enrollment year

Center, Country
[Pubmed ID]
Enrollment years
Monitoring schedulePSAGleason score# biopsy cores /% coresImagingBehavioral indicationAdditional laboratory testsTriggers for interventions
Kagawa Medical Univ., Japan153
[10765093]
1990–1998
NRPSA DT based on 1st PSA >1 mo after biopsy. ≥3 values at intervals ≥1 mo apart for >6 mo.NR
Kitasato Univ. Hospital, Japan154
[11851612]
1991–2000
“a DRE,” generally seen every 3–6 mo “as clinical circumstances dictated.”Annual bone scanNR
Univ. of North Carolina, US155
1991–1996
PSA at 3 mo; then every 6 moBiochemical progression: PSA level increase in 3 consecutive measurements and the total increase was > 5 ng/mLHematocrit and creatinine every 6 moNR
Princess Margaret hospital, Canada156
[21211899]
1995–2010
For the most part, PSA every 3mo for 2 yr and every 6 mo in stable patients; DRE every 6 mo; a confirmatory biopsy within 12 mo and then every 2–3 yr until the patient reached 80 yr of age or refused treatmentaRepeat biopsies consisted of 10 cores before 2001 and 15–16 cores after 2001.
>3 cores or any core involvement >50%
NR
Note: Pathologic progression was devalued, defined as increased grade, increased number of cores to more than 3 or any core involvement >50%.
BCCA, Canada157
[9445192]
NR
PSA generally every 3–6 mo as neededNR
Kansas City VA, US158
[21172105]
2004–2009
PSA every 3 mo and a repeat TRUS guided prostate biopsy at 1 yrAll biopsies were performed using a standard 12-core biopsy scheme, but increased number if larger glandsNR

WW = watchful waiting; EM = expectant management; NR = not reported; DT = doubling time; mo = month(s); PAP = prostate acid phosphatase; PSA = prostate specific antigen; TRUS = Transrectal ultrasound; CT = computerized tomography; PSA = prostate-specific antigen; TNM = tumor-node-metastasis system; US = ultrasound; yr = year(s); BCCA = British Columbia Cancer Agency

✓ = item was used as part of monitoring strategy but explicit criteria were not defined

– = item was not used or not reported as part of monitoring strategy

a

The authors reported that five physicians in a nonstandardized fashion followed patients, although a relatively similar pattern of care was provided.

From: Results

Cover of An Evidence Review of Active Surveillance in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer
An Evidence Review of Active Surveillance in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer.
Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 204.
Ip S, Dahabreh IJ, Chung M, et al.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.