Current Treatment for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in China: A National Network Survey

被引:6
|
作者
Wei, Yongbao [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Longfei [3 ]
Li, Xin [4 ]
Song, Wei [5 ]
Zhong, Dewen [6 ]
Cao, Xiande [7 ]
Yuan, Daozhang [8 ]
Ming, Shaoxiong [9 ]
Zhang, Peng [10 ]
Wen, Yanlin [11 ]
机构
[1] Fujian Med Univ, Shengli Clin Med Coll, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian, Peoples R China
[2] Fujian Prov Hosp, Dept Urol, 134 Dong St, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian, Peoples R China
[3] Cent S Univ, Xiangya Hosp, Dept Urol, Changsha 410000, Hunan, Peoples R China
[4] 118th Hosp PLA, Dept Urol, Wenzhou 325000, Peoples R China
[5] Hunan Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Urol, Changsha 410005, Hunan, Peoples R China
[6] Fujian Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Urol, Longyan 364000, Peoples R China
[7] Jining Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Urol, Jining 272000, Peoples R China
[8] Guangzhou Med Univ, Canc Ctr, Dept Urol, Guangzhou 510095, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[9] Second Mil Med Univ, Changhai Hosp, Dept Urol, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China
[10] Wuhan Univ, Zhongnan Hosp, Dept Urol, Wuhan 430071, Hubei, Peoples R China
[11] Nanchong Cent Hosp, Dept Urol, Nanchong 637000, Peoples R China
来源
JOURNAL OF CANCER | 2019年 / 10卷 / 06期
关键词
prostate cancer; active surveillance; radical prostatectomy; urologist; China; survey; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; MANAGEMENT; TRENDS; MEN;
D O I
10.7150/jca.29595
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: To analyze the current treatment for low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) in China. Methods: A national questionnaire survey titled "A survey of current treatment of LRPC" was designed and released nationally through the network from July 16 to August 3, 2017. Results: A total of 1,116 valid questionnaires were recovered. The percentages of preferred treatment by active surveillance (AS) or radical prostatectomy (RP) were 29.21% and 45.61%, respectively. A correspondence analysis showed that the physician in charge was more inclined to choose AS than RP. Respondents from different institution types, hospitals with different annual numbers of newly admitted patients with prostate cancer, and with different familiarity with the LRPC definition presented a significant difference in the preferred treatments (p < 0.05). Urologists chose AS or not for the following reasons: tumor progression (52.51%), potential medical disputes (42.56%) (i.e., medical disputes from patients or their relatives when urologists choose AS to treat patients with LRPC and the patient has a poor outcome), fear of cancer (4 1.94%), and surgical risk (39.07%). These reasons were ubiquitous, and there was no significant difference among urologists for these concerns (p > 0.05). Personal skills, surgical risk, and tumor progression were the most common factors that influenced whether AS or RP was preferred (p < 0.05). Concern about the medical disputes brought about by AS was a key factor for not choosing AS (p < 0.05). Conclusions: LRPC is still dominated by RP in China, followed by AS. Personal skills, surgical risk, and concern about tumor progression were the common factors influencing whether AS or RP was preferred. In addition, medical disputes brought by AS are another key factor for not choosing AS. There will be more Chinese data in the future to guide treatment of LRPC.
引用
收藏
页码:1496 / 1502
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer
    Klotz, Laurence
    CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2015, 16 (04) : 1 - 10
  • [22] Very low-risk versus low-risk prostate cancer: A distinction worth keeping
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    PROSTATE, 2021, 81 (13): : 923 - 925
  • [23] Adoption of Active Surveillance for Very Low-Risk Differentiated Thyroid Cancer in the United States: A National Survey
    Pitt, Susan C.
    Yang, Nan
    Saucke, Megan C.
    Marka, Nicholas
    Hanlon, Bret
    Long, Kristin L.
    McDow, Alexandria D.
    Brito, J. P.
    Roman, Benjamin R.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM, 2021, 106 (04): : E1728 - E1737
  • [24] Treatment Options in Low-risk Prostate Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Database Report
    Erbatu, Oguzcan
    Muezzinoglu, Talha
    Akdogan, Bulent
    Aslan, Guven
    Sozen, Sinan
    Baltaci, Sumer
    Suer, Evren
    Izol, Volkan
    Ucer, Oktay
    Ataus, Suleyman
    Turkeri, Levent
    Tinay, Ilker
    UROONKOLOJI BULTENI-BULLETIN OF UROONCOLOGY, 2023, 22 (02): : 72 - 75
  • [25] Focal Therapy Is a Viable Treatment for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer
    Berends, Joel
    Dupati, Ajith
    Dibianco, John
    George, Arvin K.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2021, 35 (09) : 1281 - 1283
  • [26] Association Between Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Observation for Low-risk Prostate Cancer
    Leapman, Michael S.
    Wang, Rong
    Park, Henry S.
    Yu, James B.
    Weinreb, Jeffrey C.
    Gross, Cary P.
    Ma, Xiaomei
    UROLOGY, 2019, 124 : 98 - 105
  • [27] Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Worldwide: The PRIAS Study
    Bul, Meelan
    Zhu, Xiaoye
    Valdagni, Riccardo
    Pickles, Tom
    Kakehi, Yoshiyuki
    Rannikko, Antti
    Bjartell, Anders
    van der Schoot, Deric K.
    Cornel, Erik B.
    Conti, Giario N.
    Boeve, Egbert R.
    Staerman, Frederic
    Vis-Maters, Jenneke J.
    Vergunst, Henk
    Jaspars, Joris J.
    Stroelin, Petra
    van Muilekom, Erik
    Schroder, Fritz H.
    Bangma, Chris H.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2013, 63 (04) : 597 - 603
  • [28] Management of low-risk prostate cancer
    Rozet, F.
    Bastide, C.
    Beuzeboc, P.
    Cormier, L.
    Fromont, G.
    Hennequin, C.
    Mongiat-Artus, P.
    Peyromaure, M.
    Renard-Penna, R.
    Richaud, P.
    Salomon, L.
    Soulie, M.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2015, 25 (01): : 1 - 10
  • [29] Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Identification, Management, and Outcomes
    Moschini, Marco
    Carroll, Peter R.
    Eggener, Scott E.
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    Graefen, Markus
    Montironi, Rodolfo
    Parker, Christopher
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2017, 72 (02) : 238 - 249
  • [30] Decision-making processes among men with low-risk prostate cancer: A survey study
    Hoffman, Richard M.
    Van den Eeden, Stephen K.
    Davis, Kimberly M.
    Lobo, Tania
    Luta, George
    Shan, Jun
    Aaronson, David
    Penson, David F.
    Leimpeter, Amethyst D.
    Taylor, Kathryn L.
    PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2018, 27 (01) : 325 - 332