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
  • [42] Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer
    Laurence Klotz
    Current Urology Reports, 2015, 16
  • [43] Management dilemmas in low-risk prostate cancer
    Patel, Vipul R.
    Ganapathi, Hariharan Palayapalayam
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 118 (02) : 180 - 181
  • [44] A national questionnaire survey of Japanese urologists on active surveillance for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer
    Kato, Takuma
    Tohi, Yoichiro
    Honda, Tomoko
    Matsuda, Iori
    Osaki, Yu
    Naito, Hirohito
    Matsuoka, Yuki
    Okazoe, Homare
    Taoka, Rikiya
    Tsunemori, Hiroyuki
    Ueda, Nobufumi
    Sugimoto, Mikio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 30 (03) : 289 - 297
  • [45] A hospital-based study of initial observation for low-risk prostate cancer and its predictors in the United States
    Maurice, Matthew J.
    Zhu, Hui
    Abouassaly, Robert
    CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2015, 9 (3-4): : E193 - E199
  • [46] Prospective quality-of-life outcomes for low-risk prostate cancer: Active surveillance versus radical prostatectomy
    Jeldres, Claudio
    Cullen, Jennifer
    Hurwitz, Lauren M.
    Wolff, Erika M.
    Levie, Katherine E.
    Odem-Davis, Katherine
    Johnston, Richard B.
    Pham, Khanh N.
    Rosner, Inger L.
    Brand, Timothy C.
    L'Esperance, James O.
    Sterbis, Joseph R.
    Etzioni, Ruth
    Porter, Christopher R.
    CANCER, 2015, 121 (14) : 2465 - 2473
  • [47] Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists
    Gorin, M. A.
    Eldefrawy, A.
    Ekwenna, O.
    Soloway, M. S.
    PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, 2012, 15 (02) : 177 - 181
  • [48] Upgrading and upstaging of low-risk prostate cancer among Korean patients: a multicenter study
    Hwang, Insang
    Lim, Donghoon
    Jeong, Young Beom
    Park, Seung Chol
    Noh, Jun Hwa
    Kwon, Dong Deuk
    Kang, Taek Won
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY, 2015, 17 (05) : 811 - 814
  • [49] Predictors of adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy in low-risk prostate cancer
    Park, Jae Won
    Koh, Dong Hoon
    Jang, Won Sik
    Cho, Kang Su
    Ham, Won Sik
    Rha, Koon Ho
    Hong, Sung Joon
    Choi, Young Deuk
    BMC CANCER, 2018, 18
  • [50] Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018
    Briganti, Alberto
    Fossati, Nicola
    Catto, James W. F.
    Cornford, Philip
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Mottet, Nicolas
    Wirth, Manfred
    Van Poppel, Hendrik
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2018, 74 (03) : 357 - 368