Models of Care and NCCN Guideline Adherence in Very-Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

Restricted access

NCCN Guidelines recommend active surveillance as the primary management option for patients with very-low-risk prostate cancer and an expected survival of less than 20 years, reflecting the favorable prognosis of these men and the lack of perceived benefit of immediate, definitive treatment. The authors hypothesized that care at a multidisciplinary clinic, where multiple physicians have an opportunity to simultaneously review and discuss each case, is associated with increased rates of active surveillance in men with very-low-risk prostate cancer, including those with limited life expectancy. Of 630 patients with low-risk prostate cancer managed at 1 of 3 tertiary care centers in Boston, Massachusetts in 2009, 274 (43.5%) had very-low-risk classification. Patients were either seen by 1 or more individual practitioners in sequential settings or at a multidisciplinary clinic, in which concurrent consultation with 2 or more of the following specialties was obtained: urology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. Patients seen at a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic were more likely to select active surveillance than those seen by individual practitioners (64% vs 30%; P<.001), an association that remained significant on multivariable logistic regression (odds ratio [OR], 4.16; P<.001). When the analysis was limited to patients with an expected survival of less than 20 years, this association remained highly significant (72% vs 34%, P<.001; OR, 5.19; P<.001, respectively). Multidisciplinary care is strongly associated with selection of active surveillance, adherence to NCCN Guidelines and minimization of overtreatment in patients with very-low-risk prostate cancer.

Correspondence: Ayal A. Aizer, MD, MHS, Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, 100 Blossom Street, Cox 3, Boston, MA 02114. E-mail: aaaizer@partners.org
  • 1.

    Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer, Version 4, 2013. Available at: NCCN.org. Accessed October 2, 2013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:21852190.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD. Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis. JAMA 2010;304:23732380.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Aizer AA, Paly JJ, Zietman AL. Multidisciplinary care and pursuit of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:30713076.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Kasperzyk JL, Shappley WV 3rd, Kenfield SA. Watchful waiting and quality of life among prostate cancer survivors in the physicians’ health study. J Urol 2011;186:18621867.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Eldefrawy A, Katkoori D, Abramowitz M. Active surveillance vs. treatment for low-risk prostate cancer: a cost comparison. Urol Oncol 2013;31:576580.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Corcoran AT, Peele PB, Benoit RM. Cost comparison between watchful waiting with active surveillance and active treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Urology 2010;76:703707.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994;271:368374.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol 2009;55:18.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373383.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Actuarial Life Table, 2007. Social Security Administration Web site. Available at: http://www.ssa.gov. Accessed September 23, 2013.

  • 12.

    Murphy SL, Xu J, Kochanek KD. Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports 2012;60:151. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_04.pdf. Accessed October 2, 2013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008;358:12501261.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:11171123.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Falit BP, Gross CP, Roberts KB. Integrated prostate cancer centers and over-utilization of IMRT: a close look at fee-for-service medicine in radiation oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010;76:12851288.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Moore MJ, O’Sullivan B, Tannock IF. How expert physicians would wish to be treated if they had genitourinary cancer. J Clin Oncol 1988;6:17361745.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Fowler FJ Jr, McNaughton Collins M, Albertsen PC. Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2000;283:32173222.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Visser BC, Ma Y, Zak Y. Failure to comply with NCCN guidelines for the management of pancreatic cancer compromises outcomes. HPB (Oxford) 2012;14:539547.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Walz J, Gallina A, Saad F. A nomogram predicting 10-year life expectancy in candidates for radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:35763581.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Froehner M, Koch R, Litz RJ. Which patients are at the highest risk of dying from competing causes BJU Int 2012;110:206210.

  • 21.

    Feliu J, Jimenez-Gordo AM, Madero R. Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for terminally ill cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:16131620.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Chow E, Davis L, Panzarella T. Accuracy of survival prediction by palliative radiation oncologists. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:870873.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Korman H, Lanni T Jr, Shah C. Impact of a prostate multidisciplinary clinic program on patient treatment decisions and on adherence to NCCN Guidelines: the William Beaumont Hospital experience. Am J Clin Oncol 2013;36:121125.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Gomella LG, Lin J, Hoffman-Censits J. Enhancing prostate cancer care through the multidisciplinary clinic approach: a 15-year experience. J Oncol Pract 2010;6:e510.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Litton G, Kane D, Clay G. Multidisciplinary cancer care with a patient and physician satisfaction focus. J Oncol Pract 2010;6:e3537.

  • 26.

    Stephenson AJ, Bolla M, Briganti A. Postoperative radiation therapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;61:443451.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2011;364:17081717.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;367:203213.

  • 29.

    Widmark A. Prospective randomized trial comparing external beam radiotherapy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. Presented at: Annual Meeting of The American Society of Radiation Oncology; October 3, 2011; Miami, Florida.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:126131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Johansson JE, Andren O, Andersson SO. Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2004;291:27132719.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 119 101 7
PDF Downloads 39 39 13
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0