Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: J. Erik Busby x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Mark H. Kawachi, Robert R. Bahnson, Michael Barry, J. Erik Busby, Peter R. Carroll, H. Ballentine Carter, William J. Catalona, Michael S. Cookson, Jonathan I. Epstein, Ruth B. Etzioni, Veda N. Giri, George P. Hemstreet III, Richard J. Howe, Paul H. Lange, Hans Lilja, Kevin R. Loughlin, James Mohler, Judd Moul, Robert B. Nadler, Stephen G. Patterson, Joseph C. Presti, Antoinette M. Stroup, Robert Wake and John T. Wei

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer Early Detection (to view the most recent version of these guidelines, visit the NCCN Web site at www.NCCN.org) provide a set of sequential recommendations detailing a screening and subsequent workup strategy for maximizing the detection of prostate cancer in an early, organ-confined state and attempting to minimize unnecessary procedures. These guidelines were developed for men who have elected to participate in prostate cancer screening; they are not meant to address the controversy regarding population screening. Overview Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in American men. More than 192,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2009, and an estimated 27,360 men will die of this disease.1 During the same period, nearly 20 million men in the United States will be confronted with important decisions regarding early detection for prostate cancer. Men in the United States have an approximately 1 in 6 chance of eventually being diagnosed with this malignancy and about 1 in 30 chance of eventually dying of it.2 African-American men and men with a first-degree relative with prostate cancer (especially cancer found at a younger age) have a higher risk for developing prostate cancer.2–4 In a recent study of 26,111 men, the baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value was found to be a stronger predictive factor than a positive family history or being of African-American heritage.5 Men who undergo regular PSA tests have a higher chance of undergoing a...
Full access

James Mohler, Robert R. Bahnson, Barry Boston, J. Erik Busby, Anthony D'Amico, James A. Eastham, Charles A. Enke, Daniel George, Eric Mark Horwitz, Robert P. Huben, Philip Kantoff, Mark Kawachi, Michael Kuettel, Paul H. Lange, Gary MacVicar, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Julio M. Pow-Sang, Mack Roach III, Eric Rohren, Bruce J. Roth, Dennis C. Shrieve, Matthew R. Smith, Sandy Srinivas, Przemyslaw Twardowski and Patrick C. Walsh

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the number of newly diagnosed prostate cancers in the United States increased dramatically, surpassing lung cancer as the most common cancer in men.1 Experts generally believe that these changes resulted from prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening that detected many early-stage prostate cancers. For example, the percentage of patients with low-risk disease has increased (45.3% in 1999–2001 vs. 29.8% in 1989–1992; P < .0001).2 The incidence of prostate cancer increased 2.0% annually from 1995 to 2001 and has since declined. In 2009, an estimated 192,280 new cases were diagnosed and prostate cancer was expected to account for 25% of new cancer cases in men.1 Fortunately, the age-adjusted death rates from prostate cancer have also declined (–4.1% annually from 1994 to 2001).1 Researchers expect prostate cancer to account for 27,360 deaths in 2009.1 This comparatively low death rate suggests that, unless prostate cancer is becoming biologically less aggressive, increased public awareness with earlier detection and treatment of prostate cancer has begun to affect mortality from this prevalent cancer. However, early detection and treatment of prostate cancers that do not threaten life expectancy cause unnecessary side effects that impair quality of life, increase health care expenses, and decrease the value of PSA and digital rectal examination (DRE) as early detection tests.3,4To properly identify and manage patients with prostate cancer or any other malignancy, physicians must have an in-depth understanding of the natural history and diagnostic, staging, and treatment options. To this end, every year the NCCN...
Full access

James L. Mohler, Andrew J. Armstrong, Robert R. Bahnson, Barry Boston, J. Erik Busby, Anthony Victor D’Amico, James A. Eastham, Charles A. Enke, Thomas Farrington, Celestia S. Higano, Eric Mark Horwitz, Philip W. Kantoff, Mark H. Kawachi, Michael Kuettel, Richard J. Lee, Gary R. MacVicar, Arnold W. Malcolm, David Miller, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Julio M. Pow-Sang, Mack Roach III, Eric Rohren, Stan Rosenfeld, Sandy Srinivas, Seth A. Strope, Jonathan Tward, Przemyslaw Twardowski, Patrick C. Walsh, Maria Ho and Dorothy A. Shead

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Prostate Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with prostate cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight notable recent updates. Abiraterone acetate is a first-in-class hormonal agent that represents a new standard of care for patients with metastatic castration-recurrent prostate cancer who have previously received docetaxel (category 1 recommendation). Abiraterone acetate also received category 2B recommendations in the prechemotherapy setting for asymptomatic patients or symptomatic patients who are not candidates for docetaxel. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel also added new indications for existing agents, including the option of sipuleucel-T as second-line therapy. In addition, brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiation therapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy is now an alternative for patients with high-risk localized tumors or locally advanced disease.