Because low-risk prostate cancer is unlikely to spread or impact survival, experts and guidelines recommend energetic surveillance, which involves regular monitoring and thus avoid or delay treatment like surgery or radiation therapy and their life-changing complications. A brand new study examined the rates of energetic surveillance use and evaluated the aspects related to choosing this management strategy over surgery or radiation, with a give attention to underserved Black patients who’ve been underrepresented in prior studies. The findings are published by Wiley online in CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society.

For the study, called the Treatment Options in Prostate Cancer Study, Jinping Xu, MD, MS, of Wayne State University, and her colleagues analyzed data from metro-Detroit, Michigan, and Georgia cancer registries, specializing in patient self-reported information related to Black and white patients who were newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer in 2014–2017.

Amongst 1,688 patients, 57% selected energetic surveillance (51% of Black patients and 61% of white patients) over other treatments. After adjusting for other influencing aspects, the strongest determinant of energetic surveillance uptake was a urologist’s advice to decide on this feature. Other aspects linked with the choice to undergo energetic surveillance included a shared patient-physician treatment decision and greater knowledge about prostate cancer. Also, participants living in metro-Detroit were more more likely to select energetic surveillance than those living in Georgia.

Conversely, men were less more likely to try energetic surveillance if their considerations were strongly influenced by the will to realize a “cure” or they expected to “live longer” with treatment, or in the event that they perceived that their low-risk prostate cancer diagnosis was more “serious.”

Education and interventions for patients and particularly urologists that address these aspects may increase the usage of really useful energetic surveillance amongst individuals with low-risk prostate cancer.

I’m glad to see that the vast majority of our study participants chosen energetic surveillance, which indicates that acceptance has improved over the past decade; nonetheless, there may be room for greater acceptance. Our study findings shed recent light on potentially modifiable aspects that can assist further increase energetic surveillance use amongst patients with newly diagnosed low-risk prostate cancer to avoid unnecessary invasive treatment and improve their quality of life.”

Dr. Jinping Xu, MD, MS, of Wayne State University