Controversial issues in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: Results from a Canadian consensus forum.
Journal
Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
ISSN: 1911-6470
Titre abrégé: Can Urol Assoc J
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101312644
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
9
11
2019
medline:
9
11
2019
entrez:
9
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The management of advanced prostate cancer (PCa) continues to evolve with the emergence of new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. As a result, there are multiple areas in this landscape with a lack of high-level evidence to guide practice. Consensus initiatives are an approach to establishing practice guidance in areas where evidence is unclear. We conducted a Canadian-based consensus forum to address key controversial areas in the management of advanced PCa. As part of a modified Delphi process, a core scientific group of PCa physicians (n=8) identified controversial areas for discussion and developed an initial set of questions, which were then reviewed and finalized with a larger group of 29 multidisciplinary PCa specialists. The main areas of focus were non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), oligometastatic prostate cancer, genetic testing in prostate cancer, and imaging in advanced prostate cancer. The predetermined threshold for consensus was set at 74% (agreement from 20 of 27 participating physicians). Consensus participants included uro-oncologists (n=13), medical oncologists (n=10), and radiation oncologists (n=4). Of the 64 questions, consensus was reached in 30 questions (n=5 unanimously). Consensus was more common for questions related to biochemical recurrence, sequencing of therapies, and mCRPC. A Canadian consensus forum in PCa identified areas of agreement in nearly 50% of questions discussed. Areas of variability may represent opportunities for further research, education, and sharing of best practices. These findings reinforce the value of multidisciplinary consensus initiatives to optimize patient care.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31702544
pii: cuaj.6082
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.6082
pmc: PMC7124178
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
E137-E149Références
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jun 28;378(26):2465-2474
pubmed: 29949494
Cancer. 2011 May 15;117(10):2077-85
pubmed: 21523719
Eur Urol. 2018 Feb;73(2):178-211
pubmed: 28655541
N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 12;378(15):1408-1418
pubmed: 29420164
Lancet. 2018 Dec 1;392(10162):2353-2366
pubmed: 30355464
Eur Urol. 2015 Nov;68(5):891-8
pubmed: 26129856
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Apr;67(4):401-9
pubmed: 24581294
Intern Emerg Med. 2015 Apr;10(3):373-83
pubmed: 25430678
Eur Urol. 2017 Jul;72(1):10-13
pubmed: 28314611
Cancer. 2018 Jul 1;124(13):2785-2800
pubmed: 29786848
BMJ. 1995 Aug 5;311(7001):376-80
pubmed: 7640549
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Apr;15(2):e217-e222
pubmed: 27522450
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2015 Jul;24(4):574-89
pubmed: 25757457
Urology. 2016 Oct;96:171-176
pubmed: 27318265