A newly published report, indicating a high level of use of active surveillance (AS) is encouraging; however, the substantial variability in levels of implementation indicate that some urologists remain uncertain of this approach. This report encourages the standardized implementation of AS and improved counselling of patients that are eligible for such monitoring.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Womble, P. R. et al. Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 67, 44–50 (2015).
Bokhorst, L. P. et al. A decade of active surveillance in the PRIAS Study: an update and evaluation of the criteria used to recommend a switch to active treatment. Eur. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.007 (2016).
Cher, M. L. et al. Appropriateness criteria for active surveillance of prostate cancer. J. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.005 (2016).
Epstein, J. I. et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 40, 244–252 (2016).
Fitch, K. et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual (RAND, 2001).
Lawson, E. H. et al. The appropriateness method has acceptable reliability and validity for assessing overuse and underuse of surgical procedures. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 65, 1133–1143 (2012).
Sohn, W. et al. Impact of adherence to quality measures for localized prostate cancer on patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes, patient satisfaction, and treatment-related complications. Med. Care. 54, 738–744 (2016).
SooHoo, N. F. et al. Development of quality of care indicators for patients undergoing total hip or total knee replacement. BMJ Qual. Saf. 20, 153–157 (2011).
Brar, S. et al. Defining surgical quality in gastric cancer: a RAND/UCLA appropriateness study. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 217, 347–357.e1 (2013).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Avulova, S., Barocas, D. Active surveillance appropriateness criteria — a way forward. Nat Rev Urol 13, 633–634 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2016.202
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2016.202
