ISSN 2149-3235 | E-ISSN 2149-3057
Original Article
Is active surveillance an appropriate approach to manage prostate cancer patients with Gleason Score 3+3 who met the criteria for active surveillance?
1 Infertility and Reproductive Health Research Center (irhrc), Shahid Beheshti Medical Science University, Tehran, Iran  
2 Department of Urology, Shohadae-tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran  
3 Department of Pathology, Shohadae-tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran  
4 Department of Urology, Shahid Modares Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran  
5 Department of Radiology. Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran  
Turk J Urol ; : -
DOI: 10.5152/tud.2018.72920
Key Words: Active surveillance; Gleason Score; prostate cancer; tumor volume; transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate
Abstract

Objective: Prostate cancer is one of the common malignant tumors in men worldwide. Nowadays it seems that Gleason Score 3+3 may not need definite treatment and some of the experts even ignore it as a cancer but we should be aware that in some patients with Gleason Score 3+3 there is a higher risk for harboring higher-grade cancer. We had done this study to evaluate patients with prostate cancer with Gleason Score 3+3 to determine the value of tumor volume in these cases.


Material and methods
: From September 2010 to October 2017, radical prostatectomy was done for 123 sequential patients with localized prostate cancer in two referral centers of Shahid Beheshti Medical University, Tehran, Iran, and 42 cases with Gleason Scores 3+3 which who were candidates for active surveillance were included in the study.


Results
: We interestingly found that 30 of 42 (71.4%) patients had significant tumor volumes (≥0/5 cm3). We concluded that when tumor volume was less than 0.5 cm3, none of the patients had extra prostatic tumor extension. In patients with tumor volume greater than 0.5 cm3, two cases (6.6%) had extra prostatic extension, 4 cases (13.3%) had positive margins, four cases (13.3%) reactive lymph nodes and 16 cases (53.3%) perineural invasion.


Conclusion
: Authors suggest that some patients with Gleason Score 3+3 have tumor volume >0.5 cm3 who are considered having significant cancer pathology and active surveillance may not be appropriate approach to manage all cases with Gleason Score 3+3.


Cite this article as
: Ghiasy S, Abedi AR, Moradi A, Hosseini SY, Karkan MF, Sadri G, et al. Is active surveillance an appropriate approach to manage prostate cancer patients with Gleason Score 3+3 who met the criteria for active surveillance? Turk J Urol 2018. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2018.72920

Key Words
Authors
All
Survey
AVES | Copyright © 2018 Turkish Association of Urology | Latest Update: 08.10.2018