The effect of urologist experience on choosing active surveillance for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the urologist's experience in selecting active surveillance (AS) versus immediate treatment (IT) for low-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

Men with low-risk prostate cancer were enrolled from March 2011 to August 2013 at 13 medical centers in Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The AS cohort was defined as men who had cT1-T2a stage prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, a biopsy revealing Gleason grade ≤6, fewer than three biopsy cores positive, ≤50 % cancer in any core, and not undergone immediate therapy (surgery, radiation, other) within 6 months following diagnosis. The urologist's experience (age, number of years in practice, number of robotic surgeries performed, and fellowship experience in oncology and/or robotics) was then compared between AS and IT cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 4754 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 713 men satisfied with inclusion criteria; 433 (60.7 %) and 280 (39.3 %) chose AS and IT, respectively. A total of 87 urologists were included. Univariate and multivariate adjusted analyses revealed no differences in urologist's age or years in practice. Patients who saw urologists who had performed ≥50 robotic surgeries were less likely to choose AS (OR 0.40, 95 % CI 0.25-0.66). Patients who saw urologists with a fellowship in oncology and/or robotics were more than twice as likely to choose AS (OR 2.27, 95 % CI 1.38-3.75).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the decision to pursue AS may be influenced by the urologist's experience.