Open Access

ARTICLE

Family history in patients who would have been candidates for active surveillance

Mohammed Shahait^1,3, Daniel Lee^1,2, Jessica L. Kim¹, Suzy Na¹, David I. Lee¹

1 Division of Urology, University of Pennsylvania Department of Surgery, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
2 Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Pennsylvania, USA
3 King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan
Address correspondence to Dr. David I. Lee, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Penn Urology, 51 N. 39th Street, MOB Suite 300, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA

Canadian Journal of Urology 2021, 28(2), 10632-10637.

Abstract

Introduction: It is unknown whether a family history of prostate cancer confers additional risk among men who are candidates for active surveillance (AS).
Materials and methods: Using a prospectively maintained database of men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) (2010-2018), candidates for AS were identified according to the expanded criteria. Pathological upgrading was defined as a pathologic Gleason score (pGS) of 3+4 or higher for patients with a biopsy GS of 3+3 and a pGS of 4+3 or higher for patients with a biopsy GS of 3+4. Major upgrading was defined as a pGS of 4+4 or higher. The χ2 test was used for comparisons.
Results: Of 1,320 men who were candidates for AS, 288 (21.8%) had a family history of prostate cancer. There were no differences in terms of age, number of positive cores, or number of patients with a GS of 7 between the two groups. Pathological upgrading was observed in 61.1% of the total cohort, with no difference observed between the two groups (60.7% versus 62.5%; p = 0.5).
Conclusion: In men who are eligible for AS according to the expanded criteria, a family history of prostate cancer does not appear to be associated with adverse pathology at RP.

---

Keywords

---