Is active surveillance an appropriate approach to manage prostate cancer patients with Gleason Score 3+3 who met the criteria for active surveillance?

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.