Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Clinical

Benign prostatic hyperplasia during active surveillance for prostate cancer: is it time to define management strategies?

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

In recent years, the criteria determining eligibility for active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) patients have evolved considerably. Factors such as disease stage, PSA values, core involvement at biopsies, Gleason Score (GS), and comprehensive risk score classifications [1, 2] have been reassessed to expand the cohort of patients suitable for AS. Despite this broader eligibility, more than 40% of patients with low-risk disease are treated immediately in the United States (U.S.), leading to an increased number of patients receiving unnecessary treatment [3]. Historically, the implementation of AS within the U.S. has been predominantly associated with academic institutions, with lower adoption rates in community-based urology practices. However, recent trends indicate a substantial and rapid expansion in the utilization of AS across a broader spectrum of healthcare institutions, leading to significant increase of active monitoring among the U.S. population diagnosed with PCa [4, 5].

Interestingly, the broader eligibility criteria have not only resulted in an increased number of patients choosing AS, but also extended the period during which individuals commit to this management strategy. This paradigm shift has consequently led to a rise in the incidence of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) among patients in AS, a condition that typically emerges around the age of 40 and becomes progressively more common thereafter [6]. Currently, there are no specific recommendations regarding the management of patients developing moderate to severe LUTS secondary to BPH requiring surgery during AS, what the preferred surgical intervention should be, and what are the potential implications on the subsequent management of PCa.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Percentage and management strategies for patients undergoing BPH surgery during active surveillance.

References

  1. Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Barocas D, Bitting R, et al. Prostate cancer, version 4.2023, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023;21:1067–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79:243–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooperberg MR, Meeks W, Fang R, Gaylis FD, Catalona WJ, Makarov DV. Time trends and variation in the use of active surveillance for management of low-risk prostate cancer in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6:e231439.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990–2013. JAMA. 2015;314:80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu Y, Hall IJ, Filson C, Howard DH. Trends in the use of active surveillance and treatments in Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2021;39:432.e1–432.e10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gravas S, Malde S, Cornu JN, Gacci M, Gratzke C, Herrmann TRW, et al. From BPH to male LUTS: a 20-year journey of the EAU guidelines. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-023-00700-3.

  7. Bajpai RR, Razdan S, Sanchez-Gonzalez MA, Reddy BN, Razdan S. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy after prior transurethral resection of prostate: an analysis of perioperative, functional, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes. J Endourol. 2022;36:1063–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kretschmer A, Mazzone E, Barletta F, Leni R, Heidegger I, Tsaur I, et al. Initial experience with radical prostatectomy following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Eur Urol Focus. 2021;7:1247–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Liadi Y, Campbell T, Dike P, Harlemon M, Elliott B, Odero-Marah V. Prostate cancer metastasis and health disparities: a systematic review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-023-00667-1.

  10. Scheipner L, Incesu RB, Morra S, Baudo A, Assad A, Jannello LMI, et al. Characteristics of incidental prostate cancer in the United States. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-023-00742-7.

  11. Capitanio U, Autorino R, Bandini M, Briganti A, Cheng L, Cooperberg MR, et al. Incidental prostate cancer (cT1a–cT1b) Is a relevant clinical and research entity and should be fully discussed in the international prostate cancer guidelines. Eur Urol Oncol. 2022;5:256–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Han EA, Nandalur KR, Morgan MA, Arora SS, Loening AM, Bivalacqua TJ, et al. MRI of benign prostatic hyperplasia: important pre- and posttherapeutic considerations. RadioGraphics. 2023;43 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.220096.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Eugenio Bologna, Leslie Claire Licari, Francesco Ditonno & Riccardo Autorino

  2. Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy

    Eugenio Bologna & Leslie Claire Licari

  3. Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

    Francesco Ditonno

  4. Department of Urology, “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy

    Rocco Simone Flammia, Aldo Brassetti & Costantino Leonardo

  5. Department of Urology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

    Antonio Franco & Cosimo De Nunzio

Authors
  1. Eugenio Bologna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leslie Claire Licari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Ditonno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rocco Simone Flammia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aldo Brassetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Costantino Leonardo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Antonio Franco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Cosimo De Nunzio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Riccardo Autorino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization and supervision: EB, RA; Data extraction: EB; Data analysis and interpretation: LCL, RSF; Manuscript drafting: EB, AF, FD; Statistical review: AB; Scientific and grammatical review: CL, CD, RA. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Autorino.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bologna, E., Licari, L.C., Ditonno, F. et al. Benign prostatic hyperplasia during active surveillance for prostate cancer: is it time to define management strategies?. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-024-00837-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-024-00837-9

Search

Advanced search

Quick links