진행성 전립선암의 치료: 국내 전립선암 전문가로 구성된 Prostate Cancer Summit (PCAS) 2016을 통한 전립선암 치료 지침의 확인
Management of Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer: Establishment of Treatment Guidelines Through Prostate Cancer Summit (PCAS) 2016 Composed of Korean Prostate Cancer Experts
- 주제(키워드) Advenced prostate cancer , CRPC , PCAS2016 , APCCC2015
- 주제(기타) 비뇨생식기종양
- 설명문(URI) https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002618363
- 등재 KCI등재
- 발행기관 대한비뇨기종양학회
- 발행년도 2020
- URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/ewha/000000176180
- 본문언어 한국어
- Published As http://dx.doi.org/10.22465/kjuo.2020.18.2.124
초록/요약
Purpose: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2015 was based on topics with controversy in the field of advanced prostate cancer. To understand the Korean urologists perspective regarding the issues, we have conducted a questionnaire named Prostate Cancer Summit (PCAS) 2016, with 9 important subtopics Materials and Methods: Total 9 subtopics have been decided and questions were developed regarding each subtopic. The questions were based on that of APCCC 2015 and translated into Korean for better understanding. Total 51 panelists have voted online on 85 different questions. Results: The survey concluded that testosterone should be measured as a diagnostic criterion for castration resistance prostate cancer (CRPC) and that consensus was reached on issues such as the use of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors in the treatment of predocetaxel and postdocetaxel in CRPC patients. In addition, 76% of the participants agreed that imaging tests were needed before new treatment in CRPC patients, and a majority of participants agreed that periodic imaging tests are necessary regardless of symptoms during treatment for CRPC. However, some issues, such as the use of prostate-specific antigen-based triggers for remediation in CRPC patients, the endocrine manipulation in nonmetastatic CRPC patients, and the onset of treatment in asymptomatic metastatic CRPC patients, were not agreed. Conclusions: The results from PCAS 2016 has addressed some of the issues with controversy. Although the voting results are subjective, it will help guide treatment decisions in topics with less evidence.
more