A National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists on Perceived Attitudes and Recommendations of Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

BackgroundClinical factors and barriers affecting adoption of active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remain poorly understood. We performed a national survey of radiation oncologists (RO) and urologists (URO) about the perceptions and recommendations of AS for low-risk PCa.Materials and MethodsIn 2017, we surveyed 915 RO and 940 URO about AS for low-risk PCa in the United States. Survey items queried respondents about their attitudes toward AS and recommendations of AS for low-risk PCa. Pearson chi-square and multivariable logistic regression identified clinical and physician factors related toward AS for low-risk PCa.ResultsOverall, the response rate was 37.3% (n = 691) and was similar for RO and URO (35.7% vs. 38.7%; P = .18). RO were less likely to consider AS effective for low-risk PCa (86.5% vs. 92.0%; P = .04) and more likely to rate higher patient anxiety on AS (49.5% vs. 29.5%; P < .001) than URO. Recommendations of AS varied modestly on the basis of age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and number of cores positive for Gleason 3 + 3 PCa. For a 55-year-old man with PSA 8 with 6 cores of Gleason 6 PCa, both RO and URO infrequently recommended AS (4.4% vs. 5.2%; adjusted odds ratio = 0.6; P = .28). For a 75-year-old patient with PSA 4 with 2 cores of Gleason 6 PCa, URO and RO most often recommended AS (89.6% vs. 83.4%; adjusted odds ratio = 0.5; P = .07).ConclusionRO and URO consider AS to be effective in the clinical management of low-risk PCa, but this varies by clinical and physician factors.