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.

  • Paper
  • Published:

Integrating risk profiles for disease progression in the treatment choice for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia: a combined analysis of external evidence and clinical expertise

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 8, pages 369–374 (2005)Cite this article

Abstract

The RAND appropriateness method was used to explore the relevance of risk factors for disease progression in the treatment choice for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). A total of, 12 international experts assessed the appropriateness of various treatments for 243 risk profiles. Highest appropriateness rates were found for α1-adrenoceptor antagonists (68% of profiles) and combination therapy (46%). A large prostate volume was the dominant argument in favour of 5α-reductase inhibitors and combination therapy, but was irrelevant for the choice of surgery. Considerable postvoid residual, severe symptoms and poor maximum flow rate were the most important factors in favour of surgery.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lee AJ et al. The natural history of untreated lower urinary tract symptoms in middle-aged and elderly men over a period of five years. Eur Urol 1998; 34: 325–332.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dobrovits M et al. A longitudinal prospective study of men with mild symptoms of BOO treated with watchful waiting over 4 years. Eur Urol Suppl 2003; 2: 26 (Abstract 96).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tubaro A, Miano L . Managing the consequences of obstruction. Eur Urol Suppl 2002; 1: 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. McConnell JD et al. The long-term effect of doxazosin, finasteride, and combination therapy on the clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2387–2398.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jacobsen SJ et al. Natural history of prostatism: risk factors for acute urinary retention. J Urol 1997; 158: 481–487.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. McConnell JD et al. The effect of finasteride on the risk of acute urinary retention and the need for surgical treatment among men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 557–563.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Roehrborn CG et al. Serum prostate-specific antigen concentration is a powerful predictor of acute urinary retention and need for surgery in men with clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 1999; 53: 473–480.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McConnell JD et al. Baseline measures predict the risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia clinical progression in placebo-treated patients. J Urol 2003; 169 (Suppl): 332 (Abstract 1287).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Roehrborn CG, Boyle P, Nickel JC . PSA is a significant predictor of objective parameters in men at risk of BPH progression. J Urol 2003; 169 (Suppl): 364–365, (Abstract 1362).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Jimenez-Cruz F . Identifying patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) at risk for progression. Eur Urol Suppl 2003; 2: 6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lowe FC et al. Risk factors for disease progression in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH): a systematic analysis of expert opinion. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2005; June 14 (Epub ahead of print).

  12. Brook RH et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1986; 2: 53–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Shekelle P . The appropriateness method. Med Decis Making 2004; 24: 228–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Meesen B . LUTS/BPH Progression. A Literature Review on Risk Factors for Progression and Impact of Medical Therapy on Progression. ISMAR Healthcare: Lier, Belgium, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  15. O'Leary M et al. Treatment choice in relation to the patient's risk profile in lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic analysis of expert opinion. J Urol 2004; 171 (4 Suppl): 357 (Abstract 1357).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fitch K et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. User's Manual. RAND: Santa Monica, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Roehrborn CG, Boyle P, Gould AL, Waldstreicher J . Serum prostate-specific antigen as a predictor of prostate volume in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 1999; 53: 581–589.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Vaughan ED . Medical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia—are two drugs better than one? N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2449–2451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. AUA Practice Guidelines Committee. AUA guideline on management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (2003). Chapter 1: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol 2003; 170: 530–547.

  20. Stoevelaar HJ, McDonnell J, Van de Beek C, Casparie AF . Appropriate treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia; refining the indications for treatment by systematic analysis of expert opinion. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1999; 143: 2425–2429.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stoevelaar HJ et al. Lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction: how can clinical expertise contribute to rational management? Eur Urol 2001; 39 (Suppl 3): 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McDonnell J, Stoevelaar HJ, Bosch JL, Kahan JP . The appropriateness of treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a comparison of Dutch and multinational criteria. Health Policy 2001; 57: 45–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Taunton & Somerset Hospital, Taunton, UK

    M Speakman

  2. Fundacion Puigvert/CM Teknon, Barcelona, Spain

    J Batista

  3. PAN-Klinik am Neumarkt, Cologne, Germany

    R Berges

  4. GH Pitié-Salpétrière, Paris, France

    E Chartier-Kastler

  5. Ospedale S. Anna, Como, Italy

    G Conti

  6. CHU Saint Louis, Paris, France

    F Desgrandchamps

  7. Zentralkrankenhaus St.-Juergenstrasse, Bremen, Germany

    K Dreikorn

  8. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, New York, USA

    F Lowe

  9. Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, USA

    M O'Leary

  10. Medical Sciences University of the São Paulo Santa Casa Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil

    M Perez

  11. University of Toronto & Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada

    J Trachtenberg

  12. La Sapienza University, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy

    A Tubaro

  13. Ismar Healthcare, Lier, Belgium

    B Meesen & L Smets

  14. Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    H Stoevelaar

Authors
  1. M Speakman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J Batista
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R Berges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E Chartier-Kastler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G Conti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. F Desgrandchamps
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. K Dreikorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. F Lowe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. M O'Leary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. M Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. J Trachtenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. A Tubaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. B Meesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. L Smets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. H Stoevelaar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M Speakman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Speakman, M., Batista, J., Berges, R. et al. Integrating risk profiles for disease progression in the treatment choice for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia: a combined analysis of external evidence and clinical expertise. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 8, 369–374 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500827

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500827

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links