The objective of this project is to pilot an approach for developing future research priorities and suggesting specific projects to address evidence gaps. From the results of this and comparable pilot projects conducted by other Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs), AHRQ will identify generalizable strategies and lessons learned.

The topic of this pilot project, the comparative effectiveness of treatments for localized prostate cancer, was selected because of its importance. The Minnesota EPC completed a comparative effectiveness review (CER) on this topic in 2008 for AHRQ.¹ This pilot project amends the list of recommendations from that report and creates prioritized lists of research gaps and proposed research studies. Subsequently, management strategies for local prostate cancer were in the first quartile of the Institute of Medicine’s 100 initial priority topics for comparative effectiveness research:

Compare the effectiveness of management strategies for localized prostate cancer (e.g., active surveillance, radical prostatectomy [conventional, robotic, and laparoscopic], and radiotherapy [conformal, brachytherapy, proton beam, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy]) on survival, recurrence, side effects, quality of life, and costs.²