PURPOSE: Watchful waiting (WW) is an acceptable strategy for managing prostate cancer (PC) in older men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has resulted in a stage migration, with diagnoses made in younger men. An analysis of the Department of Defense Center for Prostate Disease Research Database was undertaken to document younger men with low- or intermediate-grade PC who initially chose WW. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified men choosing WW who were diagnosed between January 1991 and January 2002, were 70 years or younger, had a Gleason score < or = 6 with no Gleason pattern 4, had no more than three positive cores on biopsy, and whose clinical stage was < or = T2 and PSA level was < or = 20. We analyzed their likelihood of remaining on WW, the factors associated with secondary treatment, and the influence of comorbidities. RESULTS: Three hundred thirteen men were identified. Median follow-up time was 3.8 years. Median age was 65.4 years (range, 41 to 70 years). Ninety-eight patients remained on WW; 215 proceeded to treatment. A total of 57.3% and 73.2% chose treatment within the first 2 and 4 years, respectively. Median PSA doubling time (DT) was 2.5 years for those who underwent therapy; those remaining on WW had a median DT of 25.8 years. The type of secondary treatment was associated with the number of patient's comorbidities (P =.012). CONCLUSION: Younger patients who choose WW seemed more likely to receive secondary treatment than older patients. PSA DTs often predict the use of secondary treatment. The number of comorbidities a patient has influences the type of secondary therapy chosen. The WW strategy may better be termed temporarily deferred therapy.
PURPOSE: Watchful waiting (WW) is an acceptable strategy for managing prostate cancer (PC) in older men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has resulted in a stage migration, with diagnoses made in younger men. An analysis of the Department of Defense Center for Prostate Disease Research Database was undertaken to document younger men with low- or intermediate-grade PC who initially chose WW. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified men choosing WW who were diagnosed between January 1991 and January 2002, were 70 years or younger, had a Gleason score < or = 6 with no Gleason pattern 4, had no more than three positive cores on biopsy, and whose clinical stage was < or = T2 and PSA level was < or = 20. We analyzed their likelihood of remaining on WW, the factors associated with secondary treatment, and the influence of comorbidities. RESULTS: Three hundred thirteen men were identified. Median follow-up time was 3.8 years. Median age was 65.4 years (range, 41 to 70 years). Ninety-eight patients remained on WW; 215 proceeded to treatment. A total of 57.3% and 73.2% chose treatment within the first 2 and 4 years, respectively. Median PSA doubling time (DT) was 2.5 years for those who underwent therapy; those remaining on WW had a median DT of 25.8 years. The type of secondary treatment was associated with the number of patient's comorbidities (P =.012). CONCLUSION: Younger patients who choose WW seemed more likely to receive secondary treatment than older patients. PSA DTs often predict the use of secondary treatment. The number of comorbidities a patient has influences the type of secondary therapy chosen. The WW strategy may better be termed temporarily deferred therapy.
Authors: Stephen B Williams; Simpa Salami; Meredith M Regan; Donna P Ankerst; John T Wei; Mark A Rubin; Ian M Thompson; Martin G Sanda Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-10-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kenneth S Tseng; Patricia Landis; Jonathan I Epstein; Bruce J Trock; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-03-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Andrew J Stephenson; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham; Fernando J Bianco; Ofer Yossepowitch; Andrew J Vickers; Eric A Klein; David P Wood; Peter T Scardino Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-07-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stacy Loeb; Anna Kettermann; Luigi Ferrucci; Patricia Landis; E Jeffrey Metter; H Ballentine Carter Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-07-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nicole L Simone; Anurag K Singh; Janet E Cowan; Benjamin P Soule; Peter R Carroll; Mark S Litwin Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-10-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Anna Kettermann; Christopher Warlick; E Jeffrey Metter; Patricia Landis; Patrick C Walsh; Jonathan I Epstein Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 7.450