Literature DB >> 19755699

Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management.

Grace L Lu-Yao1, Peter C Albertsen, Dirk F Moore, Weichung Shih, Yong Lin, Robert S DiPaola, Michael J Barry, Anthony Zietman, Michael O'Leary, Elizabeth Walker-Corkery, Siu-Long Yao.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Most newly diagnosed prostate cancers are clinically localized, and major treatment options include surgery, radiation, or conservative management. Although conservative management can be a reasonable choice, there is little contemporary prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-era data on outcomes with this approach.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of clinically localized prostate cancer managed without initial attempted curative therapy in the PSA era. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based cohort study of men aged 65 years or older when they were diagnosed (1992-2002) with stage T1 or T2 prostate cancer and whose cases were managed without surgery or radiation for 6 months after diagnosis. Living in areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, the men were followed up for a median of 8.3 years (through December 31, 2007). Competing risk analyses were performed to assess outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ten-year overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and major cancer related interventions.
RESULTS: Among men who were a median age of 78 years at cancer diagnosis, 10-year prostate cancer-specific mortality was 8.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2%-12.8%) for men with well-differentiated tumors; 9.1% (95% CI, 8.3%-10.1%) for those with moderately differentiated tumors, and 25.6% (95% CI, 23.7%-28.3%) for those with poorly differentiated tumors. The corresponding 10-year risks of dying of competing causes were 59.8% (95% CI, 53.2%-67.8%), 57.2% (95% CI, 52.6%-63.9%), and 56.5% (95% CI, 53.6%-58.8%), respectively. Ten-year disease-specific mortality for men aged 66 to 74 years diagnosed with moderately differentiated disease was 60% to 74% lower than earlier studies: 6% (95% CI, 4%-8%) in the contemporary PSA era (1992-2002) compared with results of previous studies (15%-23%) in earlier eras (1949-1992). Improved survival was also observed in poorly differentiated disease. The use of chemotherapy (1.6%) or major interventions for spinal cord compression (0.9%) was uncommon.
CONCLUSIONS: Results following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 1992 through 2002 are better than outcomes among patients diagnosed in the 1970s and 1980s. This may be due, in part, to additional lead time, overdiagnosis related to PSA testing, grade migration, or advances in medical care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19755699      PMCID: PMC2822438          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  36 in total

1.  Determining cause of death in prostate cancer: are death certificates valid?

Authors:  D F Penson; P C Albertsen; P S Nelson; M Barry; J L Stanford
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-12-05       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Overview of the SEER-Medicare data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States elderly population.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; Carrie N Klabunde; Deborah Schrag; Peter B Bach; Gerald F Riley
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  A comparison of cause of death determination in men previously diagnosed with prostate cancer who died in 1985 or 1995.

Authors:  P C Albertsen; S Walters; J A Hanley
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data.

Authors:  C N Klabunde; A L Potosky; J M Legler; J L Warren
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Fifteen-year survival in prostate cancer. A prospective, population-based study in Sweden.

Authors:  J E Johansson; L Holmberg; S Johansson; R Bergström; H O Adami
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-02-12       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  National practice patterns and time trends in androgen ablation for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg; Gary D Grossfeld; Deborah P Lubeck; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-07-02       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial:VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Michael J Barry; Karen M Jones; Young Kwon; Jeffrey R Gingrich; William J Aronson; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Steven Fox
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-08-23       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Gerrit Draisma; Rob Boer; Suzie J Otto; Ingrid W van der Cruijsen; Ronald A M Damhuis; Fritz H Schröder; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-06-18       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Utility of the SEER-Medicare data to identify chemotherapy use.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; Linda C Harlan; Angela Fahey; Beth A Virnig; Jean L Freeman; Carrie N Klabunde; Gregory S Cooper; Kevin B Knopf
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Studying radiation therapy using SEER-Medicare-linked data.

Authors:  Beth A Virnig; Joan L Warren; Gregory S Cooper; Carrie N Klabunde; Nicola Schussler; Jean Freeman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  129 in total

1.  [Patterns of care of patients with localized prostate cancer in Germany: a health care study with focus on active surveillance].

Authors:  F K H Chun; A Becker; L A Kluth; D Seiler; D Schnell; M Fisch; M Graefen; L Weissbach
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Management of low (favourable)-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  External-beam radiation therapy should be given with androgen deprivation treatment for intermediate-risk prostate cancer: new confirmatory evidence.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 4.  Focal therapy of prostate cancer: evidence-based analysis for modern selection criteria.

Authors:  Michael R Abern; Matvey Tsivian; Thomas J Polascik
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US Preventive Services Task Force Review.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Andrew J Vickers; Monique Roobol; James Eastham; Peter Scardino; Hans Lilja; Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Diagnosis of localized, screen-detected, prostate cancer--crisis or opportunity?

Authors:  Siu-Long Yao; Grace L Lu-Yao
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-06-18       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Response.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 8.  Novel therapies for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  J M Clarke; A J Armstrong
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2013-03

9.  Variation in quality of care among older men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ravishankar Jayadevappa; Sumedha Chhatre; Jerry C Johnson; S Bruce Malkowicz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 10.  Locally advanced prostate cancer: optimal therapy in older patients.

Authors:  Michael Froehner; Manfred P Wirth
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.