Literature DB >> 20965646

A competing-risks analysis of survival after alternative treatment modalities for prostate cancer patients: 1988-2006.

Firas Abdollah1, Maxine Sun, Rodolphe Thuret, Claudio Jeldres, Zhe Tian, Alberto Briganti, Shahrokh F Shariat, Paul Perrotte, Patrizio Rigatti, Francesco Montorsi, Pierre I Karakiewicz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of prostate cancer (PCa) treatment modalities is a subject of continuous debate.
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that significant differences in survival rates may exist among PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), radiation therapy (RT), and observation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We focused on 404,604 patients with clinically localized PCa within 17 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries. MEASUREMENTS: Competing-risks survival analyses were used to estimate cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates. Patients were stratified according to treatment type, age group, and PCa risk group (high risk: T2c and/or Gleason score 8-10; low to intermediate risk: all others). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The 10-yr CSM and OCM rates were 6.1% and 29.2%, respectively. In RP, RT, and observation patients, CSM rates were 3.6%, 6.5%, and 10.8% (p<0.001), respectively; OCM rates were 17.1%, 32.4%, and 48.9% (p<0.001), respectively. In low- to intermediate-risk patients, the lowest CSM (1.3-3.7%) and OCM (6.9-31.6%) rates within all age categories except octogenarians (8.9% and 62.8%, respectively) were recorded in RP. In high-risk patients, the lowest CSM (5.8-7.2%) and OCM (8.7-16.1%) rates in patients aged ≤69 yr were also recorded in RP. RT was equally favorable to RP in the 70-79 age category and appeared ideal in all octogenarian patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that RP provides the most favorable survival rates in most patients. The exception is octogenarian men, in whom RT provides the best results. Finally, the least-favorable outcomes were recorded after observation. However, these findings must be interpreted within the context of the limitations of observational data.
Copyright © 2010 European Association of Urology. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20965646     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  39 in total

Review 1.  Radical prostatectomy as primary treatment of high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alexandre Ingels; Alexandre de la Taille; Guillaume Ploussard
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  mRNA Expression Profiles for Prostate Cancer following Fractionated Irradiation Are Influenced by p53 Status.

Authors:  Charles B Simone; Molykutty John-Aryankalayil; Sanjeewani T Palayoor; Adeola Y Makinde; David Cerna; Michael T Falduto; Scott R Magnuson; C Norman Coleman
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 4.243

3.  Prostate cancer: epidemiologic studies and changing clinical practice.

Authors:  Giacomo Novara; Vincenzo Ficarra
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Preoperative characteristics of high-Gleason disease predictive of favourable pathological and clinical outcomes at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Phillip M Pierorazio; Ashley E Ross; Brian M Lin; Jonathan I Epstein; Misop Han; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin; Christian P Pavlovich; Edward M Schaeffer
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 5.  The oncologic role of local treatment in primary metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  Pirus Ghadjar; Alberto Briganti; Peter J L De Visschere; Jurgen J Fütterer; Gianluca Giannarini; Hendrik Isbarn; Piet Ost; Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Christian I Surcel; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Inge M van Oort; Ofer Yossepowitch; Guillaume Ploussard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-07-05       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Treatment trends and Medicare reimbursements for localized prostate cancer in elderly patients.

Authors:  Paolo Dell'oglio; Anne Sophie Valiquette; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Zhe Tian; Vincent Trudeau; Alessandro Larcher; Shahrokh F Shariat; Umberto Capitanio; Alberto Briganti; Markus Graefen; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 7.  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

8.  External beam radiation therapy improves survival in high- and intermediate-risk non-metastatic octogenarian prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Sophie Knipper; Cristina Dzyuba-Negrean; Carlotta Palumbo; Angela Pecoraro; Giuseppe Rosiello; Zhe Tian; Alberto Briganti; Fred Saad; Derya Tilki; Markus Graefen; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 9.  Biomarkers in prostate cancer surveillance and screening: past, present, and future.

Authors:  K Clint Cary; Mathew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2013-12

Review 10.  The comparative oncologic effectiveness of available management strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mark D Tyson; David F Penson; Matthew J Resnick
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.498

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.