Literature DB >> 22537761

Historical prostate cancer screening and treatment outcomes from a single institution.

Deanna S Cross1, Mark Ritter, Douglas J Reding.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To quantify outcomes of individuals diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer in a single institution.
DESIGN: Retrospective electronic chart abstraction.
SETTING: Marshfield Clinic, the largest private multispecialty group practice in Wisconsin, and one of the largest in the United States, provides health care services annually to approximately 385,000 unique patients through 1.8 million annual patient encounters. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals within the Marshfield Clinic cancer registry who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1960 and 2009.
METHODS: Electronic chart abstraction from the cancer registry and the electronic medical record was conducted (N=6,181). Data abstracted included age at diagnosis; stage and grade of tumor; prostate specific antigen (PSA) values before, at, and after diagnosis; initial cancer treatment; follow-up time; subsequent cancer treatments; evidence of metastasis; age of death; and cause of death, if known.
RESULTS: The average age of prostate cancer diagnosis has decreased from 70-71 years in the 1960's and 1970's to an average age at diagnosis of 67 years in the 2000's (P<0.001). This decrease in age occurred within the decades of implementation of PSA screening. Approximately 74% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer within the PSA screening era had at least one PSA test, and the presence of a PSA test did not appear to change treatment outcome. Age, grade, and stage were the biggest predictors of prostate cancer outcome. There was no difference in event-free survival between current treatment types (radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, photon treatment, or intensity-modulated radiation therapy) (2003 or later) when stratified by age (greater than 85%, 5-year event-free survival P=0.85); however, more events occurred with older external beam radiation treatment regimens (1993-2003) (70% to 75%, 5-year event-free survival P=0.001).
CONCLUSION: Individuals diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer within the Marshfield Clinic comprehensive care setting follow national trends with a decreased age of diagnosis since the advent of PSA screening. Outcomes for individuals treated within the Clinic system are also comparable to national trends.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22537761      PMCID: PMC3421330          DOI: 10.3121/cmr.2011.1042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Med Res        ISSN: 1539-4182


  35 in total

1.  Cancer detection and cancer characteristics in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)--Section Rotterdam. A comparison of two rounds of screening.

Authors:  Renske Postma; Fritz H Schröder; Geert J L H van Leenders; Robert F Hoedemaeker; Andre N Vis; Monique J Roobol; Theodorus H van der Kwast
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-01-16       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Surgery versus implant for early prostate cancer: results from a single institution, 1992-2005.

Authors:  John W Colberg; Roy H Decker; Anwar M Khan; Ann McKeon; Lynn D Wilson; Richard E Peschel
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

3.  Prostate cancer--which treatment to choose?

Authors:  Jarrod B Adkison; Mark A Ritter
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-06-23

4.  Patterns of care for radical prostatectomy in the United States from 2003 to 2005.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Nathanael D Hevelone; Marcos D Ferreira; Stuart R Lipsitz; Toni K Choueiri; Martin G Sanda; Craig C Earle
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Effect of increasing radiation doses on local and distant failures in patients with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Patrick A Kupelian; Jay Ciezki; Chandana A Reddy; Eric A Klein; Arul Mahadevan
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Use of the prostate-specific antigen test among U.S. men: findings from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Louie E Ross; Zahava Berkowitz; Donatus U Ekwueme
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Clinical and pathological features of screen vs non-screen-detected prostate cancers: is there a difference?

Authors:  Alexandre E Pelzer; Daniela Colleselli; Jasmin Bektic; Georg Schaefer; Stefano Ongarello; Christian Schwentner; Leo Pallwein; Michael Mitterberger; Eberhard Steiner; Georg Bartsch; Wolfgang Horninger
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-03-13       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Trends in prostate-specific antigen testing from 1995 through 2004.

Authors:  Wildon R Farwell; Jeffrey A Linder; Ashish K Jha
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2007-12-10

Review 9.  A critical review of clinical practice guidelines for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Philipp Dahm; Lawrence L Yeung; Sam S Chang; Michael S Cookson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-06-11       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Surgery vs. radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer. Which is best?

Authors:  Stefan Welz; Maximilian Nyazi; Claus Belka; Ute Ganswindt
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2008-09-07       Impact factor: 3.481

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Heart healthy equals prostate healthy and statins, aspirin, and/or metformin (S.A.M.) are the ideal recommendations for prostate cancer prevention.

Authors:  Mark A Moyad; Nicholas J Vogelzang
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 2.  Current status of biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Vicki M Velonas; Henry H Woo; Cristobal G dos Remedios; Stephen J Assinder
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 5.923

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.