Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with clinically detected localized prostate cancer, but evidence from randomized trials with long-term follow-up is sparse.
We randomly assigned 695 ...men with localized prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy from October 1989 through February 1999 and collected follow-up data through 2017. Cumulative incidence and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and metastasis were estimated in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, and numbers of years of life gained were estimated. We evaluated the prognostic value of histopathological measures with a Cox proportional-hazards model.
By December 31, 2017, a total of 261 of the 347 men in the radical-prostatectomy group and 292 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group had died; 71 deaths in the radical-prostatectomy group and 110 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.41 to 0.74; P<0.001; absolute difference in risk, 11.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.2 to 18.2). The number needed to treat to avert one death from any cause was 8.4. At 23 years, a mean of 2.9 extra years of life were gained with radical prostatectomy. Among the men who underwent radical prostatectomy, extracapsular extension was associated with a risk of death from prostate cancer that was 5 times as high as that among men without extracapsular extension, and a Gleason score higher than 7 was associated with a risk that was 10 times as high as that with a score of 6 or lower (scores range from 2 to 10, with higher scores indicating more aggressive cancer).
Men with clinically detected, localized prostate cancer and a long life expectancy benefited from radical prostatectomy, with a mean of 2.9 years of life gained. A high Gleason score and the presence of extracapsular extension in the radical prostatectomy specimens were highly predictive of death from prostate cancer. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.).
Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with localized prostate cancer; however, important questions regarding long-term benefit remain.
Between 1989 and 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men ...with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy and followed them through the end of 2012. The primary end points in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) were death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and the risk of metastases. Secondary end points included the initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy.
During 23.2 years of follow-up, 200 of 347 men in the surgery group and 247 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group died. Of the deaths, 63 in the surgery group and 99 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer; the relative risk was 0.56 (95% confidence interval CI, 0.41 to 0.77; P=0.001), and the absolute difference was 11.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.5 to 17.5). The number needed to treat to prevent one death was 8. One man died after surgery in the radical-prostatectomy group. Androgen-deprivation therapy was used in fewer patients who underwent prostatectomy (a difference of 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 17.7 to 32.3). The benefit of surgery with respect to death from prostate cancer was largest in men younger than 65 years of age (relative risk, 0.45) and in those with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.38). However, radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduced risk of metastases among older men (relative risk, 0.68; P=0.04).
Extended follow-up confirmed a substantial reduction in mortality after radical prostatectomy; the number needed to treat to prevent one death continued to decrease when the treatment was modified according to age at diagnosis and tumor risk. A large proportion of long-term survivors in the watchful-waiting group have not required any palliative treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.).
To study distribution of coronary artery stenosis among patients with breast cancer (BC) and to assess correlation between radiotherapy (RT) and location of stenosis.
A Swedish BC cohort diagnosed ...from 1970 to 2003 was linked to registers of coronary angiography from 1990 to 2004, which yielded 199 patients. Stenoses of the coronary arteries were graded from 0 to 5, where 0 indicated a normal vessel and 5 indicated occlusion. Two hotspot areas for radiation were defined: proximal right coronary artery (prox RCA), mid and distal left anterior descending artery and distal diagonal (mdLAD + dD). RT regimens were categorized as high or low risk of irradiating the hotspot areas. Left breast/chest wall was considered high risk for mdLAD + dD; left internal mammary chain (IMC), high risk for prox RCA and mdLAD + dD from 1970 to 1995 and thereafter solely for mdLAD + dD; and right IMC, high risk for prox RCA. Other RT targets and no RT were considered low risk. Results were expressed in odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs.
For irradiated left- versus right-sided BC, the OR for grade 3 to 5 stenosis in mdLAD + dD was 4.38 (95% CI, 1.64 to 11.7), and for grade 4 to 5 stenosis, the OR was 7.22 (95% CI, 1.64 to 31.8). For high-risk RT versus low-risk or no RT, the OR for grade 3 to 5 stenosis in hotspot areas was 1.90 (95% CI, 1.11 to 3.24).
An increase of stenosis in mdLAD + dD in irradiated left-sided BC and an association between high-risk RT and stenosis in hotspot areas for radiation indicate a direct link between radiation and location of coronary stenoses.
Lars Holmberg and Andrew Vickers discuss the importance of ensuring prediction models lead to better decision making in light of new research into breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer risk by Ruth ...Pfeiffer and colleagues. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
Breast cancer is uncommon in young women and correlates with a less favourable prognosis; still it is the most frequent cancer in women under 40, accounting for 30-40% of all incident female cancer. ...The aim of this study was to study prognosis in young women, quantifying how much stage at diagnosis and management on the one hand, and tumour biology on the other; each contribute to the worse prognosis seen in this age group.
In a registry based cohort of women aged 20-69 (n = 22 017) with a primary diagnosis of invasive breast cancer (1992-2005), women aged 20-34 (n = 471), 35-39 (n = 858) and 40-49 (n = 4789) were compared with women aged 50-69 years (n = 15 899). The cumulative 5-year relative survival ratio and the relative excess mortality (RER) were calculated. The cumulative 5-year relative survival ratio was lowest in women aged 20-34. The RER was 2.84 for women aged 20-34 and decreased with increasing age (RER 1.76 and 1.17 for women aged 35-39 and 40-49, respectively). The excess risk was, however, present only in disease stages I and II. For women aged 20-34 with stage I disease RER was 4.63, and 6.70 in the subgroup with tumour size 1-10 mm. The absolute difference in stage I between the youngest and the reference groups amounted to nearly 8%, with a 90% 5-year survival in women aged 20-34. In stages IIa and IIb, the relative excess risk was not as dramatic, but the absolute differences approached 15%. The youngest women with small tumours generally received more aggressive treatment than women in older age groups.
After correction for stage, tumour characteristics and treatment, age remained an independent risk factor for breast cancer death in women <35 years of age. The excess risk for young women was only seen in early stages of disease and was most pronounced in women with small tumours. Young women affected by breast cancer have a high risk of dying compared to their middle-aged counterparts even if diagnosed early and receiving an intense treatment.
Purpose The guideline purpose is to provide the urologist with a framework for the early detection of prostate cancer in asymptomatic average risk men. Materials and Methods A systematic review was ...conducted and summarized evidence derived from over 300 studies that addressed the predefined outcomes of interest (prostate cancer incidence/mortality, quality of life, diagnostic accuracy and harms of testing). In addition to the quality of evidence, the panel considered values and preferences expressed in a clinical setting (patient-physician dyad) rather than having a public health perspective. Guideline statements were organized by age group in years (age <40; 40 to 54; 55 to 69; ≥70). Results Except prostate specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening, there was minimal evidence to assess the outcomes of interest for other tests. The quality of evidence for the benefits of screening was moderate, and evidence for harm was high for men age 55 to 69 years. For men outside this age range, evidence was lacking for benefit, but the harms of screening, including over diagnosis and overtreatment, remained. Modeled data suggested that a screening interval of two years or more may be preferred to reduce the harms of screening. Conclusions The Panel recommended shared decision-making for men age 55 to 69 years considering PSA-based screening, a target age group for whom benefits may outweigh harms. Outside this age range, PSA-based screening as a routine could not be recommended based on the available evidence. The entire guideline is available at www.AUAnet.org/education/guidelines/prostate-cancer-detection.cfm.
Summary Background For men with localised prostate cancer, surgery provides a survival benefit compared with watchful waiting. Treatments are associated with morbidity. Results for functional outcome ...and quality of life are rarely reported beyond 10 years and are lacking from randomised settings. We report results for quality of life for men in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) after a median follow-up of more than 12 years. Methods All living Swedish and Finnish men (400 of 695) randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in SPCG-4 from 1989 to 1999 were included in our analysis. An additional 281 men were included in a population-based control group matched for region and age. Physical symptoms, symptom-induced stress, and self-assessed quality of life were evaluated with a study-specific questionnaire. Longitudinal data were available for 166 Swedish men who had answered quality-of-life questionnaires at an earlier timepoint. Findings 182 (88%) of 208 men in the radical prostatectomy group, 167 (87%) of 192 men in the watchful-waiting group, and 214 (76%) of 281 men in the population-based control group answered the questionnaire. Men in SPCG-4 had a median follow-up of 12·2 years (range 7–17) and a median age of 77·0 years (range 61–88). High self-assessed quality of life was reported by 62 (35%) of 179 men allocated radical prostatectomy, 55 (34%) of 160 men assigned to watchful waiting, and 93 (45%) of 208 men in the control group. Anxiety was higher in the SPCG-4 groups (77 43% of 178 and 69 43% of 161 men) than in the control group (68 33% of 208 men; relative risk 1·42, 95% CI 1·07–1·88). Prevalence of erectile dysfunction was 84% (146 of 173 men) in the radical prostatectomy group, 80% (122 of 153) in the watchful-waiting group, and 46% (95 of 208) in the control group and prevalence of urinary leakage was 41% (71 of 173), 11% (18 of 164), and 3% (six of 209), respectively. Distress caused by these symptoms was reported significantly more often by men allocated radical prostatectomy than by men assigned to watchful waiting. In a longitudinal analysis of men in SPCG-4 who provided information at two follow-up points 9 years apart, 38 (45%) of 85 men allocated radical prostatectomy and 48 (60%) of 80 men allocated watchful waiting reported an increase in number of physical symptoms; 50 (61%) of 82 and 47 (64%) of 74 men, respectively, reported a reduction in quality of life. Interpretation For men in SPCG-4, negative side-effects were common and added more stress than was reported in the control population. In the radical prostatectomy group, erectile dysfunction and urinary leakage were often consequences of surgery. In the watchful-waiting group, side-effects can be caused by tumour progression. The number and severity of side-effects changes over time at a higher rate than is caused by normal ageing and a loss of sexual ability is a persistent psychological problem for both interventions. An understanding of the patterns of side-effects and time dimension of their occurrence for each treatment is important for full patient information. Funding US National Institutes of Health; Swedish Cancer Society; Foundation in Memory of Johanna Hagstrand and Sigfrid Linnér.
In 2008, we reported that radical prostatectomy, as compared with watchful waiting, reduces the rate of death from prostate cancer. After an additional 3 years of follow-up, we now report estimated ...15-year results.
From October 1989 through February 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy. Follow-up was complete through December 2009, with histopathological review of biopsy and radical-prostatectomy specimens and blinded evaluation of causes of death. Relative risks, with 95% confidence intervals, were estimated with the use of a Cox proportional-hazards model.
During a median of 12.8 years, 166 of the 347 men in the radical-prostatectomy group and 201 of the 348 in the watchful-waiting group died (P=0.007). In the case of 55 men assigned to surgery and 81 men assigned to watchful waiting, death was due to prostate cancer. This yielded a cumulative incidence of death from prostate cancer at 15 years of 14.6% and 20.7%, respectively (a difference of 6.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.2 to 12.0), and a relative risk with surgery of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.87; P=0.01). The survival benefit was similar before and after 9 years of follow-up, was observed also among men with low-risk prostate cancer, and was confined to men younger than 65 years of age. The number needed to treat to avert one death was 15 overall and 7 for men younger than 65 years of age. Among men who underwent radical prostatectomy, those with extracapsular tumor growth had a risk of death from prostate cancer that was 7 times that of men without extracapsular tumor growth (relative risk, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.6 to 18.4).
Radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduction in the rate of death from prostate cancer. Men with extracapsular tumor growth may benefit from adjuvant local or systemic treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and the National Institutes of Health.).
PDF
