| 1. |
- Holmberg, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Results from the scandinavian prostate cancer group trial number 4 : a randomized controlled trial of radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs. - Cary, USA : Oxford University Press. - 1052-6773 .- 1745-6614. ; 2012:45, s. 230-233
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Trial Number 4 (SPCG-4), 347 men were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy and 348 to watchful waiting. In the most recent analysis (median follow-up time = 12.8 years), the cumulative mortality curves had been stable over the follow-up. At 15 years, the absolute risk reduction of dying from prostate cancer was 6.1% following randomization to radical prostatectomy, compared with watchful waiting. Hence, 17 need to be randomized to operation to avert one death. Data on self-reported symptoms, stress from symptoms, and quality of life were collected at 4 and 12.2 years of median follow-up. These questionnaire studies show an intricate pattern of symptoms evolving after surgery, hormonal treatments, signs of tumor progression, and also from natural aging. This article discusses some of the main findings of the SPCG-4 study. The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Trial Number 4 (SPCG-4) started in 1989 when radical prostatectomy was newly introduced in Scandinavia and when there was essentially no prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in asymptomatic men; such testing only became common at the end of the inclusion of the trial a decade later. However, the trial data continue to be important for several reasons. In many parts of the world, the clinical panorama of prostate cancer still resembles that in Sweden in the early 1990s. The trial results point to many of the issues that modern diagnosis and treatment have to solve. SPCG-4 is to date the only trial to inform about both forces of mortality and self-reported symptoms and quality of life in men after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting two decades and more out after a primary diagnosis of prostate cancer. According to the protocol (http://www.roc.se/prostata/SPCG-4.pdf), the main trial data have been updated every 3 years since 2002 (1–6). In this presentation, we highlight some of the main findings with bearing on the topic of this conference and discuss some issues that have been raised when the trial results have been presented.
|
|
| 2. |
- Szulkin, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
Prostate cancer risk variants are not associated with disease progression
- 2012
-
Ingår i: The Prostate. - : Wiley. - 0270-4137 .- 1097-0045. ; 72:1, s. 30-39
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Currently used prognostic markers are limited in their ability to accurately predict disease progression among patients with localized prostate cancer. We examined 23 reported prostate cancer susceptibility variants for association with disease progression. METHODS: Disease progression was explored among 4,673 Swedish patients treated for clinically localized prostate cancer between 1997 and 2002. Prostate cancer progression was defined according to primary treatment as a composed event reflecting termination of deferred treatment, biochemical recurrence, local progression, or presence of distant metastasis. Association between single variants, and all variants combined, were performed in Cox regression analysis assuming both log-additive and co-dominant genetic models. RESULTS: Three of the 23 genetic variants explored were nominally associated with prostate cancer progression; rs9364554 (P = 0.041) on chromosome 6q25 and rs10896449 (P = 0.029) on chromosome 11q13 among patients treated with curative intent; and rs4054823 (P = 0.008) on chromosome 17p12 among patients on surveillance. However, none of these associations remained statistically significant after correction for multiple testing. The combined effect of all susceptibility variants was not associated with prostate cancer progression neither among patients receiving treatment with curative intent (P = 0.14) nor among patients on surveillance (P = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: We observed no evidence for an association between any of 23 established prostate cancer genetic risk variants and disease progression. Accumulating evidence suggests separate genetic components for initiation and progression of prostate cancer. Future studies systematically searching for genetic risk variants associated with prostate cancer progression and prognosis are warranted. Prostate © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
|
|
| 3. |
- Vickers, Andrew, et al.
(författare)
-
Individualized Estimation of the Benefit of Radical Prostatectomy from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Randomized Trial
- 2012
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 62:2, s. 204-209
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Although there is randomized evidence that radical prostatectomy improves survival, there are few data on how benefit varies by baseline risk. Objective: We aimed to create a statistical model to calculate the decrease in risk of death associated with surgery for an individual patient, using stage, grade, prostate-specific antigen, and age as predictors. Design, setting, and participants: A total of 695 men with T1 or T2 prostate cancer participated in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 4 trial (SPCG-4). Intervention: Patients in SPCG-4 were randomized to radical prostatectomy or conservative management. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Competing risk models were created separately for the radical prostatectomy and the watchful waiting group, with the difference between model predictions constituting the estimated benefit for an individual patient. Results and limitations: Individualized predictions of surgery benefit varied widely depending on age and tumor characteristics. At 65 yr of age, the absolute 10-yr risk reduction in prostate cancer mortality attributable to radical prostatectomy ranged from 4.5% to 17.2% for low-versus high-risk patients. Little expected benefit was associated with surgery much beyond age 70. Only about a quarter of men had an individualized benefit within even 50% of the mean. A limitation is that estimates from SPCG-4 have to be applied cautiously to contemporary patients. Conclusions: Our model suggests that it is hard to justify surgery in patients with Gleason 6, T1 disease or in those patients much above 70 yr of age. Conversely, surgery seems unequivocally of benefit for patients who have Gleason 8, or Gleason 7, stage T2. For patients with Gleason 6 T2 and Gleason 7 T1, treatment is more of a judgment call, depending on patient preference and other clinical findings, such as the number of positive biopsy cores and comorbidities.
|
|
