| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- 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.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Malmström, Per, et al.
(creator_code:cre_t)
-
Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1052-6773 .- 1745-6614. ; 2010:41, s. 162-177
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Individual patient data were available for all four of the randomized trials that began before 1995, and that compared adjuvant radiotherapy vs no radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). A total of 3729 women were eligible for analysis. Radiotherapy reduced the absolute 10-year risk of any ipsilateral breast event (ie, either recurrent DCIS or invasive cancer) by 15.2% (SE 1.6%, 12.9% vs 28.1% 2 P <.00001), and it was effective regardless of the age at diagnosis, extent of breast-conserving surgery, use of tamoxifen, method of DCIS detection, margin status, focality, grade, comedonecrosis, architecture, or tumor size. The proportional reduction in ipsilateral breast events was greater in older than in younger women (2P < .0004 for difference between proportional reductions; 10-year absolute risks: 18.5% vs 29.1% at ages <50 years, 10.8% vs 27.8% at ages ≥ 50 years) but did not differ significantly according to any other available factor. Even for women with negative margins and small low-grade tumors, the absolute reduction in the 10-year risk of ipsilateral breast events was 18.0% (SE 5.5, 12.1% vs 30.1%, 2P = .002). After 10 years of follow-up, there was, however, no significant effect on breast cancer mortality, mortality from causes other than breast cancer, or all-cause mortality.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
