| 1. |
- van den Bergh, Roderick C N, et al.
(author)
-
Gleason score 7 screen-detected prostate cancers initially managed expectantly: outcomes in 50 men.
- 2009
-
In: BJU international. - 1464-410X. ; 103:11, s. 1472-7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE To assess whether men newly diagnosed with Gleason 7 prostate cancer are eligible for active surveillance (AS) instead of radical treatment. AS is an appropriate initial strategy in selected men who are presently diagnosed with prostate cancer, as many tumours will not progress during a patient's lifetime. PATIENTS AND METHODS Cancer-specific-, overall and treatment-free survival were analysed retrospectively in men with Gleason score 7 cancer who were initially managed expectantly. All were screen-detected in four centres of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. RESULTS In 50 men active therapy was initially withheld if they had Gleason 7 disease; 29 of 50 (58%) would otherwise have been suitable for AS, as they had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of < or =10.0 ng/mL, a PSA density of <0.2 ng/mL/mL, stage T1c/T2, and two or fewer positive biopsy-cores; 44 of 50 (88%) had a Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7. The mean (range) age of the men was 69.5 (59.6-76.2) years and the median (interquartile range) follow-up was 2.6 (0.8-5.0) years; the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 1.8. The 6-year cancer-specific survival (nine patients at risk) was 100%, which sharply contrasted with the 68% overall survival. Men alive at the time of analysis had a favourable PSA level and PSA-doubling time. The 6-year treatment-free survival was only 59%, with most patients switching to active therapy, justified on the basis of their PSA level. However, men with otherwise favourable tumour characteristics and a Gleason score of 3 + 4 = 7 remained treatment-free significantly longer than their counterparts with unfavourable other tumour features and a Gleason score of 4 + 3 = 7. CONCLUSION In selected patients with screen-detected Gleason 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer, AS might be an option, especially in those with comorbidity and/or a short life-expectancy.
|
|
| 3. |
- Wolters, Tineke, et al.
(author)
-
The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC.
- 2010
-
In: International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer. - : Wiley. - 1097-0215. ; 126:10, s. 2387-93
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Prostate cancer (PC) mortality is the most valid end-point in screening trials, but could be influenced by the choice of initial treatment if treatment has an effect on mortality. In this study, PC treatment was compared between the screening and control arms in a screening trial. Data were collected from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). The characteristics and initial treatment of PC cases detected in the screening and the control arm were compared. Polytomous logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of study arm on treatment, adjusting for potential confounders and with statistical imputation of missing values. A total of 8,389 PC cases were detected, 5,422 in the screening arm and 3,145 in the control arm. Polytomous regression showed that trial arm was associated with treatment choice after correction for missing values, especially in men with high-risk PC. A control subject with high-risk PC was more likely than a screen subject to receive radiotherapy (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.01-2.05, p = 0.047), expectant management (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.33-6.42, p = 0.007) or hormonal treatment (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.07-2.94, p = 0.026) instead of radical prostatectomy. However, trial arm had only a minor role in treatment choice compared to other variables. In conclusion, a small effect of trial arm on treatment choice was seen, particularly in men with high-risk PC. Therefore, differences in treatment between arms are unlikely to play a major role in the interpretation of the results of the ERSPC.
|
|
