Dataset Information

Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT: The effectiveness of surgery versus observation for men with localized prostate cancer detected by means of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is not known.From November 1994 through January 2002, we randomly assigned 731 men with localized prostate cancer (mean age, 67 years; median PSA value, 7.8 ng per milliliter) to radical prostatectomy or observation and followed them through January 2010. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; the secondary outcome was prostate-cancer mortality.During the median follow-up of 10.0 years, 171 of 364 men (47.0%) assigned to radical prostatectomy died, as compared with 183 of 367 (49.9%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.08; P=0.22; absolute risk reduction, 2.9 percentage points). Among men assigned to radical prostatectomy, 21 (5.8%) died from prostate cancer or treatment, as compared with 31 men (8.4%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.09; P=0.09; absolute risk reduction, 2.6 percentage points). The effect of treatment on all-cause and prostate-cancer mortality did not differ according to age, race, coexisting conditions, self-reported performance status, or histologic features of the tumor. Radical prostatectomy was associated with reduced all-cause mortality among men with a PSA value greater than 10 ng per milliliter (P=0.04 for interaction) and possibly among those with intermediate-risk or high-risk tumors (P=0.07 for interaction). Adverse events within 30 days after surgery occurred in 21.4% of men, including one death.Among men with localized prostate cancer detected during the early era of PSA testing, radical prostatectomy did not significantly reduce all-cause or prostate-cancer mortality, as compared with observation, through at least 12 years of follow-up. Absolute differences were less than 3 percentage points. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program and others; PIVOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007644.).

SUBMITTER: Wilt TJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3429335 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Wilt Timothy J TJ Brawer Michael K MK Jones Karen M KM Barry Michael J MJ Aronson William J WJ Fox Steven S Gingrich Jeffrey R JR Wei John T JT Gilhooly Patricia P Grob B Mayer BM Nsouli Imad I Iyer Padmini P Cartagena Ruben R Snider Glenn G Roehrborn Claus C Sharifi Roohollah R Blank William W Pandya Parikshit P Andriole Gerald L GL Culkin Daniel D Wheeler Thomas T

The New England journal of medicine 20120701 3

<h4>Background</h4>The effectiveness of surgery versus observation for men with localized prostate cancer detected by means of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is not known.<h4>Methods</h4>From November 1994 through January 2002, we randomly assigned 731 men with localized prostate cancer (mean age, 67 years; median PSA value, 7.8 ng per milliliter) to radical prostatectomy or observation and followed them through January 2010. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; the secondary ou ...[more]

PMID: 22808955

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeContemporary treatment strategies for localized prostate cancer (PCa) have been evolved over time. However, there is little data regarding survival outcomes based on initial treatment by risk group in this new era. This study aims to evaluate survival outcomes among men who underwent observation, radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy for localized PCa using a population-based cohort.Materials and methodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) prostate with watchful waiting dataset (2010-2016) was used. We included men diagnosed with localized PCa and clinical stage T1c-2cN0M0. Other inclusion criteria were age 50-79 years, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤50 ng/mL, and initial treatment with observation (active surveillance/watchful waiting), radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy. PCa risk was assessed using the D'Amico classification. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included PCa-specific survival. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression and competing risk analysis were performed to assess outcomes.ResultsAfter IPTW-adjusting, pseudo-population comprised 521,656 men (observation: 170,428, radiotherapy: 175,628, radical prostatectomy: 175,600) at a median 36.5 month follow-up. Observation demonstrated the lowest 5-year overall survival rate (91.6%) after IPTW-adjusting in comparison to radiotherapy (92.4%) and radical prostatectomy (96.1%, p<0.001). Men who underwent radical prostatectomy had the lowest cumulative PCa-specific and all-cause mortality (p<0.001). Compared to observation, radiotherapy (sub-distribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97; p=0.012) and radical prostatectomy (sHR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.41-0.52; p<.001) had a lower risk of PCa-specific mortality in competing risk analysis after adjustment for all other factors and other-cause death.ConclusionsIntermediate-term mortality risk in men with localized PCa were lower with active treatments compared to observation-especially for intermediate- and high-risk disease. However, observation represents a safe management strategy in men within the low-risk group.

Project description:Accurate estimation of recurrence risk is needed for optimal treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients. We combined classical clinicopathological predictors of biochemical recurrence (BCR) and molecular markers into a new risk score for predicting BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP). A retrospective study which included 122 PCa patients who attended our department between 2000 and 2007 was conducted. Total RNA was isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin embedded PCa tissue. Gene expression patterns were analyzed in 21 selected samples from 7 localized, 6 locally advanced, and 8 metastatic PCa patients using Illumina microarrays. Expression levels of 41 genes were validated by quantitative PCR in an independent retrospective series of 101 patients with ≥ 10 years follow-up who underwent RP for clinically localized PCa. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to identify individual predictors of BCR. A risk score (RS) for predicting BCR including clinicopathological and gene expression data was developed and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated. Interaction networks between the genes of the model were built by GeneMANIA Cytoscape plugin. In a median follow-up of 120 months (range 3-190), 37 patients developed BCR (36.6%). Expression levels of 7,930 transcripts differed between clinically localized and locally advanced-metastatic PCa groups (FDR<0.1). A set of 41 genes were validated by quantitative PCR. Regression analysis showed that expression of ASF1B and MCL1 as well as Gleason score, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion and positive margins were independent prognostic factors of BCR. A RS generated using these gene expression and clinicopathological variables was able to discriminate between two groups of patients with a significantly different probability of BCR (HR 6.24; CI 3.23-12.4, p<0.01), improving the individual discriminative performance of each of these variables on their own. Direct interactions between the two genes of the model were not found. In conclusion, identification of new gene expression patterns associated with a high probability of BCR in clinically localized PCa patients treated with RP, and their combination with clinicopathological variables in a robust, easy-to-use and reliable classifier may contribute to improve PCa risk stratification and, consequently, to tailor treatment and surveillance strategies in these patients.

Project description:ImportanceThe cost-effectiveness of different surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy remains a subject of debate. Emergence of recent critical clinical data and changes in surgical equipment costs due to their shared use by different clinical specialties necessitate an updated cost-effectiveness analysis in a centralized, largely government-funded health care system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS).ObjectiveTo compare robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LRP) using contemporary data on clinical outcomes, costs, and surgical volumes in the UK.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic analysis used a Markov model developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of RARP, LRP, and ORP to treat localized prostate cancer. The model was constructed from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model simulated 65-year-old men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer and were followed up for a 10-year period. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021.ExposuresRobotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, LRP, and ORP.Main outcomes and measuresQuality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (direct medical costs and costs outside the NHS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsCompared with LRP, RARP cost £1785 (US $2350) less and had 0.24 more QALYs gained; thus, RARP was a dominant option compared with LRP. Compared with ORP, RARP had 0.12 more QALYs gained but cost £526 (US $693) more during the 10-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of £4293 (US $5653)/QALY. Because the ICER was below the £30 000 (US $39 503) willingness-to-pay threshold, RARP was more cost-effective than ORP in the UK. The most sensitive variable influencing the cost-effectiveness of RARP was the lower risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Scenario analysis indicated RARP would remain more cost-effective than ORP as long as the BCR hazard ratios comparing RARP vs ORP were less than 0.99.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that in the UK, RARP has an ICER lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus is likely a cost-effective surgical treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer compared with ORP and LRP. The results were mainly driven by the lower risk of BCR for RARP. These findings may differ in other health care settings where different thresholds and costs may apply.

Dataset Information

Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Publications

Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets