Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 377, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 132-142

  Wilt, Timothy J ^j   Jones, Karen M ^c   Barry, Michael J ^a,d   Andriole, Gerald L ^e   Culkin, Daniel ^f   Wheeler, Thomas ^g   Aronson, William J ^b,h   Brawer, Michael K ^i,j  

^a Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c VA Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center   (United States)

^d MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^g BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ Myriad Pharmacueticals Inc   (United States)

^j Minneapolis VA Ctr Chron Dis O   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASYMPTOMATIC DISEASE; ATTRIBUTABLE RISK; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER MORTALITY; CAUSE OF DEATH; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL OBSERVATION; CLINICAL OUTCOME; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISEASE COURSE; EARLY CANCER; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMEDIATE RISK PATIENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION; URINE INCONTINENCE; ADVERSE EFFECTS; BLOOD; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MULTICENTER STUDY; OBSERVATION; PATHOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; URINARY INCONTINENCE; WATCHFUL WAITING;

AGED; CAUSE OF DEATH; DISEASE PROGRESSION; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; URINARY INCONTINENCE; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 85024109327     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: 15334406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1615869     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 203-13.
2. Iversen P, Madsen PO, Corle DK. Radical prostatectomy versus expectant treatment for early carcinoma of the prostate: Twenty-Three year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1995; 172: 65-72.
3. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 932-42.
4. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. 10-Year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 1415-24.
5. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Barry MJ, et al. The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial:VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Contemp Clin Trials 2009; 30: 81-7.
6. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, Henson DE, et al., eds. AJCC cancer staging manual. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997.
7. Barry MJ, Andriole GL, Culkin DJ, et al. Ascertaining cause of death among men in the Prostate Cancer Intervention versus Observation Trial. Clin Trials 2013; 10: 907-14.
8. Lin G, So Y, Johnston G. Analyzing survival data with competing risks using SAS software. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 2012 (https://support .sas .com/resources/papers/proceedings12/344-2012 .pdf).
9. Gray RJ. A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Ann Stat 1988; 16: 1141-54.
10. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ. Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 975-80
11. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 373-83.
12. Gleason DF, Veteran's Administration Cooperative Urologic Research Group. Histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: Tannenbaum M, ed. Urologic pathology: The prostate. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1977: 171-98.
13. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 969-74.
14. Allison PD. Survival analysis using the SAS system: A practical guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1995: 292.
15. Pocock SJ, Stone GW. The primary outcome fails-what next? N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 861-70.
16. Pocock SJ, Stone GW. The primary outcome is positive-is that good enough? N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 971-9.
17. Chavalarias D, Wallach JD, Li AHT, Ioannidis JPA. Evolution of reporting P values in the biomedical literature, 1990-2015. JAMA 2016; 315: 1141-8.
18. Newschaffer CJ, Otani K, McDonald MK, Penberthy LT. Causes of death in elderly prostate cancer patients and in a comparison nonprostate cancer cohort. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 613-21.
19. Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM. Statistics in medicine-reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2189-94.
20. Johansson E, Steineck G, Holmberg L, et al. Long-Term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 891-9.
21. Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, et al Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 1425-37.
22. Sanyal C, Aprikian AG, Cury FL, Chevalier S, Dragomir A. Management of localized and advanced prostate cancer in Canada: A lifetime cost and qualityadjusted life-year analysis. Cancer 2016; 122: 1085-96.
23. Maurice MJ, Zhu H, Abouassaly R. A hospital-based study of initial observation for low-risk prostate cancer and its predictors in the United States. Can Urol Assoc J 2015; 9: E193-E199.
24. Maurice MJ, Abouassaly R, Kim SP, Zhu H, Hui Zhu H. Contemporary nationwide patterns of active surveillance use for prostate cancer. JAMA Intern Med 2015; 175: 1569-71.
25. Hoffman KE, Niu J, Shen Y, et al. Physician variation in management of lowrisk prostate cancer: A population-based cohort study. JAMA Intern Med 2014; 174: 1450-9.
26. Yamamoto T, Musunuru B, Vesprini D, et al. Metastatic prostate cancer in men initially treated with active surveillance. J Urol 2016; 195: 1409-14.
27. Dall'Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 976-83.
28. Godtman RA, Holmberg E, Khatami A, Stranne J, Hugosson J. Outcome following active surveillance of men with screendetected prostate cancer: results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 101-7.
29. Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, et al. Long-Term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 272-7.
30. Tosoian JJ, Mamawala M, Epstein JI, et al. Intermediate and longer-Term outcomes from a prospective active-surveillance program for favorable-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 3379-85.
31. Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD, et al. Observation versus initial treatment for men with localized, low-risk prostate cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 853-60.
32. Helpap B, Egevad L. The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch 2006; 449: 622-7.
33. Epstein JI. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol 2010; 183: 433-40.
34. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97: 1248-53.
35. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990-2013. JAMA 2015; 314: 80-2.
36. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Prostate cancer: screening-draft recommendation statement (https://www .uspreventiveservicestaskforce .org/Page/Document/draft-recommendation-statement/prostate-cancer-screening1).