Welcome to Medivizor!

You're browsing our sample library. Feel free to continue browsing. You can also sign up for free to receive medical information specific to your situation.

Posted by on Aug 10, 2015 in Prostate cancer | 0 comments

In a nutshell

The authors determined the long-term outcomes of active surveillance (watchful waiting) in patients with low risk of prostate cancer.  

Some background

Active surveillance is an option, often used in patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer (Stage I/II, confined to prostate with low risk of spread or growth). It involves monitoring the cancer for signs of growth without using active treatment.

Long-term studies are needed to determine the benefit of active surveillance as a treatment option in favorable-risk prostate cancer. 

 
 

Methods & findings

The aim of this study was to determine the long-term benefit of active surveillance in patients with prostate cancer risk

Data from 993 patients were included in this study. The median (midpoint) follow-up time was 6.4 years.

The overall survival (patients who were still alive following treatment) was between 0.2 years and 20.2 years. The 10-year overall survival was 80% and 15-year overall survival was 62%. Patients over the age of 70 years had nearly 3 times increased risk of experiencing cancer death. Patients with high prostate specific antigen (PSA – protein elevated in the blood indicating the presence of prostate cancer) levels had a 52% increased risk of experiencing cancer death. Patients with a Gleason score (scoring system that compares cancer cells to healthy cells) of 6 had a 70% increased risk of experiencing cancer death.

The 10-year cause-specific survival (patients who did not die from prostate cancer) was 98.1% and 15-year cause-specific survival was 94.3%. At 5-years 75.7% of patients remained untreated. At 10-years 63.5% of patients remained untreated. At 15 to 20 years, 55% of patients remained untreated. Gleason score at 1 year and PSA values were significant predictive factors for treatment intervention. The risk of dying from prostate cancer was 9.2 times higher than from other conditions. Overall, 2.8% developed metastatic disease (cancer spread to other parts of the body). 1.5% of all patients died from metastatic prostate cancer. 

The bottom line

The authors concluded that active surveillance was a feasible and effective option in favorable-risk patients based on a 15-year time frame. 

The fine print

Patients with Gleason scores of 6 might have had higher-grade disease than predicted from the score. So the results could have been biased.

Published By :

Journal of clinical oncology

Date :

Dec 15, 2014

Original Title :

Long-Term Follow-Up of a Large Active Surveillance Cohort of Patients With Prostate Cancer.

click here to get personalized updates