Search

Objectives: To quantify the ability of two new comorbidity indices to adjust for confounding, by benchmarking a target trial emulation against the randomized controlled trial (RCT) result., Study Design and Setting: Observational study including 18,316 men from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 5.0, diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2008 and 2019 and treated with primary radical prostatectomy (RP, n = 14,379) or radiotherapy (RT, n = 3,937). The effect on adjusted risk of death from any cause after adjustment for comorbidity by use of two new comorbidity indices, the multidimensional diagnosis-based comorbidity index and the drug comorbidity index, were compared to adjustment for the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI)., Results: Risk of death was higher after RT than RP (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.70-2.21). The difference decreased when adjusting for age, cancer characteristics, and CCI (HR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.06-1.66). Adjustment for the two new comorbidity indices further attenuated the difference (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.44). Emulation of a hypothetical pragmatic trial where also older men with any type of baseline comorbidity were included, largely confirmed these results (HR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95-1.26)., Conclusion: Adjustment for comorbidity using two new indices provided comparable risk of death from any cause in line with results of a RCT. Similar results were seen in a broader study population, more representative of clinical practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest There are no competing interests for any author., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate long-term disease trajectories among men with high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (HRLPC) treated with radical radiotherapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy (RP)., Material and Methods: Men diagnosed with HRLPC in 2006-2020, who received primary RT or RP, were identified from the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) 5.0. Follow-up ended on 30 June 2021. Treatment trajectories and risk of death from prostate cancer (PCa) or other causes were assessed by competing risk analyses using cumulative incidence for each event., Results: In total, 8317 men received RT and 4923 men underwent RP. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 6.2 (3.6-9.5) years. After RT, the 10-year risk of PCa-related death was 0.13 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12-0.14) and the risk of death from all causes was 0.32 (95% CI 0.31-0.34). After RP, the 10-year risk of PCa-related death was 0.09 (95% CI 0.08-0.10) and the risk of death from all causes was 0.19 (95% CI 0.18-0.21). The 10-year risks of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as secondary treatment were 0.42 (95% CI 0.41-0.44) and 0.21 (95% CI 0.20-0.23) after RT and RP, respectively. Among men who received ADT as secondary treatment, the risk of PCa-related death at 10 years after initiation of ADT was 0.33 (95% CI 030-0.36) after RT and 0.27 (95% CI 0.24-0.30) after RP., Conclusion: Approximately one in 10 men with HRLPC who received primary RT or RP had died from PCa 10 years after diagnosis. Approximately one in three men who received secondary ADT, an indication of PCa progression, died from PCa 10 years after the start of ADT. Early identification and aggressive treatment of men with high risk of progression after radical treatment are warranted., (© 2024 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.)

Background: Data on functional and psychological side effects following curative treatment for prostate cancer are lacking from large, contemporary, unselected, population-based cohorts., Objective: To assess urinary symptoms, bowel disturbances, erectile dysfunction (ED), and quality of life (QoL) 12 mo after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiotherapy (RT) using patient-reported outcome measures in the Swedish prostate cancer database., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a nationwide, population-based, cohort study in Sweden of men who underwent primary RARP or RT between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Absolute proportions and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression, with adjustment for clinical characteristics., Results and Limitations: A total of 2557 men underwent RARP and 1741 received RT. Men who underwent RT were older (69 vs 65 yr) and had more comorbidities at baseline. After RARP, 13% of men experienced incontinence, compared to 6% after RT. The frequency of urinary bother was similar, at 18% after RARP and 18% after RT. Urgency to defecate was reported by 14% of men after RARP and 34% after RT. At 1 yr, 73% of men had ED after RARP, and 77% after RT. High QoL was reported by 85% of men after RARP and 78% of men after RT. On multivariable regression analysis, RT was associated with lower risks of urinary incontinence (OR 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.33), urinary bother (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.95), and ED (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.65), but higher risk of bowel symptoms (OR 2.86, 95% CI 2.42-3.39). QoL was higher after RARP than after RT (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.61)., Conclusions: Short-term specific side effects after curative treatment for prostate cancer significantly differed between RARP and RT in this large and unselected cohort. Nevertheless, the risk of urinary bother was lower after RT, while higher QoL was common after RARP., Patient Summary: In our study of patients treated for prostate cancer, urinary bother and overall quality of life are comparable at 1 year after surgical removal of the prostate in comparison to radiotherapy, despite substantial differences in other side effects., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: One out of three men who undergo cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer is diagnosed with incidental prostate cancer (PCa) at histopathological examination. Many of these men are PSA tested as part of their follow-up, but it is unclear if this is needed. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of PCa death in these men and the need of PSA-testing during follow-up., Methods: Between 2002 and 2020, 1,554 men were diagnosed with PCa after cystoprostatectomy performed for non-metastatic bladder cancer and registered in the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) of Sweden. We assessed their risk of death from PCa, bladder cancer and other causes up to 15 years after diagnosis by use of data in The Cause of Death Register. The use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as a proxy for PCa progression was assessed by fillings in The Prescribed Drug Register., Results: Fifteen years after diagnosis, cumulative incidence of death from PCa was 2.6% (95% CI 2.3%-2.9%), from bladder cancer 32% (95% CI: 30%-34%) and from other causes 40% (95% CI: 36%-44%). Only 35% of men with PCa recorded as primary cause of death in The Cause of Death Register had started ADT before date of death, indicating sticky-diagnosis bias with inflated risk of PCa death., Conclusions: For a large majority of men diagnosed with incidental PCa at cystoprostatectomy performed for bladder cancer, the risk of PCa death is very small so there is no rationale for PSA testing during follow-up.

Background and Objectives: Changes in work-up and histopathological assessment have caused stage and grade migration in men with prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this study was to assess temporal trends in risk of PCa death for men with favourable-risk PCa managed with primary radical prostatectomy or observation., Methods and Material: Men aged 75 or younger with Charlson Comorbidity index 0-1 diagnosed with favourable-risk PCa (T1-T2, prostate specific antigen [PSA] <20 ng/mL and Gleason score 6 or 7[3+4]) in the period 2000-2016 who were treated with primary radical prostatectomy or managed with observation in PCBaSe 4.0. Treatment groups were compared following propensity score matching, and risk of PCa death was estimated by use of Cox regression analyses., Results: A total of 9,666 men were selected for each treatment strategy. The 7-year cumulative incidence of PCa death decreased in all risk and treatment groups. For example, the incidence in men diagnosed with low-risk PCa and managed with observation was 1.2% in 2000-2005, which decreased to 0.4% in 2011-2016. Corresponding incidences for men with intermediate-risk PCa managed with observation were 2.0% and 0.7%. The relative risk of PCa death was lower in men with low-risk PCa managed with radical prostatectomy compared to observation: in 2000-2005 hazard ratio (HR) 0.20 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10-0.38) and in 2011-2016 HR 0.35 (95% CI 0.05-2.26). Corresponding risks for men with intermediate-risk PCa were HR 0.28 (95% CI 0.16-0.47) and HR 0.21 (95% CI 0.04-1.18). The absolute risk reduction of radical prostatectomy compared to observation for men with low-risk PCa was 1% in 2000-2005 and 0.4% in 2011-2016, and for men with intermediate-risk PCa 1.1% in 2000-2005 and 0.7% in 2011-2016., Conclusion: Men diagnosed in 2011-2016 with low-risk and favourable intermediate-risk PCa have a similar relative benefit but smaller absolute benefit of curative treatment compared to men diagnosed in 2000-2005.

Background and Objective: Changes in diagnostic work-up, histopathological assessment, and treatment of men with prostate cancer during the last 20 years have affected the prognosis. The objective was to investigate the risk of prostate cancer death in men with clinically localised prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in Sweden in 2000-2010., Methods: Population-based, nationwide, study on men with clinically localised prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in the period 2000-2010. Cox regression analyses were used to assess differences in risk of prostate cancer death according to calendar period for diagnosis and stratified on risk category., Results: The study included 19 330 men with a median follow-up of 12.4 years. Men diagnosed in 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 had a significantly lower risk of prostate cancer death compared to men diagnosed in 2000-2002. The reduced risk of prostate cancer death was restricted to men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer with no differences observed in men with low- or high-risk prostate cancer., Conclusion: During the study period, the risk of prostate cancer death decreased in the total population of men with localised prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. The decrease was restricted to men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Surgical Oncology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a non-curative but essential treatment of prostate cancer with severe side effects. Therefore, both over- and underuse should be avoided. We investigated adherence to guidelines for ADT following radical prostatectomy through Swedish population-based data. Material and methods: We used the database Uppsala/Örebro PSA cohort (UPSAC) to study men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer at diagnosis (clinical stage T1-T3, N0-NX, M0-MX, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <50 ng/ml) who underwent radical prostatectomy 1997-2012. 114 men were treated with ADT and selected as cases; 1140 men with no ADT at the index date were selected as controls within 4-year strata of year of radical prostatectomy. All men with a biochemical recurrence and a PSA doubling time <12 months and/or a Gleason score of 8-10 were considered to have an indication for ADT according to the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines. Results: No indication for ADT was found in 37% of the cases. Among these, 88% had clinical stage T1-2 at diagnosis, 57% had a biopsy Gleason score 2-6, 98% had an expected remaining lifetime over 10 years, 12% received castration, and 88% received antiandrogen monotherapy. 2% of controls were found to have an indication for ADT, and 96% of these had an expected remaining lifetime over 10 years. Conclusion: Our results indicate that overtreatment with ADT after radical prostatectomy is common, whereas undertreatment is unusual. Interventions to improve adherence to guidelines are needed to avoid unnecessary side-effects and long treatment durations with ADT.

Purpose: North American studies have revealed that about 3% to 7% of opioid naïve surgical patients transition to chronic opioid use after a single prescription. We examined the risk of chronic opioid use following radical prostatectomy using nationwide Swedish data., Materials and Methods: A total of 25,703 men in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden who underwent radical prostatectomy were linked to the Prescribed Drug Register. Opioid use was assessed at 3 times, including baseline (13 months to 1 month preoperatively), perioperatively (1 month before and after) and postoperatively (1 to 12 months). Multivariable logistic regression was done to identify predictors of new late use (1 or more opioid prescriptions in 3 consecutive months more than 2 months after surgery)., Results: Overall 16,368 men (64%) filled an opioid prescription during the 13 months before or after surgery. The use of strong opioids increased with time and the use of weak opioids decreased. Of the men 1.9% had opioid prescriptions during the baseline period, followed by a spike to 59% around the time surgery, which sharply decreased in month 2 postoperatively. However, thereafter the proportion of men with opioid prescriptions remained slightly higher at 2.2% compared to the baseline before radical prostatectomy. Of chronic late users 57% were previous users and 43% were new chronic users. Higher cancer risk category, greater comorbidity, unmarried status and low educational level were associated with the risk of new chronic opioid use., Conclusions: Slightly more than half of male Swedish patients filled an opioid prescription after radical prostatectomy and less than 1% became chronic opioid users. These rates are lower than in previous studies of postoperative opioid use from North America.

Objective: To investigate if results in terms of absolute risk in mature randomised trials are relevant for contemporary decision-making. To do so, we compared the outcome for men in the radical prostatectomy (RP) arm of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study number 4 (SPCG-4) randomised trial with matched men treated in a contemporary era before and after compensation for the grade migration and grade inflation that have occurred since the 1980s., Patients and Methods: A propensity score-matched analysis of prostate cancer mortality and all-cause mortality in the SPCG-4 and matched men in the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) of Sweden treated in 1998-2006 was conducted. Cumulative incidence of prostate cancer mortality and all-cause mortality was calculated. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for a matching on original Gleason Grade Groups (GGG) and second, matching with GGG increased one unit for men in the NPCR., Results: Matched men in the NPCR treated in 2005-2006 had half the risk of prostate cancer mortality compared to men in the SPCG-4 (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19-1.14). In analysis of men matched on an upgraded GGG in the NPCR, this difference was mitigated (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.36-1.47)., Conclusions: Outcomes after RP for men in the SPCG-4 cannot be directly applied to men in the current era, mainly due to grade inflation and grade migration. However, by compensating for changes in grading, similar outcomes after RP were seen in the SPCG-4 and NPCR. In order to compare historical trials with current treatments, data on temporal changes in detection, diagnostics, and treatment have to be accounted for., (© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with clinically detected localized prostate cancer, but evidence from randomized trials with long-term follow-up is sparse., Methods: We randomly assigned 695 men with localized prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy from October 1989 through February 1999 and collected follow-up data through 2017. Cumulative incidence and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and metastasis were estimated in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, and numbers of years of life gained were estimated. We evaluated the prognostic value of histopathological measures with a Cox proportional-hazards model., Results: By December 31, 2017, a total of 261 of the 347 men in the radical-prostatectomy group and 292 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group had died; 71 deaths in the radical-prostatectomy group and 110 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.74; P<0.001; absolute difference in risk, 11.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.2 to 18.2). The number needed to treat to avert one death from any cause was 8.4. At 23 years, a mean of 2.9 extra years of life were gained with radical prostatectomy. Among the men who underwent radical prostatectomy, extracapsular extension was associated with a risk of death from prostate cancer that was 5 times as high as that among men without extracapsular extension, and a Gleason score higher than 7 was associated with a risk that was 10 times as high as that with a score of 6 or lower (scores range from 2 to 10, with higher scores indicating more aggressive cancer)., Conclusions: Men with clinically detected, localized prostate cancer and a long life expectancy benefited from radical prostatectomy, with a mean of 2.9 years of life gained. A high Gleason score and the presence of extracapsular extension in the radical prostatectomy specimens were highly predictive of death from prostate cancer. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.).

Background: There are no conclusive results from randomized trials on radiotherapy (RT) versus radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. Numerous observational studies have suggested that RP is associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer death, but whether results have been biased due to limited adjustments for confounding factors is unknown., Objective: To compare the risk of prostate cancer death after RT versus RP., Design, Setting, and Participants: Nationwide population-based observational study of men in the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 3.0 who had undergone RT or RP between 1998 and 2012., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Prostate cancer deaths were compared. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated in Cox regression models, including clinical T stage, M stage, Gleason grade group, serum levels of prostate-specific antigen, proportion of biopsy cores with cancer, mode of detection, comorbidity, age, educational level, and civil status. Period analysis with left truncation was performed., Results and Limitations: Primary treatment was RT or RP for 41 503 men. Treatment effect was associated with disease severity. In univariate analysis of RT versus RP, risk of prostate cancer death was higher after RT-low- and intermediate-risk cancer, HR 1.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.53-2.16), and high-risk cancer, HR 1.57 (95% CI: 1.33-1.85). After full adjustment in period analysis, this difference between the treatments was attenuated-low- and intermediate-risk cancer, HR 1.24 (95% CI: 0.97-1.58), and high-risk cancer, HR 1.03 (95% CI: 0.81-1.31). Confounding remained due to nonrandom allocation to treatment., Conclusions: In comparison with previous studies, the difference in prostate cancer mortality after RT and RP was much smaller., Patient Summary: The difference in prostate cancer mortality after contemporary radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy was small in contrast to previous studies, indicating that potential side effects should be more emphasized when selecting treatment., (Copyright © 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate whether curative prostate cancer (PCa) treatment was received less often by men with both PCa and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as little is known about the influence of T2DM diagnosis on the receipt of such treatment in men with localized PCa., Subjects and Methods: The Prostate Cancer database Sweden (PCBaSe) was used to obtain data on men with T2DM and PCa (n = 2210) for comparison with data on men with PCa only (n = 23 071). All men had intermediate- (T1-2, Gleason score 7 and/or prostate-specific antigen [PSA] 10-20 ng/mL) or high-risk (T3 and/or Gleason score 8-10 and/or PSA 20-50 ng/mL) localized PCa diagnosed between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2014. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) for receipt of curative treatment in men with and without T2DM. Overall survival, for up to 8 years of follow-up, was calculated both for men with T2DM only and for men with T2DM and PCa., Results: Men with T2DM were less likely to receive curative treatment for PCa than men without T2DM (OR 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.87). The 8-year overall survival rates were 79% and 33% for men with T2DM and high-risk PCa who did and did not receive curative treatment, respectively., Conclusions: Men with T2DM were less likely to receive curative treatment for localized intermediate- and high-risk PCa. Men with T2DM and high-risk PCa who received curative treatment had substantially higher survival times than those who did not. Some of the survival differences represent a selection bias, whereby the healthiest patients received curative treatment. Clinicians should interpret this data carefully and ensure that individual patients with T2DM and PCa are not under- nor overtreated., (© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Current guidelines recommend androgen deprivation therapy only for men with very high-risk prostate cancer (PCa), but there is little evidence to support this stance., Objective: To investigate the association between radical local treatment and mortality in men with very high-risk PCa., Design, Setting, and Participants: Semiecologic study of men aged <80 yr within the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden, diagnosed in 1998-2012 with very high-risk PCa (local clinical stage T4 and/or prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level 50-200ng/ml, any N, and M0). Men with locally advanced PCa (local clinical stage T3 and PSA level <50ng/ml, any N, and M0) were used as positive controls., Intervention: Proportion of men who received prostatectomy or full-dose radiotherapy in 640 experimental units defined by county, diagnostic period, and age at diagnosis., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: PCa and all-cause mortality rate ratios (MRRs)., Results and Limitations: Both PCa and all-cause mortality were half as high in units in the highest tertile of exposure to radical local treatment compared with units in the lowest tertile (PCa MRR: 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.95; and all-cause MRR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.92). The results observed for locally advanced PCa for highest versus lowest tertile of exposure were in agreement with results from randomized trials (PCa MRR: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.94; and all-cause MRR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00). Although the semiecologic design minimized selection bias on an individual level, the effect of high therapeutic activity could not be separated from that of high diagnostic activity., Conclusions: The substantially lower mortality in units with the highest exposure to radical local treatment suggests that radical treatment decreases mortality even in men with very high-risk PCa for whom such treatment has been considered ineffective., Patient Summary: Men with very high-risk prostate cancer diagnosed and treated in units with the highest exposure to surgery or radiotherapy had a substantially lower mortality., (Copyright © 2016 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) use is common for management of erectile dysfunction. Single-institution studies have reported conflicting data on the relationship between PDE5i use and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer (BCR) after radical prostatectomy., Objective: To evaluate the association between PDE5i use and BCR after radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy in a nationwide population-based cohort., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a nested case-control study using the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden linked to the Prescribed Drug Register. Among men with localized prostate cancer who underwent primary radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy during 2006-2007 with 5 yr of follow-up, 293 had BCR after treatment (cases). For each case we identified 20 BCR-free controls (n=5767) using incidence density sampling., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to examine the association between PDE5i use and BCR risk. Separate multivariable models including clinical variables for men undergoing prostatectomy or radiotherapy and including surgical pathology after prostatectomy were also analyzed., Results and Limitations: PDE5i use was not associated with BCR after radical prostatectomy (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.03) or radiation therapy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.49-1.97) after adjusting for marital status, education, income, prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, Gleason score, and proportion of positive biopsies. Results were similar after additional adjustment for surgical pathology (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.16). Men whose cumulative number of PDE5i pills was above the median had a slightly lower BCR risk after prostatectomy in the clinical model, and no difference in BCR risk after adjustment for pathologic tumor features., Conclusions: Our results from a population-based cohort suggest that BCR risk is not higher among men using PDE5i after prostate cancer treatment., Patient Summary: Erectile dysfunction medications are not associated with a higher risk of disease recurrence after prostate cancer treatment., (Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of immediate versus delayed radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with low-grade prostate cancer., Materials and Methods: The study included a nationwide population-based cohort in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, of 7608 men with clinically localized, biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer who underwent immediate or delayed RP in 1997-2007. Multivariable models compared RP pathology, use of salvage radiotherapy and prostate cancer mortality based on timing of RP (< 1, 1-2 or >2 years after diagnosis). Median follow-up was 8.1 years., Results: Men undergoing RP more than 2 years after diagnosis had a higher risk of Gleason upgrading [odds ratio 2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.34-3.68] and an increased risk of salvage radiotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.90, 95% CI 1.41-2.55], but no significant increase in prostate cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.57-5.99). In competing risk analysis, 7 year prostate cancer-specific cumulative mortality was similar, at less than 1%, for immediate RP and active surveillance regardless of later intervention. Limitations of this study include the lack of data on follow-up biopsies and the limited follow-up time., Conclusion: Men undergoing RP more than 2 years after diagnosis had more adverse pathological features and second line therapy, highlighting the trade-off in deferring immediate curative therapy. However, men with delayed RP constitute a minority with higher risk cancer among the much larger group of low-risk men initially surveilled, and the overall risk of prostate cancer mortality at 7 years was similarly low with immediate RP or active surveillance.

Background: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with localized prostate cancer; however, important questions regarding long-term benefit remain., Methods: Between 1989 and 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy and followed them through the end of 2012. The primary end points in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) were death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and the risk of metastases. Secondary end points included the initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy., Results: During 23.2 years of follow-up, 200 of 347 men in the surgery group and 247 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group died. Of the deaths, 63 in the surgery group and 99 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer; the relative risk was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.77; P=0.001), and the absolute difference was 11.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.5 to 17.5). The number needed to treat to prevent one death was 8. One man died after surgery in the radical-prostatectomy group. Androgen-deprivation therapy was used in fewer patients who underwent prostatectomy (a difference of 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 17.7 to 32.3). The benefit of surgery with respect to death from prostate cancer was largest in men younger than 65 years of age (relative risk, 0.45) and in those with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.38). However, radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduced risk of metastases among older men (relative risk, 0.68; P=0.04)., Conclusions: Extended follow-up confirmed a substantial reduction in mortality after radical prostatectomy; the number needed to treat to prevent one death continued to decrease when the treatment was modified according to age at diagnosis and tumor risk. A large proportion of long-term survivors in the watchful-waiting group have not required any palliative treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.).

Background: Studies enumerating the dynamics of physical and emotional symptoms following prostate cancer (PCa) treatment are needed to guide therapeutic strategy. Yet, overcoming patient selection forces is a formidable challenge for observational studies comparing treatment groups., Objective: To compare patterns of symptom burden and distress in men with localized PCa randomized to radical prostatectomy (RP) or watchful waiting (WW) and followed up longitudinally., Design, Setting, and Participants: The three largest, Swedish, randomization centers for the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 trial conducted a longitudinal study to assess symptoms and distress from several psychological and physical domains by mailed questionnaire every 6 mo for 2 yr and then yearly through 8 yr of follow-up., Intervention: RP compared with WW., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: A questionnaire was mailed at baseline and then repeatedly during follow-up with questions concerning physical and mental symptoms. Each analysis of quality of life was based on a dichotomization of the outcome (yes vs no) studied in a binomial response, generalized linear mixed model., Results and Limitations: Of 347 randomized men, 272 completed at least five questionnaires during an 8-yr follow-up period. Almost all men reported that PCa negatively influenced daily activities and relationships. Health-related distress, worry, feeling low, and insomnia were consistently reported by approximately 30-40% in both groups. Men in the RP group consistently reported more leakage, impaired erection and libido, and fewer obstructive voiding symptoms. For men in the WW group, distress related to erectile symptoms increased gradually over time. Symptom burden and distress at baseline was predictive of long-term outlook., Conclusions: Cancer negatively influenced daily activities among almost all men in both treatment groups; health-related distress was common. Trade-offs exist between physiologic symptoms, highlighting the importance of tailored treatment decision-making. Men who are likely to experience profound long-term distress can be identified early in disease management., (Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) and surgery are both associated with increased risk of thromboembolic diseases (TED)., Objective: We assessed risk of TED among men undergoing different types of urologic surgery., Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the Prostate Cancer Database Sweden (PCBaSe) Sweden, we identified all men (n=45 065) undergoing pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND), radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without PLND, orchiectomy due to PCa, or a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). We identified a comparison cohort from the population., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Main outcomes were deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) as primary diagnoses in the National Patient Register or Cause of Death Register (2002-2010). We calculated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models., Results and Limitations: All surgical procedures were associated with increased risk of TED; laparoscopic and open RP with a PLND were the most strongly associated with TED (HR for PE: 8.1 [95% CI, 2.9-23.0] and 7.8 [95% CI, 4.9-13], respectively). For surgery including a PLND, the risk increased during the second half of the first postoperative month. The HR for PE after TURP in men with PCa was 3.0 (95% CI, 1.8-5.1). Patients with a history of TED had a strongly increased risk of TED (HR for DVT: 4.5; 95% CI, 2.6-8.0). A limitation is lack of information on TED prophylaxis, but its use was standardized during the study period for RP and PLND. Other limitations are lack of information on extent of PLND and lifestyle factors., Conclusions: Surgeries for PCa, including TURP, are associated with hospitalization for TED. Patients with a history of TED and patients undergoing a PLND were at highest risk. The largest risk was observed from days 14 to 28 postoperatively. Thus, our results suggest that prophylactic measures may be beneficial during the first 4 wk in these patients., (Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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.

Background: Although there is randomized evidence that radical prostatectomy improves survival, there are few data on how benefit varies by baseline risk., Objective: We aimed to create a statistical model to calculate the decrease in risk of death associated with surgery for an individual patient, using stage, grade, prostate-specific antigen, and age as predictors., Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 695 men with T1 or T2 prostate cancer participated in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 4 trial (SPCG-4)., Intervention: Patients in SPCG-4 were randomized to radical prostatectomy or conservative management., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Competing risk models were created separately for the radical prostatectomy and the watchful waiting group, with the difference between model predictions constituting the estimated benefit for an individual patient., Results and Limitations: Individualized predictions of surgery benefit varied widely depending on age and tumor characteristics. At 65 yr of age, the absolute 10-yr risk reduction in prostate cancer mortality attributable to radical prostatectomy ranged from 4.5% to 17.2% for low- versus high-risk patients. Little expected benefit was associated with surgery much beyond age 70. Only about a quarter of men had an individualized benefit within even 50% of the mean. A limitation is that estimates from SPCG-4 have to be applied cautiously to contemporary patients., Conclusions: Our model suggests that it is hard to justify surgery in patients with Gleason 6, T1 disease or in those patients much above 70 yr of age. Conversely, surgery seems unequivocally of benefit for patients who have Gleason 8, or Gleason 7, stage T2. For patients with Gleason 6 T2 and Gleason 7 T1, treatment is more of a judgment call, depending on patient preference and other clinical findings, such as the number of positive biopsy cores and comorbidities., (Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: To date, adverse events of prostate cancer (PCa) treatment have only been studied as a single event, and little is known about the risk of subsequent adverse events., Objective: We assessed the frequency of multiple events (fractures, stroke, heart disease [HD], and thromboembolic disease [TED]) following PCa diagnosis., Design, Setting, and Participants: PCBaSe Sweden is based on the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) that covers >96% of incident PCa cases in Sweden., Measurements: We evaluated the number of events (fractures, stroke, HD, and TED) leading to hospitalisation recorded in the National Hospital Discharge Registry after PCa diagnosis and conducted multivariate age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the risk of developing multiple events., Results and Limitations: Between 1997 and 2007, 30 642 men received primary endocrine treatment, 26 432 curative treatment, and 19 526 surveillance: 75% had no event during follow-up, 17% had one event, and 9% had more than one event. The incidence of any event was 102 in 1000 person-years. Men who already had experienced an event, particularly HD, before or after the date of PCa diagnosis were more likely to have multiple events afterwards. For example, the hazard ratio of developing a third event for those with two or more events of HD before PCa diagnosis was 1.40 (95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.52) compared with those with no events of HD before PCa diagnosis. Events treated without hospitalisation were not included, so the number of adverse events is possibly underestimated., Conclusions: A third of PCa patients with an adverse event after treatment subsequently experienced another adverse event, but apart from history of HD or stroke before PCa diagnosis, no specific characteristics were found for these men. Thus PCa management needs to take into account the risk of adverse events in all PCa patients, especially those with a history of adverse events before PCa diagnosis., (Crown Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2008, we reported that radical prostatectomy, as compared with watchful waiting, reduces the rate of death from prostate cancer. After an additional 3 years of follow-up, we now report estimated 15-year results., Methods: From October 1989 through February 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy. Follow-up was complete through December 2009, with histopathological review of biopsy and radical-prostatectomy specimens and blinded evaluation of causes of death. Relative risks, with 95% confidence intervals, were estimated with the use of a Cox proportional-hazards model., Results: During a median of 12.8 years, 166 of the 347 men in the radical-prostatectomy group and 201 of the 348 in the watchful-waiting group died (P=0.007). In the case of 55 men assigned to surgery and 81 men assigned to watchful waiting, death was due to prostate cancer. This yielded a cumulative incidence of death from prostate cancer at 15 years of 14.6% and 20.7%, respectively (a difference of 6.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2 to 12.0), and a relative risk with surgery of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.87; P=0.01). The survival benefit was similar before and after 9 years of follow-up, was observed also among men with low-risk prostate cancer, and was confined to men younger than 65 years of age. The number needed to treat to avert one death was 15 overall and 7 for men younger than 65 years of age. Among men who underwent radical prostatectomy, those with extracapsular tumor growth had a risk of death from prostate cancer that was 7 times that of men without extracapsular tumor growth (relative risk, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.6 to 18.4)., Conclusions: Radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduction in the rate of death from prostate cancer. Men with extracapsular tumor growth may benefit from adjuvant local or systemic treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and the National Institutes of Health.).

Background: The benefit of radical prostatectomy in patients with early prostate cancer has been assessed in only one randomized trial. In 2005, we reported that radical prostatectomy improved prostate cancer survival compared with watchful waiting after a median of 8.2 years of follow-up. We now report results after 3 more years of follow-up., Methods: From October 1, 1989, through February 28, 1999, 695 men with clinically localized prostate cancer were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy (n = 347) or watchful waiting (n = 348). Follow-up was complete through December 31, 2006, with histopathologic review and blinded evaluation of causes of death. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Statistical tests were two-sided., Results: During a median of 10.8 years of follow-up (range = 3 weeks to 17.2 years), 137 men in the surgery group and 156 in the watchful waiting group died (P = .09). For 47 of the 347 men (13.5%) who were randomly assigned to surgery and 68 of the 348 men (19.5%) who were not, death was due to prostate cancer. The difference in cumulative incidence of death due to prostate cancer remained stable after about 10 years of follow-up. At 12 years, 12.5% of the surgery group and 17.9% of the watchful waiting group had died of prostate cancer (difference = 5.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2 to 11.1%), for a relative risk of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.45 to 0.94; P = .03). The difference in cumulative incidence of distant metastases did not increase beyond 10 years of follow-up. At 12 years, 19.3% of men in the surgery group and 26% of men in the watchful waiting group had been diagnosed with distant metastases (difference = 6.7%, 95% CI = 0.2 to 13.2%), for a relative risk of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.47 to 0.88; P = .006). Among men who underwent radical prostatectomy, those with extracapsular tumor growth had 14 times the risk of prostate cancer death as those without it (RR = 14.2, 95% CI = 3.3 to 61.8; P < .001)., Conclusion: Radical prostatectomy reduces prostate cancer mortality and risk of metastases with little or no further increase in benefit 10 or more years after surgery.

A suitable setting to analyze factors that determine prognosis or treatment response in prostate cancer is an unbiased comparison of radical prostatectomy and watchful waiting as in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Trial number 4. In our previous presentation of 10-year results, we studied Gleason score, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and age at diagnosis as modifiers of the effect of radical prostatectomy on survival. Because overall prognostic information obtained by these parameters or by tumor stage was not provided in our publication, we now present these data in the two study arms separately.

Background: In 2002, we reported the initial results of a trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in the management of early prostate cancer. After three more years of follow-up, we report estimated 10-year results., Methods: From October 1989 through February 1999, 695 men with early prostate cancer (mean age, 64.7 years) were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy (347 men) or watchful waiting (348 men). The follow-up was complete through 2003, with blinded evaluation of the causes of death. The primary end point was death due to prostate cancer; the secondary end points were death from any cause, metastasis, and local progression., Results: During a median of 8.2 years of follow-up, 83 men in the surgery group and 106 men in the watchful-waiting group died (P=0.04). In 30 of the 347 men assigned to surgery (8.6 percent) and 50 of the 348 men assigned to watchful waiting (14.4 percent), death was due to prostate cancer. The difference in the cumulative incidence of death due to prostate cancer increased from 2.0 percentage points after 5 years to 5.3 percentage points after 10 years, for a relative risk of 0.56 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.88; P=0.01 by Gray's test). For distant metastasis, the corresponding increase was from 1.7 to 10.2 percentage points, for a relative risk in the surgery group of 0.60 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.42 to 0.86; P=0.004 by Gray's test), and for local progression, the increase was from 19.1 to 25.1 percentage points, for a relative risk of 0.33 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.44; P<0.001 by Gray's test)., Conclusions: Radical prostatectomy reduces disease-specific mortality, overall mortality, and the risks of metastasis and local progression. The absolute reduction in the risk of death after 10 years is small, but the reductions in the risks of metastasis and local tumor progression are substantial., (Copyright 2005 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Objectives: To provide a descriptive review of the establishment of the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) in Sweden, to present clinical characteristics at diagnosis and to calculate the relative survival of different risk groups after 5 years., Material and Methods: Since 1998, data on all newly diagnosed prostate cancers, including TNM classification, grade of malignancy, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and treatment, have been prospectively collected. For the 35,223 patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2002, relative survival in different risk groups has been calculated., Results: Between 1998 and 2002, 96% of all prostate cancer cases diagnosed in Sweden were registered in the NPCR. The number of new cases increased from 6137 in 1998 to 7385 in 2002. The age-standardized rate rose in those aged < 70 years, while it was stable, or possibly declining from 1999, in the older age groups. The proportion of T1c tumours increased from 14% to 28% of all recorded cases. The age-adjusted incidence of advanced tumours (M1 or PSA > 100 ng/ml) decreased by 17%. The proportion of patients receiving curative treatment doubled. Patients with N1 or M1 disease or poorly differentiated tumours (G3 or Gleason score 8-10) had a markedly reduced relative 5-year survival rate., Conclusions: It is possible to establish a nationwide prostate cancer register including basic data for assessment of the disease in the whole of Sweden. The introduction of PSA screening has increased the detection of early prostate cancer in younger men and, to a lesser extent, decreased the incidence of advanced disease. The effect of these changes on mortality is obscure but the NPCR in Sweden will serve as an important tool in such evaluation.