Observational studyBMC urology2020
Survival and mortality of elderly men with localized prostate cancer managed with primary androgen deprivation therapy or by primary observation.
Observational study in BMC urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Targeting adenocarcinoma and enzalutamide‑resistant prostate cancer using the novel anti‑androgen inhibitor ADA‑308.Oncology reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byGeriatrics.2021
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAndrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a primary treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa) even though there is no evidence that its use is beneficial in the absence of curative treatment.
methodsMen aged ≥70 years (n = 16,534) diagnosed with localized PCa from 1985 to 2014 and managed either with primary observation or ADT in the absence of curative treatment were included. The cases were identified from the population-based Finnish Cancer Registry. We estimated the standardized mortality ratios (SMR) for overall mortality by treatment group. We determined the relative risk (RR) of PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) and other-cause mortality between the two treatment groups. Survival was determined using the life table method. Two age groups (70-79 years and ≥ 80 years) and three calendar time cohorts (1985-1994, 1995-2004, and 2005-2014) were compared following adjustment of propensity score matching between the treatment groups with four covariates (age, year of diagnosis, educational level, and hospital district). Follow-up continued until death or until December 31, 2015.
resultsPatients in the observation group had lower overall SMRs than those in the ADT group in both age cohorts over the entire study period. PCSM was higher in men aged 70-79 years undergoing primary ADT compared to those managed by observation only (RR: 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-2.23 [1985-1994]; RR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.35-1.84 [1995-2004]; and RR 2.71, 95% CI: 2.08-3.53 [2005-2014]); p = 0.005 for periodic trend. A similar trend over time was also observed in men aged > 80 years; (p for age-period interaction = 0.237). Overall survival was also higher among men in their 70's managed by observation compared to those undergoing ADT.
conclusionsPrimary ADT within four months period from diagnosis is not associated with improved long-term overall survival or decreased PCSM compared to primary conservative management for men with localized PCa. However, this observational study's conclusions should be weighted with confounding factors related to cancer aggressiveness and comorbidities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.