Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2006 May 22;94(10):1361-8.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603105.

A model of the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer, and the effect of radical treatment on overall survival

Affiliations
Comparative Study

A model of the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer, and the effect of radical treatment on overall survival

C Parker et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

The lead time and over-detection associated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, and generational improvements in all-cause mortality, make prostate cancer outcome studies from the pre-PSA era difficult to interpret in a contemporary setting. We developed a competing-risks hazard model to estimate the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer, and the impact of radical treatment on overall survival. The model of hazard of mortality was fitted to clinical outcome data from the pre-PSA era, and the effects of screening, generational mortality improvements and radical treatment were incorporated. Sensitivities to the choice of baseline data and values of key parameters were assessed. Lead-time estimates in men diagnosed aged 55-59 years were 14.1, 9.3 and 5.0 years for men with Gleason scores <7, 7 and >7, respectively, assuming biennial screening with 100% attendance. Central estimates of 15-year prostate cancer mortality for conservative management of screen-detected prostate cancer ranged from 0 to 2% for Gleason scores <7, 9 to 31% for Gleason score 7 and 28-72% for Gleason scores >7. For men aged 55-59 years at diagnosis, the predicted absolute 15-year survival benefit from curative treatment was 0, 12 and 26% for men with Gleason scores <7, 7 and >7, respectively. Estimates of the survival benefit of radical treatment were relatively insensitive to values of key parameters. The case for curative treatment, rather than conservative management, of screen-detected localised prostate cancer is strongest in men with high-grade disease. This conclusion contrasts with current patterns of care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of methods.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Projections of survival over 15 years under conservative treatment, using the central model assumptions. Black areas represent deaths due to prostate cancer, grey areas represent deaths due to other causes.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Albertsen P, Gleason D, Barry M (1998) Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280: 975–980 - PubMed
    1. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J (2005) 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 293: 2095–2101 - PubMed
    1. Anderson P, Abildstrom S, Rosthoj S (2002) Competing risks as a multi-state model. Stat Methods Med Res 11: 203–215 - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ, Albertsen PC, Bagshaw MA, Blute ML, Cox R, Middleton RG, Gleason DF, Zincke H, Bergstralh EJ, Jacobsen SJ (2001) Outcomes for men with clinically nonmetastatic prostate carcinoma managed with radical prostactectomy, external beam radiotherapy, or expectant management: a retrospective analysis. Cancer 91: 2302–2314 - PubMed
    1. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spangberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Garmo H, Palmgren J, Adami HO, Norlen BJ, Johansson JE (2005) Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 352: 1977–1984 - PubMed

Publication types

Substances