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
. 2008 Jun;26(3):211-8.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-008-0250-7. Epub 2008 Mar 28.

High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990-2007

Affiliations
Comparative Study

High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990-2007

Matthew R Cooperberg et al. World J Urol. 2008 Jun.

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to describe national trends in presentation, management, and outcomes for men with high risk prostate cancer.

Methods: Data were abstracted from CaPSURE; 10,808 men were diagnosed between 1990 and 2007 and had complete clinical data. High-risk was defined according to the D'Amico criteria; a more restrictive definition assigned clinical stage T2c to intermediate rather than high risk. Temporal trends were assessed for patient distribution among risk groups, and within the high-risk group for individual risk factors, Kattan nomogram score, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score, and primary treatment. Survival analysis stratified by CAPRA score was performed.

Results: Under the standard definition, 31.2% of the men were diagnosed with high-risk disease, and 16.9% were high-risk under the restrictive definition. This proportion has fallen over time but has been stable since 2000. Patients who would be stratified to high risk under the standard definition and to intermediate risk under the restrictive definition have better outcomes than those stratified to either intermediate or high risk under both definitions. There has been no consistent risk migration within the high-risk group over time. Treatment varies substantially with CAPRA score within the high-risk group, with higher risk men less likely to receive local therapy. Use of androgen deprivation therapy has increased over time, both as primary therapy and in conjunction with both external beam radiation and brachytherapy. Biochemical outcomes vary according to CAPRA score within the high-risk group.

Conclusions: Clinical stage T2c should not define high risk, and the high-risk group should be substratified using a multivariable instrument. There is no evidence for meaningful downward risk migration among high-risk patients over the past 15 years. At least some men in the high-risk group may be undertreated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Trends in patient clinical risk stratification at time of diagnosis
Percentage of men stratified to low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups in each year group. Patients designated as “Int/High” are those stratified to high risk using the standard definition (including T2c) and intermediate using the more restrictive definition (T3a only) of high risk. Numbers indicate aggregate totals for each group in each time period: 1990-1994, 1995-1999, 2000-2001, 2002-2003, and 2004-2007. The trend toward more low- and less high-risk disease at diagnosis was significant (P<0.001).
Figure 2
Figure 2. Biochemical recurrence by risk group
Kaplan-Meier curves are presented for patients stratified to low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk, and for those (“Int/High”) stratified to high risk using the standard definition and intermediate risk using the more restrictive definition of high risk.
Figure 3
Figure 3. CAPRA distribution over time among high risk patients
Change in distribution of high-risk patients (standard definition) across CAPRA scores over time.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Treatment trends among high risk patients
Panel A illustrates trends over time in distribution of high risk patients (standard definition) across radical prostatectomy (RP), cryotherapy (Cryo), brachytherapy (Brachy), external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT), primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), and watchful waiting / active surveillance (WW). Panel B shows treatment distribution among all study patients stratified by CAPRA score.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Treatment trends among high risk patients
Panel A illustrates trends over time in distribution of high risk patients (standard definition) across radical prostatectomy (RP), cryotherapy (Cryo), brachytherapy (Brachy), external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT), primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), and watchful waiting / active surveillance (WW). Panel B shows treatment distribution among all study patients stratified by CAPRA score.
Figure 5
Figure 5. Biochemical recurrence by CAPRA score
Kaplan-Meier curves are presented for patients in the high risk group (standard definition), stratified by CAPRA score.

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:43–66. - PubMed
    1. Thompson IM. Defining high risk prostate cancer--where do we set the bar? A translational science approach to risk stratification. J Urol. 2006;176:S21–4. discussion S5-6. - PubMed
    1. Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Pasta DJ, et al. Multiinstitutional validation of the UCSF cancer of the prostate risk assessment for prediction of recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2006;107:2384–91. - PubMed
    1. Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Serio AM, et al. Secondary Therapy, Metastatic Progression, and Cancer-Specific Mortality in Men with Clinically High-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.008. in press. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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. - PubMed