Article

Impact of Age at Diagnosis on Prostate Cancer Treatment and Survival

Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-1695, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 01/2011; 29(2):235-41. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.30.2075
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Older men are more likely to be diagnosed with high-risk prostate cancer and to have lower overall survival. As a result, age often plays a role in treatment choice. However, the relationships among age, disease risk, and prostate cancer-specific survival have not been well established.
We studied men in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) database with complete risk, treatment, and follow-up information. High-risk patients were identified by using the validated Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score. Competing risks regression was used to identify the independent impact of age on cancer-specific survival. We also analyzed the effect of local treatment on survival among older men with high-risk disease.
In all, 26% of men age ≥ 75 years presented with high-risk disease (CAPRA score 6 to 10). Treatment varied markedly with age across risk strata; older men were more likely to receive androgen deprivation monotherapy. Controlling for treatment modality alone, or for treatment and risk, age did not independently predict cancer-specific survival. Furthermore, controlling for age, comorbidity, and risk, older men with high-risk tumors receiving local therapy had a 46% reduction in mortality compared with those treated conservatively.
Older patients are more likely to have high-risk prostate cancer at diagnosis and less likely to receive local therapy. Indeed, underuse of potentially curative local therapy among older men with high-risk disease may in part explain observed differences in cancer-specific survival across age strata. These findings support making decisions regarding treatment on the basis of disease risk and life expectancy rather than on chronologic age.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Matthew R Cooperberg, Jul 04, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
141 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify individual and contextual factors contributing to overall mortality among men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Florida, a random sample of patients (between October 1, 2001, and December 31, 2007) was taken from the Florida Cancer Data System. Patient's demographic and clinical information were obtained from the Florida Cancer Data System. Comorbidity was computed following the Elixhauser Index method. Census-tract-level socioeconomic status and farm house presence were extracted from Census 2000 and linked to patient data. The ratio of urologists and radiation oncologists to prostate cancer cases at the county level was computed. Multilevel logistic regression was conducted to identify significance of individuals and contextual factors in relation to overall mortality. A total of 18,042 patients were identified, among whom 2,363 died. No racial difference was found in our study. Being older at diagnosis, unmarried, current smoker, uninsured, diagnosed at late stage, with undifferentiated, poorly differentiated, or unknown tumor grade were significantly associated with higher odds of overall mortality. Living in a low-income area was significantly associated with higher odds of mortality (p = .0404). After adjusting for age, stage, and tumor grade, patients who received hormonal, combination of radiation with hormone therapy, and no definitive treatment had higher odds of mortality compared with those who underwent surgery only. A large number of comorbidities were associated with higher odds of mortality. Although disease-specific mortality was not examined, our findings suggest the importance of careful considerations of patient sociodemographic characteristics and their coexisting conditions in treatment decision making, which in turn affects mortality.
    American journal of men's health 12/2013; 8(4). DOI:10.1177/1557988313512862 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The recommendations and the updated EAU guidelines consider early detection of PCa with the purpose of reducing PCa-related mortality and the development of advanced or metastatic disease. This paper presents the recommendations of the European Association of Urology (EAU) for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) in men without evidence of PCa-related symptoms. The working panel conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective clinical studies on baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and early detection of PCa and on PCa screening published between 1990 and 2013 using Cochrane Reviews, Embase, and Medline search strategies. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were analysed according to the principles of evidence-based medicine. The current strategy of the EAU recommends that (1) early detection of PCa reduces PCa-related mortality; (2) early detection of PCa reduces the risk of being diagnosed and developing advanced and metastatic PCa; (3) a baseline serum PSA level should be obtained at 40-45 yr of age; (4) intervals for early detection of PCa should be adapted to the baseline PSA serum concentration; (5) early detection should be offered to men with a life expectancy ≥10 yr; and (6) in the future, multivariable clinical risk-prediction tools need to be integrated into the decision-making process. A baseline serum PSA should be offered to all men 40-45 yr of age to initiate a risk-adapted follow-up approach with the purpose of reducing PCa mortality and the incidence of advanced and metastatic PCa. In the future, the development and application of multivariable risk-prediction tools will be necessary to prevent over diagnosis and over treatment.
    European Urology 07/2013; 64(3). DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.06.051 · 12.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is a potentially lethal disease. It is clinically important to identify patients with high-risk PCa early on because they stand to benefit the most from curative therapy. Because of recent advances in PCa management, a multimodal approach may be advantageous. Define high-risk PCa, and identify the best diagnostic and treatment patterns for patients with clinically localized and locally advanced disease. A critical analysis of published results following monomodal and/or multimodal therapy for high-risk PCa patients was also performed. A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases as well as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. High-risk PCa accounts for ≤ 15% of all new diagnoses. Compared with patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCa, patients with high-risk PCa are at increased risk of treatment failure. Unfortunately, no contemporary randomized controlled trials comparing different treatment modalities exist. Evaluation of the results published to date shows that no single treatment can be universally recommended. Most often, a multimodal approach is warranted to optimize patient outcomes. A significant minority of patients continue to present with high-risk PCa, which remains lethal in some cases. Outcomes following treatment of men with high-risk tumors have not substantially improved over time. However, not all high-risk patients are at the same risk of PCa progression and death. At present, a multimodal approach seems the best way to achieve acceptable outcomes for high-risk PCa patients.
    European Urology 02/2012; 61(6):1096-106. DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.031 · 12.48 Impact Factor