Minimal difference in survival between radical prostatectomy and observation in men with modest life expectancy.

Evidence-Based Medicine Pub Date : 2017-12-01 Epub Date: 2017-11-10 DOI:10.1136/ebmed-2017-110837
Vignesh T Packiam, Scott E Eggener
{"title":"Minimal difference in survival between radical prostatectomy and observation in men with modest life expectancy.","authors":"Vignesh T Packiam, Scott E Eggener","doi":"10.1136/ebmed-2017-110837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commentary on : Wilt TJ, Jones KM, Barry MJ, et al . Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2017;377:132–42.\n\nScreening, diagnosis and management of localised prostate cancer remains controversial.\n\nProstate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) was a randomised controlled trial that accrued 731 men with prostate cancer (PCa) between 1994 and 2002 from Veterans Affairs hospitals. Patients were randomised to radical prostatectomy (n=364) or observation (n=367). Inclusion criteria was clinical stage T1–T2 (organ confined), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 10 years. Primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause and prostate-cancer mortality.\n\nMedian age was 67 years, median PSA 7.8 ng/mL and 45% of patients were clinical stage T2 (palpable on exam). After 19.5 years follow-up (median 12.7 years), cumulative all-cause mortality was similar between surgery and observation (61.3% vs 66.8%; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.70 …","PeriodicalId":12182,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmed-2017-110837","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2017-110837","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Commentary on : Wilt TJ, Jones KM, Barry MJ, et al . Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2017;377:132–42. Screening, diagnosis and management of localised prostate cancer remains controversial. Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) was a randomised controlled trial that accrued 731 men with prostate cancer (PCa) between 1994 and 2002 from Veterans Affairs hospitals. Patients were randomised to radical prostatectomy (n=364) or observation (n=367). Inclusion criteria was clinical stage T1–T2 (organ confined), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 10 years. Primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause and prostate-cancer mortality. Median age was 67 years, median PSA 7.8 ng/mL and 45% of patients were clinical stage T2 (palpable on exam). After 19.5 years follow-up (median 12.7 years), cumulative all-cause mortality was similar between surgery and observation (61.3% vs 66.8%; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.70 …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根治性前列腺切除术与观察预期寿命中等男性的生存差异极小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Don't put off until tomorrow what you can do today: Early cholecystectomy is cost-effective in symptomatic cholelithiasis requiring hospitalization. Intensive glucose control in patients with diabetes prevents onset and progression of microalbuminuria, but effects on end-stage kidney disease are still uncertain. Prophylactic platelet transfusion does not reduce risk of clinical bleeding in adults with dengue and thrombocytopaenia. A meta-analysis of positive airway pressure treatment for cardiovascular prevention: why mix apples and pears? Long-acting reversible contraception acceptability and satisfaction is high among adolescents.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1