본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Surveillance Versus Treatment for Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer and Mortality-Risk.

2/5 보강
The Prostate 2026 Vol.86(7) p. 839-845 Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatm
TL;DR All‐cause, PC‐specific, and non‐PC‐specific mortality in younger patients with FIR PC managed with either AS/watchful‐waiting (WW) or immediate definitive treatment, stratified by race is evaluated.
Retraction 확인
출처
PubMed DOI OpenAlex Semantic 마지막 보강 2026-04-29

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 3/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
832 patients, 127 died (3.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
Surveillance
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
Treatment for Favorable Intermediate
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
추출되지 않음
OpenAlex 토픽 · Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research Frailty in Older Adults

Sayan M, Tuac Y, Qian Z, Dall CP, Cole AP, Leeman JE, King MT, Nguyen PL, D'Amico AV

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

All‐cause, PC‐specific, and non‐PC‐specific mortality in younger patients with FIR PC managed with either AS/watchful‐waiting (WW) or immediate definitive treatment, stratified by race is evaluated.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value p < 0.025
  • p-value p = 0.01
  • 95% CI 0.44-1.94
  • 연구 설계 cohort study

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Mutlay Sayan, Yetkin Tuac, et al. (2026). Surveillance Versus Treatment for Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer and Mortality-Risk.. The Prostate, 86(7), 839-845. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.70156
MLA Mutlay Sayan, et al.. "Surveillance Versus Treatment for Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer and Mortality-Risk.." The Prostate, vol. 86, no. 7, 2026, pp. 839-845.
PMID 41802205
DOI 10.1002/pros.70156

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred management approach for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PC); yet whether younger patients with favorable-intermediate-risk (FIR) PC experience increased mortality-risk when electing AS remains unknown. We evaluated all-cause, PC-specific, and non-PC-specific mortality (ACM, PCSM, and non-PCSM) in younger patients with FIR PC managed with either AS/watchful-waiting (WW) or immediate definitive treatment, stratified by race.

[METHODS] We conducted a retrospective cohort study using SEER data (2010-2020). Patients included were < 60 years-old with FIR PC. The primary outcome was ACM, secondary outcomes PCSM and non-PCSM. Multivariable Cox and Fine-Gray competing-risk regressions were used, adjusting for known prognostic factors. Interaction by race (White vs underrepresented minority [URM]) was explored. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.025 (Bonferroni-adjusted).

[RESULTS] Among 3,832 patients, 127 died (3.31%), including 18 of the 127 deaths from PC (14.17%). Initial treatment with RP/RT did not significantly reduce ACM or non-PCSM compared to AS/WW in White (ACM AHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.44-1.94; non-PCSM AHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.53-3.46) or URM patients (ACM AHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.33-1.43; non-PCSM AHR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.44-2.44). However, after adjustment for multiplicity RP/RT significantly reduced PCSM-risk compared to AS/WW in URM (AHR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.00-0.48; p = 0.01), but not in White patients (AHR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.88; p = 0.03) although the median follow-up was 6.5-months longer in URM patients undergoing AS/WW compared to RP/RT.

[CONCLUSIONS] Early mortality-risks were similar and low in patients age < 60 years with FIR PC managed with AS/WW compared to RP/RT, irrespective of race.

MeSH Terms

Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Watchful Waiting; SEER Program; Risk Assessment

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (2)