Treating prostate cancer in elderly men associated
with longer survival, compared to non-treatment
Newswise — New findings from an observational study
suggest that elderly men who received treatment for
localized prostate cancer survived significantly
longer than men who did not receive treatment,
according to a study in the December 13 issue of
JAMA; however, the investigators emphasize the
importance of validating these results in randomized
trials.
The widespread adoption of prostate-specific antigen
(PSA) screening has led to an increasing proportion
of men being diagnosed with early-stage and low- or
intermediate-grade prostate cancer.
Studies have demonstrated the slow-developing nature
of low- and intermediate-grade prostate cancer,
making management options (observation, radiation
therapy, and radical prostatectomy) controversial,
with uncertain outcomes. This is also applies to men
older than 65 years, because of a lack of
information from randomized trials. When randomized
controlled trial data are not available,
observational studies can provide insight into
important clinical questions, according to
background information in the article.
Yu-Ning Wong, M.D., of the Fox Chase Cancer Center,
Philadelphia, and colleagues evaluated the
association of active treatment (radiation or
prostatectomy) vs. observation on overall survival
in a large sample of elderly men treated for low- or
intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. The
researchers used data from the Surveillance,
Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Medicare
database, a population-based cancer registry
encompassing approximately 14 percent of the U.S.
population.
This study included data on 44,630 men age 65 to 80
years who were diagnosed between 1991-1999 with
prostate cancer and who had survived more than a
year past diagnosis. Patients were followed up until
death or study end (December 31, 2002). Patients
were classified as having received treatment (n =
32,022) if they had claims for radical prostatectomy
or radiation therapy during the first 6 months after
diagnosis. They were classified as having received
observation (n = 12,608) if they did not have claims
for radical prostatectomy radiation or hormonal
therapy. Patients who received only hormonal therapy
were excluded.
The researchers found that patients who received
treatment had a 31 percent lower risk of death
during the 12-years of follow-up. In the observation
group, 4,643 patients died (37 percent) and 7,639
patients (23.8 percent) in the treatment group died.
Active treatment was associated with a significant
improvement in survival in the study overall. A
benefit associated with treatment was seen in all
subgroups examined, including older men (age 75-80
years at diagnosis), black men, and men with
low-risk disease.
"In summary, even though prostate cancer commonly is
considered an indolent [slow to develop and
painless] disease, this observational study suggests
a reduced risk of mortality associated with active
treatment for low- and intermediate-risk prostate
cancer in the elderly Medicare population examined.
Because observational data can never be free of
concerns about selection bias and confounding, these
results must be validated by rigorous randomized
controlled trials of elderly men with localized
prostate cancer before the findings can be used to
inform treatment decisions," the authors write.
(JAMA. 2006;296:2683-2693. Available
pre-embargo to the media at
http://www.jamamedia.org.)
Editorial: Treating Older Men With Prostate Cancer -
Survival (or Selection) of the Fittest?
In an accompanying editorial, Mark S. Litwin, M.D.,
M.P.H., and David C. Miller, M.D., M.P.H., of the
University of California, Los Angeles, comment on
the findings of Wong and colleagues.
"Improvement in the quality of care for men with
prostate cancer may best be achieved not by treating
more patients but by treating them more
discerningly. Clinicians must remain steadfast in
their efforts to reduce overtreatment and
undertreatment by thoughtfully defining each
patient's unique balance between the natural history
of prostate cancer and that individual patient's
life expectancy."
"The reported association between treatment and
improved survival for older men with low- and
intermediate-risk prostate cancer will be confirmed
or refuted by the results of ongoing randomized
controlled trials … Until then, physicians should
apply these provocative findings judiciously and
continue their concerted efforts to help patients
make informed treatment decisions based not only on
survival predictions but also on health status,
functional concerns, and-most importantly-personal
preference," they write.