Optimal Treatment Strategies for Localized Prostate Cancer
Author Information
Author(s): Wendy R. Parulekar, M. McKenzie, K.N. Chi, L. Klotz, C. Catton, M. Brundage, K. Ding, A. Hiltz, R. Meyer, F. Saad
Primary Institution: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group
Hypothesis
Is active surveillance with a radical intervention based on signs of disease progression as good as radical intervention at diagnosis?
Conclusion
The study aims to define the management of low-risk prostate cancer globally and clarify the role of PSA doubling time in decision-making.
Supporting Evidence
- Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in Canadian men.
- Mortality from prostate cancer declined at a rate of 2.7% annually from 1994 to 2003.
- Current treatment options still fail to cure or control disease in a significant proportion of cases.
Takeaway
This study is trying to find out if watching prostate cancer closely is just as good as treating it right away.
Methodology
The study compares active surveillance with radical therapy in a randomized phase III setting.
Limitations
The study's results may vary based on patient and physician willingness to participate.
Participant Demographics
Patients with favorable-risk prostate cancer and a life expectancy of more than 10 years.
Statistical Information
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website