RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Investigating men's perceived lifetime risk of prostate cancer. DESIGN: Survey-based study to men invited for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in the GÖTEBORG-2 trial between September 2015 and June 2020. SETTING: 38 775 men in the Gothenburg area, Sweden, were invited for PSA-testing and participated in a survey. PARTICIPANTS: 17 980 men participated in PSA-testing, of whom 13 189 completed the survey. In addition, 1264 men answered the survey only. INTERVENTIONS: Before having the PSA-test, men answered an electronic survey and estimated their lifetime risk of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis on a visual analogue scale from 0% to 100%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the median lifetime risk estimation, which was compared with Wilcoxon test to an anticipated lifetime risk of 20% (based on GÖTEBORG-1 trial). The secondary outcome was to determine factors associated with risk estimation in a multivariable linear regression model: previous prostate examination, family history, physical exercise, healthy diet, comorbidity, alcohol consumption, smoking, education level, marital status, urinary symptoms and erectile dysfunction. RESULTS: Among PSA-tested men, the median estimated lifetime risk of prostate cancer was 30% (IQR 19% to 50%), corresponding to a 10 percentage-points higher estimation compared with the anticipated risk (p<0.001). Family history of prostate cancer, moderate to severe urinary symptoms and mild to moderate erectile dysfunction were associated with >5 percentage-points higher risk estimation. Similar results were obtained for non-PSA-tested men. CONCLUSIONS: Most men overestimated their prostate cancer risk which underscores the importance of providing them accurate information about prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN94604465.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Our goal was to analyze results from 22 years of followup in the Göteborg randomized prostate cancer (PC) screening trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In December 1994, 20,000 men born 1930-1944 were randomly extracted from the Swedish population register and were randomized (1:1) into either a screening group (SG) or to a control group (CG). Men in the SG were repeatedly invited for biennial prostate specific antigen testing up to an average age of 69 years. Main endpoints were PC incidence and mortality (intention-to-screen principle). RESULTS: After 22 years, 1,528 men in the SG and 1,124 men in the CG had been diagnosed with PC. In total, 112 PC deaths occurred in the SG and 158 in the CG. Compared with the CG, the SG showed a PC incidence rate ratio (RR) of 1.42 (95% CI, 1.31-1.53) and a PC mortality RR of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91). The 22-year cumulative PC mortality rate was 1.55% (95% CI, 1.29-1.86) in the SG and 2.13% (95% CI, 1.83-2.49) in the CG. Correction for nonattendance (Cuzick method) yielded a RR of PC mortality of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.43-0.80). Number needed to invite and number needed to diagnose was estimated to 221 and 9, respectively. PC death risk was increased in the following groups: nontesting men, men entering the program after age 60 and men with >10 years of followup after screening termination. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate specific antigen-based screening substantially decreases PC mortality. However, not attending, starting after age 60 and stopping at age 70 seem to be major pitfalls regarding PC death risk.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested associations between greater age, increased risk of prostate cancer (PC), and higher Gleason score. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed at investigating these associations within the Göteborg-1 randomized, population-based PC screening trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The screening arm of the Göteborg-1 screening trial comprises 10000 randomly selected men (aged 50-64 yr at randomization) from the Göteborg region of Sweden. Between 1995 and 2014, they were biennially invited to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to an upper age limit of 70 yr (range 67-71 yr). PSA ≥3 ng/ml triggered a prostate biopsy (sextant biopsy 1995-2009, thereafter a ten-core biopsy). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The impact of age on Gleason score, given a screen-detected PC, was investigated with multinomial logistic regression analyses adjusted for year of testing and screening round. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 7625 men had at least one PSA test and 1022 men were diagnosed with PC. For men with screen-detected PC, age was associated with the risk of clinically significant PC above and beyond screening round and year of testing (p < 0.001). For each 1-yr increase in age, the risk of being diagnosed with a Gleason score ≥3 + 4 cancer (vs <7) increased by 11% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7-17), whereas the risk of being diagnosed with a Gleason score ≥4 + 3 cancer (vs <7) increased by 8.5% (95% CI -1.6 to 20). CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk of a higher Gleason score in older men should be considered when counseling men regarding early diagnosis and treatment for PC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found that older age increased both the risk of prostate cancer and the risk of more aggressive prostate cancer.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among patients with localised prostate cancer. Evidence on whether different surgical techniques can affect mortality rates is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate functional and oncological outcomes 8 yr after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 4003 patients in a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial comparing RALP and RRP in 14 Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011. Data for functional outcomes were assessed via validated patient questionnaires administered preoperatively and at 12 and 24 mo and 8 yr after surgery. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was urinary incontinence. Functional outcomes at 8 yr were analysed using the modified Poisson regression approach. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Urinary incontinence was not significantly different at 8 yr after surgery between RALP and RRP (27% vs 29%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.23). Erectile dysfunction was significantly lower in the RALP group (66% vs 70%; aRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) was significantly lower in the RALP group at 8 yr after surgery (40/2699 vs 25/885; aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.93). Differences in oncological outcomes were mainly seen in the group with high D'Amico risk, with a lower risk of positive surgical margins (21% vs 34%), biochemical recurrence (51% vs 69%), and PCSM (14/220 vs 11/77) for RALP versus RRP. The main limitation is the nonrandomised design. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective multicentre controlled trial, PCSM at 8 yr after surgery was lower for RALP in comparison to RRP. A causal relationship between surgical technique and mortality cannot be inferred, but the result confirms that RALP is oncologically safe. Taken together with better short-term results reported elsewhere, our findings confirm that implementation of RALP may continue. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study comparing two surgical techniques for removal of the prostate for localised prostate cancer shows that a robot-assisted minimally invasive technique is safe in the long term. Together with previous results showing some better short-term effects with this approach, our findings support continued use of robot-assisted surgery.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional studies indicate that a cancer patient's partner is important in regard to the patient's psychological well-being. This has yet to be investigated in a large prospective setting. OBJECTIVE: To investigate types of psychosocial support and whether men improved their well-being at 12 and 24 mo after radical prostatectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a group of 1446 men participating in the Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open (LAPPRO) trial reporting low well-being 3 mo after surgery and who also had a more limited social network, we investigated predictors of change in well-being at 12 and 24 mo. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Predictors of outcome were analyzed using log-binomial regression and forward regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: No one reported high well-being 3 mo after surgery. Of 1370 men reporting low well-being at 3 mo, 479 had improved to high well-being at 12 mo. At least one supportive person increased men's chances of improved well-being at 12 mo compared with 3 mo after surgery (relative risk [RR]: 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.72), as did partner support (RR: 1.91; 95% CI, 1.28-2.86). The more people available for emotional and practical support, the more likely men were to improve their well-being at 12 and 24 mo, especially between 3 and 12 mo (p<0.0001). A limitation is that RRs were influenced by variations in the metrics of patient-reported well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The private network played a critical role regarding improved well-being. Having a partner and people to confide in within one's private network bettered patients' chances of improved well-being. Helping men mobilize support within their private network early on may be important in the recovery process. PATIENT SUMMARY: The link between one's private social network and well-being after prostate cancer surgery remains unclear. We investigated the role of support with many patients having undergone prostate cancer surgery. We found that the private social network was critical to men's well-being.