Treatment options for localized prostate cancer: Quality-adjusted life years and the effects of lead-time

被引:18
作者
Bhatnagar, V
Stewart, ST
Bonney, WW
Kaplan, RM
机构
[1] Vet Affairs San Diego Healthcare Syst, Ctr Patient Oriented Care, Hlth Serv Res & Dev, San Diego, CA 92161 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Family & Prevent Med, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[3] Univ Calif San Diego, Sch Med, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
[4] Harvard Univ, Interfac Program Hlth Syst Improvement, Cambridge, MA USA
[5] Natl Bur Econ Res, Cambridge, MA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.urology.2003.08.011
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100201 [内科学];
摘要
Objectives. The purposes of this study were to estimate the difference in quality-adjusted life-years between conservative management and prostatectomy or radiotherapy (RT) by clinical Gleason score (2 to 4, 5 to 6, 7, and 8 to 10) for patients aged 55 years and older with clinically localized prostate cancer and to adjust for and explore the effects of lead-time. For localized prostate cancer, it is not known whether treatment (prostatectomy or RT) results in longer quality-adjusted survival than conservative management. Observed survival benefits after treatment may be biased by the lead-time resulting from early diagnosis with prostate-specific antigen screening. Methods. A Markov simulation was developed, and transition probabilities were derived from a review of published studies. Utility weights were measured in male volunteers older than 60 years. Estimates of disease progression during conservative management were adjusted for lead-time. Sensitivity analyses were performed on all parameters (including estimates for lead-time). Results. For Gleason score 2 to 4 cancer, conservative management yielded the greatest number of quality-adjusted life-years. For Gleason score 5 to 6 cancer, any of the options appeared beneficial, depending on the estimates for disease progression. For Gleason score 7 to 10 cancer, prostatectomy and RT resulted in more quality-adjusted life-years than conservative management; with a lead-time adjustment of greater than 10 years, the outcomes with conservative management and prostatectomy were similar. The choice between prostatectomy and RT was sensitive to estimates of disease progression after treatment. Conclusions. Conservative management is a reasonable option for Gleason score 2 to 4 cancer and for some patients with Gleason score 5 to 6 cancer. Prostatectomy or RT is recommended for Gleason score 7 to 10 cancer. The survival benefits after treatment were not explained by the lead-time alone. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:103 / 109
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]
Deferred treatment of clinically localized low-grade prostate cancer: Actual 10-year and projected 15-year follow-up of the Karolinska series [J].
Adolfsson, J ;
Steineck, G ;
Hedlund, PO .
UROLOGY, 1997, 50 (05) :722-726
[2]
Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
Albertsen, PC ;
Hanley, JA ;
Gleason, DF ;
Barry, MJ .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (11) :975-980
[3]
Long-term hazard of progression after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: Continued rise of biochemical failure after 5 years [J].
Amling, CL ;
Blute, ML ;
Bergstralh, EJ ;
Seay, TM ;
Slezak, J ;
Zincke, H .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 164 (01) :101-105
[4]
Anderson PR, 2000, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V89, P2565, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(20001215)89:12<2565::AID-CNCR8>3.0.CO
[5]
2-I
[6]
Radical prostatectomy: Time trends, morbidity and quality of life [J].
Arai, Y .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2001, 8 (07) :S15-S18
[7]
Newer approaches to androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer - Proceedings of the Second International Conference - Overview consensus statement [J].
Carroll, PR ;
Kantoff, PW ;
Balk, SP ;
Brown, MA ;
D'Amico, AV ;
George, DJ ;
Grossfeld, GD ;
Johnson, CS ;
Kelly, WK ;
Klotz, L ;
Lee, WR ;
Lubeck, DP ;
McLeod, DG ;
Oh, WK ;
Pollack, A ;
Sartor, O ;
Smith, MR ;
Hart, C .
UROLOGY, 2002, 60 (3A) :1-6
[8]
RESULTS OF CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT OF CLINICALLY LOCALIZED PROSTATE-CANCER [J].
CHODAK, GW ;
THISTED, RA ;
GERBER, GS ;
JOHANSSON, JE ;
ADOLFSSON, J ;
JONES, GW ;
CHISHOLM, GD ;
MOSKOVITZ, B ;
LIVNE, PM ;
WARNER, J .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1994, 330 (04) :242-248
[9]
Fishman A, 2003, NEW ENGL J MED, V348, P2059
[10]
Fleming C, 1993, JAMA, V269, P2650