Cancer Therapy: Clinical Prostate Cancer Mortality following Active Surveillance versus Immediate Radical Prostatectomy

Propose:Active surveillance has been endorsed for low-risk prostate cancer, but information about longterm outcomes and comparative effectiveness of active surveillance is lacking. The purpose of this study is to project prostate cancer mortality under active surveillance followed by radical prostatectomy versus under immediate radical prostatectomy. Experimental design: A simulation model was developed to combine information on time from diagnosis to treatment under active surveillance and associated disease progression from a Johns Hopkins active surveillance cohort (n 1⁄4 769), time from radical prostatectomy to recurrence from cases in the CaPSURE database with T-stage T2a (n 1⁄4 3,470), and time from recurrence to prostate cancer death from a T-stage T2a Johns Hopkins cohort of patients whose disease recurred after radical prostatectomy (n1⁄4 963). Results were projected for a hypothetical cohort aged 40 to 90 years with low-risk prostate cancer (T-stage T2a, Gleason score 6, and prostate-specific antigen level 10 ng/mL). Results: The model projected that 2.8% of men on active surveillance and 1.6% of men with immediate radical prostatectomywould die of their disease in 20 years. Corresponding lifetime estimateswere 3.4% for active surveillance and 2.0% for immediate radical prostatectomy. The average projected increase in life expectancy associated with immediate radical prostatectomy was 1.8 months. On average, the model projected thatmen on active surveillance would remain free of treatment for an additional 6.4 years relative to men treated immediately. Conclusions: Active surveillance is likely to produce a very modest decline in prostate cancer-specific survival amongmendiagnosedwith low-risk prostate cancer but could lead to significant benefits in termsof quality of life. Clin Cancer Res; 18(19); 5471–8. 2012 AACR.