Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版
Search   
 
Journal

Ahead of print
Authors' Accepted
    Manuscripts
new!
Current Issue
Archive
Acknowledgments
Special Issues
Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

Online Submission
Online Review
Instruction for Authors
Instruction for Reviewers
English Corner new!

About AJA

About AJA
Editorial Board
Contact Us
News

Resources & Services

Advertisement
Subscription
Email alert
Proceedings
Reprints

Download area

Copyright licence
EndNote style file
Manuscript word template
Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

Proof-reading for the
    authors

AJA Club (in English)
AJA Club (in Chinese)

 
Abstract

Volume 24, Issue 5 (September 2022) 24, 494–499; 10.4103/aja2021113

The comparison of survival between active surveillance or watchful waiting and focal laser ablation in patients with low-risk prostate cancer

Jia-Kun Li1, Chi-Chen Zhang1, Shi Qiu1, Kun Jin1, Bo-Yu Cai1, Qi-Ming Yuan1, Xing-Yu Xiong1, Lian-Sha Tang2, Di Jin1, Xiang-Hong Zhou1, Yi-Ge Bao1, Lu Yang1, Qiang Wei1

1 Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
2 Department of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China

Correspondence: Dr. Q Wei (weiqiang163163@163.com) or Dr. L Yang (wycleflue@163.com)

Date of Submission 18-May-2021 Date of Acceptance 16-Nov-2021 Date of Web Publication 28-Jan-2022

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second-most common cancer among men. Both active surveillance or watchful waiting (AS/WW) and focal laser ablation (FLA) can avoid the complications caused by radical treatment. How to make the choice between these options in clinical practice needs further study. Therefore, this study aims to compare and analyze their effects based on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) to obtain better long-term benefits. We included patients with low-risk PCa from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database of 2010–2016. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were conducted for OS and CSS in the two groups. To eliminate bias, this study applied a series of sensitivity analyses. Moreover, Kaplan–Meier curves were plotted to obtain survival status. A total of 18 841 patients with low-risk PCa were included, with a median of 36-month follow-up. According to the multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression, the FLA group presented inferior survival benefits in OS than the AS/WW group (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.37–3.33, P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounders, the result persisted (HR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.02–2.81, P < 0.05). According to the results of the sensitivity analysis, the inverse probability of the treatment weighing model indicated the same result in OS. In conclusion, AS/WW and FLA have the advantage of fewer side effects and the benefit of avoiding overtreatment compared with standard treatment. Our study suggested that AS/WW provides more survival benefits for patients with low-risk PCa. More relevant researches and data will be needed for further clarity.

Keywords: active surveillance; cancer-specific survival; focal laser ablation; low-risk prostate cancer; overall survival; watchful waiting

Full Text | PDF |

 
Browse:  75
 
Copyright 1999-2017  Shanghai Materia Medica, Shanghai Jiao Tong University.  All rights reserved