Prostate Cancer Group Study Number Research Articles

Time without PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of future biochemical recurrence, metastatic disease and prostate cancer death: a prospective Scandinavian cohort study

ObjectiveAlthough surveillance after radical prostatectomy routinely includes repeated prostate specific antigen (PSA)-testing for many years, biochemical recurrence often occurs without further clinical progression. We therefore hypothesised that follow-up can be...

Prostate-specific antigen-based screening: controversy and guidelines.

Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has improved the detection of prostate cancer, allowing for stage migration to less advanced disease, the precise mortality benefit of early detection is unclear. This is in part due to a discrepancy between the two large randomized controlled trials comparing PSA screening to usual care. The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) found a survival benefit to screening, while the United States Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial did not. Furthermore, the benefit of immediate surgical intervention for screen-detected prostate cancer is unclear, as the results superficially differ between the two large randomized controlled trials comparing prostatectomy to observation. The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) found no survival benefit for prostatectomy in PSA screened U.S. men, while the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number Four (SPCG-4) found a survival benefit for prostatectomy in clinically diagnosed prostate cancer. As a result of the controversy surrounding PSA screening and subsequent prostate cancer treatment, guidelines vary widely by organization.

Updated Results from the Scandinavian Study of Early Prostate Cancer

The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4), begun in 1989, is the only large trial in which radical prostatectomy and watchful

Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer

BackgroundRadical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with localized prostate cancer; however, important questions regarding long-term benefit remain.MethodsBetween 1989 and 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy and followed them through the end of 2012. The primary end points in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) were death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and the risk of metastases. Secondary end points included the initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy.ResultsDuring 23.2 years of follow-up, 200 of 347 men in the surgery group and 247 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group died. Of the deaths, 63 in the surgery group and 99 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer; the relative risk was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.77; P=0.001), and the absolute difference was 11.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.5 to 17.5). The number needed to treat to prevent one death was 8. One man died after surgery in the radical-prostatectomy group. Androgen-deprivation therapy was used in fewer patients who underwent prostatectomy (a difference of 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 17.7 to 32.3). The benefit of surgery with respect to death from prostate cancer was largest in men younger than 65 years of age (relative risk, 0.45) and in those with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.38). However, radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduced risk of metastases among older men (relative risk, 0.68; P=0.04).ConclusionsExtended follow-up confirmed a substantial reduction in mortality after radical prostatectomy; the number needed to treat to prevent one death continued to decrease when the treatment was modified according to age at diagnosis and tumor risk. A large proportion of long-term survivors in the watchful-waiting group have not required any palliative treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.)

Prostate cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

Prostate cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

Screening and efficacy of radical prostatectomy

Screening and efficacy of radical prostatectomy

Effects of Screening on Radical Prostatectomy Efficacy: The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial

The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) trial showed that radical prostatectomy (RP) reduced prostate cancer deaths with an absolute mortality difference (AMD) between the RP and watchful waiting arms of 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2% to 12.0%) after 15 years. In the United States, the Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) produced an AMD of 3% (95% CI = -1.1% to 6.5%) after 12 years. It is not known whether a higher frequency of screen detection in PIVOT explains the lower AMD. We assumed the SPCG-4 trial represents RP efficacy and prostate cancer survival in an unscreened population. Given the fraction of screen-detected prostate cancers in PIVOT, we adjusted prostate cancer survival using published estimates of overdiagnosis and lead time to project the effect of screen detection on disease-specific deaths. On the basis of published estimates, we assumed that 32% of screen-detected cancers were overdiagnosed and a mean lead time among non-overdiagnosed cancers of 7.7 years. When we adjusted prostate cancer survival for the 76% of case patients in PIVOT who were screen detected, we projected that the AMD after 12 years would be 2.0% (95% CI = -1.6% to 5.6%) based on variation in published estimates of overdiagnosis and mean lead time in the United States. If RP efficacy and prostate cancer survival in the absence of screening are similar to that in the SPCG-4 trial, then overdiagnosis and lead time largely explain the lower AMD in PIVOT. If these artifacts of screening are the correct explanation, then there is a subset of case subjects that should not be treated with RP, and identifying this subset should lead to a clearer understanding of the benefit of RP in the remaining cases.

Long-term quality-of-life outcomes after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomised trial

For men with localised prostate cancer, surgery provides a survival benefit compared with watchful waiting. Treatments are associated with morbidity. Results for functional outcome and quality of life are rarely reported beyond 10 years and are lacking from randomised settings. We report results for quality of life for men in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) after a median follow-up of more than 12 years. All living Swedish and Finnish men (400 of 695) randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in SPCG-4 from 1989 to 1999 were included in our analysis. An additional 281 men were included in a population-based control group matched for region and age. Physical symptoms, symptom-induced stress, and self-assessed quality of life were evaluated with a study-specific questionnaire. Longitudinal data were available for 166 Swedish men who had answered quality-of-life questionnaires at an earlier timepoint. 182 (88%) of 208 men in the radical prostatectomy group, 167 (87%) of 192 men in the watchful-waiting group, and 214 (76%) of 281 men in the population-based control group answered the questionnaire. Men in SPCG-4 had a median follow-up of 12·2 years (range 7-17) and a median age of 77·0 years (range 61-88). High self-assessed quality of life was reported by 62 (35%) of 179 men allocated radical prostatectomy, 55 (34%) of 160 men assigned to watchful waiting, and 93 (45%) of 208 men in the control group. Anxiety was higher in the SPCG-4 groups (77 [43%] of 178 and 69 [43%] of 161 men) than in the control group (68 [33%] of 208 men; relative risk 1·42, 95% CI 1·07-1·88). Prevalence of erectile dysfunction was 84% (146 of 173 men) in the radical prostatectomy group, 80% (122 of 153) in the watchful-waiting group, and 46% (95 of 208) in the control group and prevalence of urinary leakage was 41% (71 of 173), 11% (18 of 164), and 3% (six of 209), respectively. Distress caused by these symptoms was reported significantly more often by men allocated radical prostatectomy than by men assigned to watchful waiting. In a longitudinal analysis of men in SPCG-4 who provided information at two follow-up points 9 years apart, 38 (45%) of 85 men allocated radical prostatectomy and 48 (60%) of 80 men allocated watchful waiting reported an increase in number of physical symptoms; 50 (61%) of 82 and 47 (64%) of 74 men, respectively, reported a reduction in quality of life. For men in SPCG-4, negative side-effects were common and added more stress than was reported in the control population. In the radical prostatectomy group, erectile dysfunction and urinary leakage were often consequences of surgery. In the watchful-waiting group, side-effects can be caused by tumour progression. The number and severity of side-effects changes over time at a higher rate than is caused by normal ageing and a loss of sexual ability is a persistent psychological problem for both interventions. An understanding of the patterns of side-effects and time dimension of their occurrence for each treatment is important for full patient information. US National Institutes of Health; Swedish Cancer Society; Foundation in Memory of Johanna Hagstrand and Sigfrid Linnér.

Surgery vs. Observation for Early-Stage Prostate Cancer

In a prior trial of 695 men with localized prostate cancer, investigators from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 showed that,

Managing localized prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting: Cost analysis of a randomized trial (SPCG-4)

The cost of radical prostatectomy (RP) compared to watchful waiting (WW) has never been estimated in a randomized trial. The goal of this study was to estimate long-term total costs per patient associated with RP and WW arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital care. This investigation used the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) trial, comparing RP to WW, and included data from 212 participants living in two counties in Sweden from 1989 to 1999 (105 randomized to WW and 107 to RP). All costs were included from randomization date until death or end of follow-up in July 2007. Resource use arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital costs was measured in physical units and multiplied by a unit cost to come up with a total cost per patient. During a median follow-up of 12 years, the overall cost in the RP group was 34% higher (p < 0.01) than in the WW group, corresponding to €6123 in Sweden. The difference was driven almost exclusively by the cost of the surgical procedure. The cost difference between RP and WW was two times higher among men with low (2-6) than among those with high (7-10) Gleason score. In this economic evaluation of RP versus WW of localized prostate cancer in a randomized study, RP was associated with 34% higher costs. This difference, attributed exclusively to the cost of the RP procedure, was not overcome during extended follow-up.

Inguinal Hernia After Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: Results From a Randomized Setting and a Nonrandomized Setting

BackgroundObservational data indicate that retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) for prostate cancer (PCa) may induce inguinal hernia (IH) formation. Little is known about the influence of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) on IH risk. ObjectiveTo compare the incidence of IH after RRP and RALP to that of nonoperated patients with PCa and to a population control. Design, setting, and participantsWe studied two groups. All 376 men included in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 constitute study group 1. Patients were randomly assigned RRP or watchful waiting (WW). The 1411 consecutive patients who underwent RRP or RALP at Karolinska University Hospital constitute study group 2. Men without PCa, matched for age and residence to each study group, constitute controls. MeasurementsPostoperative IH incidence was detected through a validated questionnaire. The participation rates were 82.7% and 88.4% for study groups 1 and 2, respectively. Results and limitationsThe Kaplan-Meier cumulative occurrence of IH development after 48 mo in study group 1 was 9.3%, 2.4%, and 0.9% for the RRP, the WW, and the control groups, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the RRP group and the WW and control groups, but not between the last two. In study group 2 the cumulative risk of IH development at 48 mo was 12.2%, 5.8%, and 2.6% for the RRP, the RALP, and the control group, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the RRP group and the RALP and control groups, but not between the last two. ConclusionsRRP for PCa leads to an increased risk of IH development. RALP may lower the risk as compared to open surgery.

Health-related quality-of-life effects of watchful waiting re-evaluated in SPCG-4

This commentary discusses the re-analysis of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4), which had previously shown a modest but significant survival benefit of prostatectomy over watchful waiting. In the re-analysis, patients allocated to watchful waiting experienced a significantly decreased health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 6-8 years after randomization, compared with those who underwent radical prostatectomy. HRQOL differences between treatment arms in the first 5 years after randomization were limited to worse erectile dysfunction among patients randomized to prostatectomy. These findings indicate that watchful waiting might be associated with greater late deterioration in select domains of HRQOL than is prostatectomy. In addition, patients randomized to watchful waiting who received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) reported a lower sense of well-being, more-depressed mood, and a lower self-assessed quality of life compared with those who did not receive ADT, which indicates that ADT might adversely affect HRQOL in this patient population.

Time, Symptom Burden, Androgen Deprivation, and Self-Assessed Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting: The Randomized Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) Clinical Trial

BackgroundQuality-of-life outcomes are important in the choice of treatment strategy for men with localized prostate cancer. ObjectiveTo evaluate how follow-up time, number of physical symptoms, and presence of androgen deprivation affected quality of life among men randomized to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. Design, setting, and participantsThe study group was composed of all 376 living men included in the Swedish part of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) [1] between January 1, 1989, and February 29, 1996. Quality-of-life data were collected after a mean follow-up time of 4.1 yr. InterventionAll patients were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. Forty-five men were androgen deprived. MeasurementsData of specific symptoms, symptom-induced stress, sense of well-being, and self-assessed quality of life were obtained by means of a questionnaire. Psychological symptoms were assessed using seven-point visual digital scales. Results and limitationsIn analyses stratified on the basis of the numbers of physical symptoms, anxiety and depressed mood were less common, and sense of well-being and self-assessed quality of life were better throughout in the radical prostatectomy group than in the watchful waiting group. As the number of physical symptoms increased, all psychological variables became worse and more prominent in the watchful waiting group. After a follow-up time of 6–8 yr, a significant decrease in quality of life (p=0.03) was seen in the watchful waiting group. Twenty-four percent of androgen-deprived patients assigned to watchful waiting reported high self-assessed quality of life compared with 60% in the radical prostatectomy group. Eighty-eight percent of patients had clinically detected tumors. ConclusionsAndrogen deprivation negatively affected self-assessed quality of life in men assigned to watchful waiting. The number of physical symptoms was associated with the level of quality of life. Quality of life was lower with longer follow-up time in both groups and was statistically significant in the watchful waiting group (p=0.03).

Editorial Comment on: Time, Symptom Burden, Androgen Deprivation, and Self-Assessed Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting: The Randomized Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) Clinical Trial

Abstract Background Quality-of-life outcomes are important in the choice of treatment strategy for men with localized prostate cancer. Objective To evaluate how follow-up time, number of physical symptoms, and presence of androgen deprivation affected quality of life among men randomized to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. Design, setting, and participants The study group was composed of all 376 living men included in the Swedish part of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) [1] between January 1, 1989, and February 29, 1996. Quality-of-life data were collected after a mean follow-up time of 4.1 yr. Intervention All patients were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. Forty-five men were androgen deprived. Measurements Data of specific symptoms, symptom-induced stress, sense of well-being, and self-assessed quality of life were obtained by means of a questionnaire. Psychological symptoms were assessed using seven-point visual digital scales. Results and limitations In analyses stratified on the basis of the numbers of physical symptoms, anxiety and depressed mood were less common, and sense of well-being and self-assessed quality of life were better throughout in the radical prostatectomy group than in the watchful waiting group. As the number of physical symptoms increased, all psychological variables became worse and more prominent in the watchful waiting group. After a follow-up time of 6–8 yr, a significant decrease in quality of life ( p =0.03) was seen in the watchful waiting group. Twenty-four percent of androgen-deprived patients assigned to watchful waiting reported high self-assessed quality of life compared with 60% in the radical prostatectomy group. Eighty-eight percent of patients had clinically detected tumors. Conclusions Androgen deprivation negatively affected self-assessed quality of life in men assigned to watchful waiting. The number of physical symptoms was associated with the level of quality of life. Quality of life was lower with longer follow-up time in both groups and was statistically significant in the watchful waiting group ( p =0.03).

Editorial Comment on: Time, Symptom Burden, Androgen Deprivation, and Self-Assessed Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting: The Randomized Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) Clinical Trial

Editorial Comment on: Time, Symptom Burden, Androgen Deprivation, and Self-Assessed Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting: The Randomized Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) Clinical Trial

The Effect of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on Fasting Serum Lipid and Glucose Parameters

Although prostate cancer specific mortality is decreasing, there is little effect on overall mortality in this population, suggesting the possibility of an increased risk of death from nonprostate cancer related causes. Androgen deprivation therapy could adversely affect cardiovascular health. We investigated changes in lipid and glucose during androgen deprivation therapy. We performed an exploratory analysis of pooled data from 3 prospective clinical trials aimed at achieving medical castration by comparing the gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist abarelix, the gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist leuprolide acetate and leuprolide acetate plus the antiandrogen bicalutamide. Most patients were treated in the neoadjuvant setting or because of biochemical recurrence. Fasting serum lipid, glucose and hemoglobin A1C were determined in 1,102 men at baseline, and on treatment days 85 and 169. In the current study men were categorized into 3 treatment groups according to the type of androgen deprivation therapy, that is leuprolide acetate, leuprolide acetate plus bicalutamide or abarelix, and statin therapy. Significant increases in total cholesterol, triglyceride and high density lipoprotein-cholesterol were observed in patients on leuprolide acetate or abarelix but not in patients on leuprolide acetate plus bicalutamide. Consistent changes in low density lipoprotein-cholesterol were not detected. Increased total cholesterol was usually due to an increase in high density lipoprotein-cholesterol. Hemoglobin A1C increased from baseline to day 85 only and there were no significant changes in fasting glucose measurements. The type of androgen deprivation therapy did not affect these parameters. Short-term androgen deprivation therapy affects serum lipid and hemoglobin A1C independent of statin therapy.

BICALUTAMIDE 150 MG IN ADDITION TO STANDARD CARE IN PATIENTS WITH LOCALIZED OR LOCALLY ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER: RESULTS FROM THE SECOND ANALYSIS OF THE EARLY PROSTATE CANCER PROGRAM AT MEDIAN FOLLOWUP OF 5.4 YEARS

We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of 150 mg bicalutamide daily given in addition to standard care, in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. The bicalutamide Early Prostate Cancer program consists of 3 randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trials prospectively designed for combined analysis. A total of 8,113 men with T1b-T4, M0, any N (N0 in 1 trial) prostate cancer were randomized to bicalutamide 150 mg/day (4,052) or placebo (4,061) in addition to standard care (radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy or watchful waiting). Primary end points were objective progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. At median 5.4 years of followup (21.6% progression events) bicalutamide significantly improved PFS in the overall population. This result was driven by positive results in trials 24 and 25, with the North American trial (trial 23) showing no difference. Patients with locally advanced disease gained most benefit from bicalutamide in terms of PFS, irrespective of underlying therapy. Overall survival was similar in the bicalutamide and placebo groups, across the program and in each trial. Among watchful waiting patients survival appeared to be improved with bicalutamide in those with locally advanced disease, whereas survival appeared to be reduced with bicalutamide in those with localized disease. The most common adverse events with bicalutamide were gynecomastia and breast pain. Other adverse events occurred with a similarly low incidence in the 2 treatment groups. This analysis confirms that bicalutamide provides benefit in patients with locally advanced disease. The current data suggest that early or adjuvant hormonal therapy for patients at low risk of disease progression, such as those with localized disease, is not appropriate.

Bicalutamide as Immediate Therapy Either Alone or as Adjuvant to Standard Care of Patients with Localized or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: First Analysis of the Early Prostate Cancer Program

We determine the efficacy and tolerability of bicalutamide as immediate therapy, either alone or as adjuvant to treatment of curative intent, in patients with clinically localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. This international program consists of 3 ongoing, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials (trials 23, 24, and 25). Men with localized or locally advanced (T1-T4, Nx/N0, M0) prostate cancer were randomized to receive 150 mg. bicalutamide daily or placebo, in addition to standard care with radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy or watchful waiting. Primary end points are time to objective progression and overall survival. In this first analysis data from the trials were combined in a single overview analysis according to protocol. Data are available for 8,113 patients (4,052 randomized to bicalutamide, 4,061 to standard care alone) at a median followup of 3.0 years. Treatment with bicalutamide provided a highly significant reduction of 42% in the risk of objective progression compared with standard care alone (9.0% versus 13.8%, hazards ratio 0.58; 95% confidence interval 0.51, 0.66; p <<0.0001). The overall result was reflected in 2 of the 3 trials (trials 24 and 25) with trial 3 (trial 23) showing a nonsignificant difference at this time. Reductions in the risk of disease progression were seen across the entire patient population, irrespective of primary treatment or disease stage. Overall survival data are currently immature and longer followup will determine if there is also a survival benefit with bicalutamide. The most frequently reported side effects of bicalutamide were gynecomastia and breast pain. Immediate treatment with 150 mg. bicalutamide daily, either alone or as adjuvant to treatment of curative intent, significantly reduces the risk of disease progression in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. This benefit must be balanced with the morbidity associated with long-term hormonal therapy. Followup is ongoing to determine potential survival benefits of this treatment approach.

BICALUTAMIDE MONOTHERAPY COMPARED WITH CASTRATION IN PATIENTS WITH NONMETASTATIC LOCALLY ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER: 6.3 YEARS OF FOLLOWUP

Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy may be a treatment option for some patients with advanced prostate cancer. We report a survival and safety update from an analysis of 2 studies in which patients with nonmetastatic (M0) locally advanced disease were treated with either 150 mg. bicalutamide monotherapy or castration. Data from 2 open label, multicenter studies of identical design were pooled according to protocol. Patients with stage T3/4 prostate cancer were randomized to receive 150 mg. bicalutamide daily or castration (orchiectomy or 3.6 mg. goserelin acetate every 28 days) in a 2:1 ratio. A total of 480 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were randomized to treatment. After a median followup of 6.3 years mortality was 56%. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in overall survival (hazard ratio 1.05, upper 1-sided 95% confidence limit 1.31, p = 0.70) or time to progression (1.20, 1.45, p = 0.11). There were statistically significant benefits in the bicalutamide monotherapy group in the 2 quality of life parameters of sexual interest (p = 0.029) and physical capacity (p = 0.046). The highest incidences of adverse events were the pharmacological side effects of hot flashes in the castration group, and breast pain and gynecomastia in the bicalutamide group. The incidences of other types of adverse events were low. Bicalutamide was well tolerated, with few drug related withdrawals from study, and no new safety issues were identified during this longer followup. Monotherapy with 150 mg. bicalutamide is an attractive alternative to castration in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer for whom immediate hormone therapy is indicated.