Outcomes Vary for Prostate Cancer Patients Choosing Surgery; Overall, No Treatment Proven Superior
Date: February 4, 2008
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Agency for Healthcare Research and Policy (AHRQ)
Outcomes Vary for Prostate Cancer Patients Choosing Surgery; Overall, No Treatment Proven Superior
Patients who undergo complete prostate removal are less likely to
experience urinary incontinence or other complications if the operation
is done by an experienced surgeon in a hospital that does many of the
procedures, according to a report funded by the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
However, the new report concludes that scientific evidence has not
established surgery or any other single treatment as superior for all
men. The analysis compared the effectiveness and risks of eight
prostate cancer treatments, ranging from prostate removal to
radioactive implants to no treatment. An article based on the report is
posted today in the online version of the Annals of Internal Medicine.
"This report is a reminder that patient outcomes may vary according to
treatment settings," said AHRQ Director Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D. "But
this analysis also underscores a broader message: when it comes to
prostate cancer, we have much to learn about which treatments work
best, and patients should be informed about the benefits and harms of
treatment options."
The prostate gland, which is about the size of a walnut, is located
just below the bladder. It makes and stores the liquid that carries
sperm. In 2007, about 218,000 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer,
and about 27,050 men died from the disease. The primary goals of
treatment are to determine whether an intervention is needed to prevent
death and disability and to minimize complications. Treatment choices
often take into account a patient's age, race, ethnicity, health
status, family history, patient preferences and how quickly the cancer
is likely to spread.
The lifetime risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer has nearly
doubled to 20 percent since the late 1980s, due mostly to expanded use
of the Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) blood test. But the risk of
dying of prostate cancer remains about 3 percent. Therefore,
considerable overdetection and overtreatment may exist. The U.S.
Preventive Services Task Force, a panel of outside experts convened by
AHRQ that makes independent evidence-based recommendations, maintains
there is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against PSA testing
for routine prostate cancer screening. PSA tests can detect early-stage
cancer when it is potentially most treatable but also lead to frequent
false-positive results and identification of prostate cancers unlikely
to cause harm.
AHRQ's new report, based on a review of 592 published articles,
compared eight prostate cancer strategies: complete surgical removal of
prostate and related tissue; minimally invasive surgery to remove the
prostate; external radiation; radioactive implants; destruction of cancer cells
through rapid freezing and thawing; removal of testicles or hormone
therapy; high-intensity ultrasound; and no immediate treatment, also
known as "watchful waiting."
The report, compiled by AHRQ's Minnesota
Evidence-based Practice Center, is intended to provide unbiased,
evidence-based information so that patients, clinicians and others can
make the best treatment decisions possible. Among its conclusions:
- Not enough scientific evidence exists to identify any prostate cancer treatment as most effective for all men, especially those whose cancers were found by PSA testing. However, more than 90 percent of patients reported they would make the same treatment decision again, regardless of the treatment they received.
- All treatment options cause health problems, primarily urinary incontinence, bowel problems and erectile dysfunction. The chances of bowel problems or sexual dysfunction are similar for surgery and external radiation. Leaking of urine is at least six times more likely among surgery patients than those treated by external radiation.
- One study showed that men who choose surgery over watchful waiting are less likely to die or have their cancer spread. The benefit appears to be limited to men under 65. However, because few patients in this study had cancer detected through PSA tests, it is unknown if this finding would apply to those whose cancers were detected through PSA screening. Another smaller study showed no difference in survival between surgery and watchful waiting.
- Among patients who choose surgery, urinary complications and incontinence are less likely if their surgeons performed more than 40 prostate removals per year.
- Surgery-related deaths, urinary complications and readmissions were lower and hospital stays were shorter in hospitals that performed more prostate removals.
- A lack of research makes it impossible to compare several treatments: rapid freezing and thawing (cryotherapy); minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic assisted radical prostatectomy); testicle removal or hormone therapy (androgen deprivation therapy); and high-intensity ultrasound or radiation therapy.
- Adding hormone therapy prior to prostate removal does not improve survival or decrease recurrence rates, but it does increase the chance of adverse events.
- Combining radiation with hormone therapy may decrease mortality. But compared with radiation treatment alone, the combination increases the chances of impotence and abnormal breast development.
.
For more information, please contact AHRQ Public Affairs: (301) 427-1855 or (301) 427-1998
.
Internet Citation
:
Outcomes Vary for Prostate Cancer Patients Choosing Surgery; Overall, No Treatment Proven Superior. Press Release, February 4, 2008. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/press/pr2008/effproscanpr.htm
Other Resources
The Guide to Clinical Preventive Services
includes U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on screening, counseling, and preventive medication topics and includes clinical considerations for each topic. This new pocket guide provides general practitioners, internists, family practitioners, pediatricians, nurses, and nurse practitioners with an authoritative source for making decisions about preventive services.
[Web Version] [Download Print Version (PDF 1.4 MB)] [PDF Help]
Now Available: The Electronic Preventive Services Selector (ePSS) is a quick hands-on tool designed to help primary care clinicians identify the screening, counseling, and preventive medication services that are appropriate for their patients. The ePSS is available both as a PDA application and a web-based tool. It is based on current recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and can be searched by specific patient characteristics, such as age, sex, and selected behavioral risk factors.