Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 16 de 16
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(3): e241970, 2024 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38470422

ABSTRACT

This cross-sectional study investigates trends in overall survival among patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer in 2 national registries in the United States.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Patients , Male , Humans
2.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 21(3): 236-246, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36898362

ABSTRACT

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for individuals with a prostate who opt to participate in an early detection program after receiving the appropriate counseling on the pros and cons. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines with regard to the testing protocol, use of multiparametric MRI, and management of negative biopsy results to optimize the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and minimize the detection of indolent disease.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Prostate , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Biopsy
3.
Eur Urol Open Sci ; 47: 58-64, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36601043

ABSTRACT

Background: Surrogate endpoints (SEs), such as progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR), are frequently used in clinical trials. The relationship between SEs and overall survival (OS) has not been well described in metastatic urothelial cancer (MUC). Objective: We evaluated trial-level data to assess the relationship between SEs and OS. We hypothesize a moderate surrogacy relationship between both PFS and ORR with OS. Design setting and participants: We systematically reviewed phase 2/3 trials in MUC with two or more treatment arms, and report PFS and/or ORR, and OS. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Linear regression was performed, and the coefficient of determination (R2) and surrogate threshold effect (STE) estimate were determined between PFS/ORR and OS. Results and limitations: Of 3791 search results, 59 trials and 62 comparisons met the inclusion criteria. Of the 53 trials that reported PFS, 31 (58%) reported proportional hazard regression for PFS and OS. Linear regression across trials demonstrated an R2 of 0.60 between hazard ratio (HR) for PFS (HRPFS) and HR for OS (HROS), and an STE of 0.41. Linear regression of ΔPFS (median PFS in months of the treatment arm - that of the control arm) and ΔOS demonstrated an R2 of 0.12 and an STE of 14.1 mo. Thirty trials reported ORRs. Linear regression for ORRratio and HROS among all trials found an R2 of 0.08; an STE of 95% was not reached at any value and ΔORR and HROS similarly demonstrated a poor correlation with an R2 value of 0.03. Conclusions: PFS provides only a moderate level of surrogacy for OS; An HRPFS of ≤0.41 provides 95% confidence of OS improvement. ORR is weakly correlated with OS and should be de-emphasized in MUC clinical trials. When PFS is discussed, proportional hazard regression should be reported. Patient summary: We examined the relationship between surrogate endpoints, common outcomes in clinical trials, with survival in urothelial cancer trials. Progression-free survival is moderately correlated, while objective response rate had a poor correlation with survival and should be de-emphasized as a primary endpoint.

5.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(4): 471-478, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35226520

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mammography screening can lead to overdiagnosis-that is, screen-detected breast cancer that would not have caused symptoms or signs in the remaining lifetime. There is no consensus about the frequency of breast cancer overdiagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the rate of breast cancer overdiagnosis in contemporary mammography practice accounting for the detection of nonprogressive cancer. DESIGN: Bayesian inference of the natural history of breast cancer using individual screening and diagnosis records, allowing for nonprogressive preclinical cancer. Combination of fitted natural history model with life-table data to predict the rate of overdiagnosis among screen-detected cancer under biennial screening. SETTING: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 50 to 74 years at first mammography screen between 2000 and 2018. MEASUREMENTS: Screening mammograms and screen-detected or interval breast cancer. RESULTS: The cohort included 35 986 women, 82 677 mammograms, and 718 breast cancer diagnoses. Among all preclinical cancer cases, 4.5% (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 0.1% to 14.8%) were estimated to be nonprogressive. In a program of biennial screening from age 50 to 74 years, 15.4% (UI, 9.4% to 26.5%) of screen-detected cancer cases were estimated to be overdiagnosed, with 6.1% (UI, 0.2% to 20.1%) due to detecting indolent preclinical cancer and 9.3% (UI, 5.5% to 13.5%) due to detecting progressive preclinical cancer in women who would have died of an unrelated cause before clinical diagnosis. LIMITATIONS: Exclusion of women with first mammography screen outside BCSC. CONCLUSION: On the basis of an authoritative U.S. population data set, the analysis projected that among biennially screened women aged 50 to 74 years, about 1 in 7 cases of screen-detected cancer is overdiagnosed. This information clarifies the risk for breast cancer overdiagnosis in contemporary screening practice and should facilitate shared and informed decision making about mammography screening. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Bayes Theorem , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Male , Mammography , Mass Screening , Overdiagnosis
6.
Cancer ; 126(3): 583-592, 2020 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31639200

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted means of managing low-risk prostate cancer. Because of the rarity of downstream events, data from existing AS cohorts cannot yet address how differences in surveillance intensity affect metastasis and mortality. This study projected the comparative benefits of different AS schedules in men diagnosed with prostate cancer who had Gleason score (GS) ≤6 disease and risk profiles similar to those in North American AS cohorts. METHODS: Times of GS upgrading were simulated based on AS data from the University of Toronto, Johns Hopkins University, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Canary Pass Active Surveillance Cohort. Times to metastasis and prostate cancer death, informed by models from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 4 trial, were projected under biopsy surveillance schedules ranging from watchful waiting to annual biopsies. Outcomes included the risk of metastasis, the risk of death, remaining life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted LYs. RESULTS: Compared with watchful waiting, AS biopsies reduced the risk of prostate cancer metastasis and prostate cancer death at 20 years by 1.4% to 3.3% and 1.0% to 2.4%, respectively; and 5-year biopsies reduced the risk of metastasis and prostate cancer death by 1.0% to 2.4% and 0.6% to 1.6%, respectively. There was little difference between annual and 5-year biopsy schedules in terms of LYs (range of differences, 0.04-0.16 LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (range of differences, -0.02 to 0.09 quality-adjusted LYs). CONCLUSIONS: Among men diagnosed with GS ≤6 prostate cancer, obtaining a biopsy every 3 or 4 years appears to be an acceptable alternative to more frequent biopsies. Reducing surveillance intensity for those who have a low risk of progression reduces the number of biopsies while preserving the benefit of more frequent schedules.


Subject(s)
Biopsy , Disease Progression , Prostate/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Metastasis , North America/epidemiology , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Risk Assessment , San Francisco/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , White People
7.
Am J Epidemiol ; 188(1): 197-205, 2019 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30325415

ABSTRACT

It is generally accepted that some screen-detected breast cancers are overdiagnosed and would not progress to symptomatic cancer if left untreated. However, precise estimates of the fraction of nonprogressive cancers remain elusive. In recognition of the weaknesses of overdiagnosis estimation methods based on excess incidence, there is a need for model-based approaches that accommodate nonprogressive lesions. Here, we present an in-depth analysis of a generalized model of breast cancer natural history that allows for a mixture of progressive and indolent lesions. We provide a formal proof of global structural identifiability of the model and use simulation to identify conditions that allow for parameter estimates that are sufficiently precise and practically actionable. We show that clinical follow-up after the last screening can play a critical role in ensuring adequately precise identification of the fraction of indolent cancers in a stop-screen trial design, and we demonstrate that model misspecification can lead to substantially biased estimates of mean sojourn time. Finally, we illustrate our findings using the example of Canadian National Breast Screening Study 2 (1980-1985) and show that the fraction of indolent cancers is not precisely identifiable. Our findings provide the foundation for extended models that account for both in situ and invasive lesions.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , False Positive Reactions , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , Models, Statistical , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Canada , Computer Simulation , Disease Progression , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Incidence , Medical Overuse
8.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 14(5): 509-19, 2016 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27160230

ABSTRACT

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for prostate cancer screening in healthy men who have elected to participate in an early detection program. The NCCN Guidelines focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Prostate Cancer Early Detection Panel's most significant discussions for the 2016 guideline update, which included issues surrounding screening in high-risk populations (ie, African Americans, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers), approaches to refine patient selection for initial and repeat biopsies, and approaches to improve biopsy specificity.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Humans , Male
9.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 13(12): 1534-61, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26656522

ABSTRACT

Prostate cancer represents a spectrum of disease that ranges from nonaggressive, slow-growing disease that may not require treatment to aggressive, fast-growing disease that does. The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide a set of sequential recommendations detailing a screening and evaluation strategy for maximizing the detection of prostate cancer that is potentially curable and that, if left undetected, represents a risk to the patient. The guidelines were developed for healthy men who have elected to participate in the early detection of prostate cancer, and they focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Biomarkers , Biopsy/methods , Diagnostic Imaging/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/etiology
10.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 107(2)2015 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25540245

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Diffusion of new cancer treatments can be both inefficient and incomplete. The uptake of new treatments over time (diffusion) has not been well studied. We analyzed the diffusion of docetaxel in metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: We identified metastatic prostate cancer patients diagnosed from 1995 to 2007 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare database. Medicare claims through 2008 were analyzed. We assessed cumulative incidence of docetaxel by socioeconomic, demographic, and comorbidity variables, and compared diffusion patterns to landmark events including release of phase III results and FDA approval dates. We compared docetaxel diffusion patterns in prostate cancer to those in metastatic breast, lung, ovarian, and gastric cancers. To model docetaxel use over time, we used the classic "mixed influence" deterministic diffusion model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: We identified 6561 metastatic prostate cancer patients; 1350 subsequently received chemotherapy. Among patients who received chemotherapy, docetaxel use was 95% by 2008. Docetaxel uptake was statistically significantly slower (P < .01) for patients older than 65 years, blacks, patients in lower income areas, and those who experienced poverty. Eighty percent of docetaxel diffusion occurred prior to the May, 2004 release of phase III results showing superiority of docetaxel over standard-of-care. The maximum increase in the rate of use of docetaxel occurred nearly simultaneously for prostate cancer as for all other cancers combined (in 2000). CONCLUSION: Efforts to increase the diffusion of treatments with proven survival benefits among disadvantaged populations could lead to cancer population survival gains. Docetaxel diffusion mostly preceded phase III evidence for its efficacy in castration-resistant prostate cancer, and appeared to be a cancer-wide-rather than a disease-specific-phenomenon. Diffusion prior to definitive evidence indicates the prevalence of off-label chemotherapy use.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Taxoids/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Comorbidity , Docetaxel , Drug Approval , Humans , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , SEER Program , United States/epidemiology
11.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 12(9): 1211-9; quiz 1219, 2014 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25190691

ABSTRACT

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for men choosing to participate in an early detection program for prostate cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight notable recent updates. Overall, the 2014 update represents a more streamlined and concise set of recommendations. The panel stratified the age ranges at which initiating testing for prostate cancer should be considered. Indications for biopsy include both a cutpoint and the use of multiple risk variables in combination. In addition to other biomarkers of specificity, the Prostate Health Index has been included to aid biopsy decisions in certain men, given recent FDA approvals.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Age Factors , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Humans , Male , Population Surveillance , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
12.
J Oncol Pract ; 7(3): 155-60, 2011 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21886495

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Diagnostic imaging is effective for evaluating patients suspected of having hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although the diagnosis can be established with imaging alone, diagnostic biopsy may be useful for patients with tumors measuring 1 to 2 cm. To date, biopsy and imaging use among patients with HCC has not been evaluated in the general community. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This cohort study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) -Medicare data (2002-2005) evaluating biopsy, imaging modalities (ultrasound, computed tomography [CT] scan, and/or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]), and HCC risk factors. RESULTS: Of 3,696 patients, 1,197 (32.4%) underwent one or more biopsies, with no change in yearly biopsy rate (trend test, P = .64). Patients with tumors > 5 cm were most likely to receive biopsies (35.3%), with increasing rates of biopsy for larger tumors (P = .001). Patients who received biopsies underwent more imaging than those who did not (P < .001) and were more likely to have an HCC risk factor. Tumor size > 5 cm in the setting of a concurrent HCC risk factor increased the odds of biopsy. In 47.8% of patients, the diagnostic sequence was not consistent with contemporary evidence-based guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread availability and use of CT scan and MRI, one third of HCC patients undergo biopsy, suggesting a problem with the performance and/or quality of diagnostic imaging or that providers do not believe imaging alone is sufficient to establish the diagnosis. Understanding factors that drive biopsy use may help improve the care of patients with HCC.

13.
CA Cancer J Clin ; 60(2): 70-98, 2010.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20200110

ABSTRACT

In 2009, the American Cancer Society (ACS) Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee began the process of a complete update of recommendations for early prostate cancer detection. A series of systematic evidence reviews was conducted focusing on evidence related to the early detection of prostate cancer, test performance, harms of therapy for localized prostate cancer, and shared and informed decision making in prostate cancer screening. The results of the systematic reviews were evaluated by the ACS Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee, and deliberations about the evidence occurred at committee meetings and during conference calls. On the basis of the evidence and a consensus process, the Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee developed the guideline, and a writing committee drafted a guideline document that was circulated to the entire committee for review and revision. The document was then circulated to peer reviewers for feedback, and finally to the ACS Mission Outcomes Committee and the ACS Board of Directors for approval. The ACS recommends that asymptomatic men who have at least a 10-year life expectancy have an opportunity to make an informed decision with their health care provider about screening for prostate cancer after they receive information about the uncertainties, risks, and potential benefits associated with prostate cancer screening. Prostate cancer screening should not occur without an informed decision-making process. Men at average risk should receive this information beginning at age 50 years. Men in higher risk groups should receive this information before age 50 years. Men should either receive this information directly from their health care providers or be referred to reliable and culturally appropriate sources. Patient decision aids are helpful in preparing men to make a decision whether to be tested.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Mass Screening/standards , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/adverse effects , Anxiety , Biopsy, Fine-Needle/adverse effects , Continuity of Patient Care , Decision Making , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Life Expectancy , Male , Phlebotomy/adverse effects , Physical Examination/methods , Prostate/pathology , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Rectum , Reference Values , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , SEER Program , Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological/etiology , United States/epidemiology , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology
16.
Urology ; 64(4): 814-20, 2004 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15491740

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine estrogen receptor-beta (ERbeta) expression in prostate cancer (CaP) metastases, thereby providing a basis for conducting estrogen therapy studies in patients with metastatic CaP. Advanced androgen-independent CaP is a serious health problem with no effective treatment at present. Estrogens have been reported to inhibit the growth of CaP cells in androgen-free environments. Recent reports have shown that the prostatic epithelium and primary CaP cells express ERbeta, with decreased expression of ERbeta accompanying CaP progression. It has been proposed that ERbeta may play a role in the growth regulation of prostate cells. The targeting of ERs by selective ER modulators might be an effective method of treating advanced CaP. METHODS: The anti-ERbeta antibody GC17 was used in immunohistochemistry to characterize the expression of ERbeta in CaP metastasis specimens (n = 60) obtained from 20 patients who had died of CaP. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the association of ERbeta expression with clinical parameters, including prostate-specific antigen levels, radiotherapy, and estrogen exposure. RESULTS: Nuclear ERbeta staining was detected in all bone CaP metastases (33 of 33) and nonosseous CaP metastases (27 of 27). However, a large variability in the percentage of immunoreactive cells (5% to 100%) was found among patients, as well as among individual patient samples. A statistically significant negative association between nuclear ERbeta staining and estrogen exposure (P = 0.05) was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Our data have shown that ERbeta is expressed in CaP metastases, validating the initiation of studies to evaluate selective ER modulators for treatment of advanced CaP.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/chemistry , Adenocarcinoma/secondary , Bone Neoplasms/chemistry , Estrogen Receptor beta/analysis , Neoplasm Proteins/analysis , Neoplasms, Hormone-Dependent/chemistry , Neoplasms, Hormone-Dependent/secondary , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Bone Neoplasms/secondary , Cell Nucleus/chemistry , Humans , Liver Neoplasms/chemistry , Liver Neoplasms/secondary , Lung Neoplasms/chemistry , Lung Neoplasms/secondary , Lymphatic Metastasis , Male , Middle Aged , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Receptors, Androgen/analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...