uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Age at diagnosis and prostate cancer treatment and prognosis: a population-based cohort study.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Annals of Oncology, ISSN 0923-7534, E-ISSN 1569-8041Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

Background: Old age at prostate cancer diagnosis has been associated with poor prognosis in several studies. We aimed to investigate the association between age at diagnosis and prognosis, and if it is independent of tumor characteristics, primary treatment, year of diagnosis, mode of detection and comorbidity.

Patients and methods: We conducted a nation-wide cohort study including 121,392 Swedish men aged 55-95 years in Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) 3.0 diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1998-2012 and followed for prostate cancer death through 2014. Data were available on age, stage, grade, PSA-level, mode of detection, comorbidity, educational level and primary treatment. We used Cox regression to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: With increasing age at diagnosis, men had more comorbidity, fewer PSA detected cancers, more advanced cancers and were less often treated with curative intent. Among men with high-risk or regionally metastatic disease, the proportion of men with unknown M stage was higher among old men versus young men. During a follow-up of 751,000 person-years, 23,649 men died of prostate cancer. In multivariable Cox-regression analyses stratified by treatment, old age at diagnosis was associated with poorer prognosis among men treated with deferred treatment (HRage 85+ vs. 60-64: 7.19; 95% CI: 5.61-9.20), androgen deprivation therapy (HRage 85+ vs. 60-64: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.61-1.84) or radical prostatectomy (HRage 75+ vs. 60-64: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.01-4.77), but not radiotherapy (HRage 75+ vs. 60-64: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.76-1.53).

Conclusion: Our findings argue against a strong inherent effect of age on risk of prostate cancer death, but indicate that in current clinical practice, old men with prostate cancer receive insufficient diagnostic work-up and subsequent curative treatment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017.
Keyword [en]
Age at diagnosis, Cohort study, Prognosis, Prostate cancer, Treatment
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-336231DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx742PubMedID: 29161337OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-336231DiVA: diva2:1165419
Available from: 2017-12-13 Created: 2017-12-13 Last updated: 2017-12-13

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Stattin, Pär
By organisation
Urology
In the same journal
Annals of Oncology
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 8 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf