Immediate versus delayed prostatectomy: Nationwide population-based study^*

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of immediate versus delayed radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with low-grade prostate cancer. Materials and methods: The study included a nationwide population-based cohort in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, of 7608 men with clinically localized, biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer who underwent immediate or delayed RP in 1997–2007. Multivariable models compared RP pathology, use of salvage radiotherapy and prostate cancer mortality based on timing of RP (< 1, 1–2 or >2 years after diagnosis). Median follow-up was 8.1 years. Results: Men undergoing RP more than 2 years after diagnosis had a higher risk of Gleason upgrading [odds ratio 2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.34–3.68] and an increased risk of salvage radiotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.90, 95% CI 1.41–2.55], but no significant increase in prostate cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.57–5.99). In competing risk analysis, 7 year prostate cancer-specific cumulative mortality was similar, at less than 1%, for immediate RP and active surveillance regardless of later intervention. Limitations of this study include the lack of data on follow-up biopsies and the limited follow-up time. Conclusion: Men undergoing RP more than 2 years after diagnosis had more adverse pathological features and second line therapy, highlighting the trade-off in deferring immediate curative therapy. However, men with delayed RP constitute a minority with higher risk cancer among the much larger group of low-risk men initially surveilled, and the overall risk of prostate cancer mortality at 7 years was similarly low with immediate RP or active surveillance.

Keywords:

• Active surveillance
• outcomes
• prognosis
• prostate cancer
• radical prostatectomy
• surgical delay

Acknowledgements

This project was made possible by the continuous work of the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden (NPCR) steering group: Pär Stattin (chairman), Anders Widmark, Camilla Thellenberg, Ove Andrén, Anna Bill Axelson, Ann-Sofi Fransson, Magnus Törnblom, Stefan Carlsson, Marie Hjälm-Eriksson, Bill Pettersson, David Robinson, Mats Andén, Jan-Erik Damber, Jonas Hugosson, Ingela Franck Lissbrant, Maria Nyberg, Göran Ahlgren, Ola Bratt, René Blom, Lars Egevad, Calle Walller, Olof Akre, Per Fransson, Eva Johansson, Fredrik Sandin, Hans Garmo, Mats Lambe and Karin Hellström.

Disclosure statement

PS reports honoraria from Ferring and Astra Zeneca. SL has no conflict of interest related to this study.

Funding information

This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council 825-2012-5047 and the Swedish Cancer Foundation 11 0471, Västerbotten County Council, the Lion’s Cancer Research Foundation at Umeå University, the Swedish Cancer Foundation (2012/475) to OB, the Louis Feil Charitable Lead Trust to SL, the Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone Medical Center to SL and the National Institutes of Health (NIH; award no. K07CA178258) to SL. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official views of the NIH.