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

References

• Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ, Jr. Yossepowitch O, Vickers AJ, et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4300–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnick MJ, Koyama T, Fan KH, Albertsen PC, Goodman M, Hamilton AS, et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2013;368:436–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol 2007;178:S14–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990-2013. JAMA 2015;314:80–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P. Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2013;190:1742–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dall'era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, Carroll PR, Carter HB, Cooperberg MR, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2012;62:976–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, Jethava V, Zhang L, Jain S, et al. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:272–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosoian JJ, Mamawala M, Epstein JI, Landis P, Wolf S, Trock BJ, et al. Intermediate and longer-term outcomes from a prospective active-surveillance program for favorable-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:3379–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hemelrijck M, Wigertz A, Sandin F, Garmo H, Hellstrom K, Fransson P, et al. Cohort profile: the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden and Prostate Cancer Data Base Sweden 2.0. Int J Epidemiol 2013;42:956–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundararajan V, Henderson T, Perry C, Muggivan A, Quan H, Ghali WA. New ICD-10 version of the Charlson Comorbidity Index predicted in-hospital mortality. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:1288–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundararajan V, Quan H, Halfon P, Fushimi K, Luthi JC, Burnand B, et al. Cross-national comparative performance of three versions of the ICD-10 Charlson index. Med Care 2007;45:1210–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Makarov DV, Bratt O, Bill-Axelson A, Stattin P. Five-year nationwide follow-up study of active surveillance for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015;67:233–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suardi N, Briganti A, Gallina A, Salonia A, Karakiewicz PI, Capitanio U, et al. Testing the most stringent criteria for selection of candidates for active surveillance in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010;105:1548–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong LM, Neal DE, Johnston RB, Shah N, Sharma N, Warren AY, et al. International multicentre study examining selection criteria for active surveillance in men undergoing radical prostatectomy. Br J Cancer 2012;107:1467–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graefen M, Walz J, Chun KH, Schlomm T, Haese A, Huland H. Reasonable delay of surgical treatment in men with localized prostate cancer – impact on prognosis? Eur Urol 2005;47:756–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abern MR, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Presti JC, Jr., Amling CL, et al. Delayed radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with biochemical recurrence: possible implications for active surveillance from the SEARCH database. Prostate 2013;73:409–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews SF, Horwitz EM, Feigenberg SJ, Eisenberg DF, Hanlon AL, Uzzo RG, et al. Does a delay in external beam radiation therapy after tissue diagnosis affect outcome for men with prostate carcinoma? Cancer 2005;104:299–304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Brien D, Loeb S, Carvalhal GF, McGuire BB, Kan D, Hofer MD, et al. Delay of surgery in men with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2011;185:2143–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Steyerberg EW, Khatami A, Aus G, Pihl CG, Wolters T, et al. Is delayed radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer associated with a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes? Cancer 2010;116:1281–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosoian JJ, Sundi D, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Schaeffer EM, et al. Pathologic outcomes in favorable-risk prostate cancer: comparative analysis of men electing active surveillance and immediate surgery. Eur Urol 2016;69:576–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bratt O, Carlsson S, Holmberg E, Holmberg L, Johansson E, Josefsson A, et al. The Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS): a randomized study comparing two different follow-up schedules for active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer. Scand J Urol 2013;47:347–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, Pickles T, Kakehi Y, Rannikko A, et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2013;63:597–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Albertsen PC, Bangma CH, Freedland SJ, Graefen M, Vickers A, et al. Timing of curative treatment for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013;64:204–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW, et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2185–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godtman RA, Holmberg E, Khatami A, Stranne J, Hugosson J. Outcome following active surveillance of men with screen-detected prostate cancer. Results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol 2013;63:101–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmstrom B, Holmberg E, Egevad L, Adolfsson J, Johansson JE, Hugosson J, et al. Outcome of primary versus deferred radical prostatectomy in the national prostate cancer register of Sweden follow-up study. J Urol 2010;184:1322–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warlick C, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Carter HB. Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:355–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar