• Something wrong with this record ?

Critical survival periods in prostate cancer in Sweden explored by conditional survival analysis

K. Hemminki, F. Zitricky, K. Sundquist, J. Sundquist, A. Försti, A. Hemminki, O. Hemminki

. 2024 ; 13 (7) : e7126. [pub] -

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24006519

BACKROUND: We wanted to characterize conditional survival in prostate cancer (PC) in Sweden around and after 2005 when the vast increase in incidence due to the opportunistic testing for prostate specific antigen (PSA) culminated. We hypothesize that analyzing survival data during that time period may help interpret survival trends. We focus on stage-specific analysis using conditional survival in order to define the periods when deaths most commonly occurred. METHODS: Data on PC patients were obtained from the Swedish cancer registry for analysis of 1-, 2.5- and 5-year relative survival and conditional relative survival between years 2004 and 2018. Tumor-node-metastatic stage classification at diagnosis was used to specify survival. RESULTS: Small improvements were observed in stage- and age-related relative survival duriring the study period. Applying conditional relative survival showed that survival in stage T3 up to 2.5 years was better than survival between years 2.5 and 5. Survival in stage T4 was approximately equal in the first and the subsequent 2.5-year period. For M1, the first 2.5 year survival period was worse than the subsequent one. The proportion of high risk and M1 disease in old patients (80+ years) remained very high and their survival improved only modestly. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that M1 metastases kill more patients in the first 2.5 years than between years 2.5 and 5 after diagnosis; T4 deaths are equal in the two periods, and in T3 mortality in the first 2.5-year period is lower than between years 2.5 and 5 after diagnosis. Conditional survival could be applied to explore critical survival periods even past 5 years after diagnoses and to monitor success in novel diagnostic and treatment practices. Improvement of survival in elderly patients may require clinical input.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24006519
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240423155328.0
007      
ta
008      
240412s2024 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1002/cam4.7126 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38545829
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Hemminki, Kari $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic $u Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany $u Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden $1 https://orcid.org/0000000227693316 $7 mzk20201092711
245    10
$a Critical survival periods in prostate cancer in Sweden explored by conditional survival analysis / $c K. Hemminki, F. Zitricky, K. Sundquist, J. Sundquist, A. Försti, A. Hemminki, O. Hemminki
520    9_
$a BACKROUND: We wanted to characterize conditional survival in prostate cancer (PC) in Sweden around and after 2005 when the vast increase in incidence due to the opportunistic testing for prostate specific antigen (PSA) culminated. We hypothesize that analyzing survival data during that time period may help interpret survival trends. We focus on stage-specific analysis using conditional survival in order to define the periods when deaths most commonly occurred. METHODS: Data on PC patients were obtained from the Swedish cancer registry for analysis of 1-, 2.5- and 5-year relative survival and conditional relative survival between years 2004 and 2018. Tumor-node-metastatic stage classification at diagnosis was used to specify survival. RESULTS: Small improvements were observed in stage- and age-related relative survival duriring the study period. Applying conditional relative survival showed that survival in stage T3 up to 2.5 years was better than survival between years 2.5 and 5. Survival in stage T4 was approximately equal in the first and the subsequent 2.5-year period. For M1, the first 2.5 year survival period was worse than the subsequent one. The proportion of high risk and M1 disease in old patients (80+ years) remained very high and their survival improved only modestly. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that M1 metastases kill more patients in the first 2.5 years than between years 2.5 and 5 after diagnosis; T4 deaths are equal in the two periods, and in T3 mortality in the first 2.5-year period is lower than between years 2.5 and 5 after diagnosis. Conditional survival could be applied to explore critical survival periods even past 5 years after diagnoses and to monitor success in novel diagnostic and treatment practices. Improvement of survival in elderly patients may require clinical input.
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    12
$a nádory prostaty $7 D011471
650    _2
$a prostatický specifický antigen $7 D017430
650    _2
$a registrace $7 D012042
650    _2
$a analýza přežití $7 D016019
650    _2
$a míra přežití $7 D015996
650    _2
$a staging nádorů $7 D009367
651    _2
$a Švédsko $x epidemiologie $7 D013548
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Zitricky, Frantisek $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000176007143
700    1_
$a Sundquist, Kristina $u Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden $u Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, USA $u Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Shimane University, Izumo, Japan
700    1_
$a Sundquist, Jan $u Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden $u Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, USA $u Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Shimane University, Izumo, Japan
700    1_
$a Försti, Asta $u Hopp Children's Cancer Center (KiTZ), Heidelberg, Germany $u Division of Pediatric Neurooncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany
700    1_
$a Hemminki, Akseli $u Cancer Gene Therapy Group, Translational Immunology Research Program, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland $u Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland $1 https://orcid.org/0000000171038530
700    1_
$a Hemminki, Otto $u Cancer Gene Therapy Group, Translational Immunology Research Program, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland $u Department of Urology, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
773    0_
$w MED00181704 $t Cancer medicine $x 2045-7634 $g Roč. 13, č. 7 (2024), s. e7126
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38545829 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20240412 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240423155324 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2080856 $s 1216286
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 13 $c 7 $d e7126 $e - $i 2045-7634 $m Cancer medicine $n Cancer Med $x MED00181704
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20240412

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options