Page 290 - An Evidence Review of Active Surveillance in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer

Appendix Table C1.7. Tumor characteristics—stage (continued)
Author Database Stage groups 1980-84 1985- 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005- Statistical Notes
Year 89 10 analysis
PMID
68
Cooperberg CaPSURE T stage P<0.001 Trend data
2007 1a 3.5% 1.6% <1% <1% (“trend in reported only for
17644125 1b 4.1% 1.1% <1% <1% distribution of “low-risk”
1c 29.9% 49.8% 73.3% 78.3% each risk prostate cancer
2a 62.5% 47.4% 25.3% 20.7% characteristic”) (PSA≤10 ng/ml,
(1990-94) (1995-99) (2002- (2004- Gleason score
03) 06) ≤6 and clinical
stage T1 or T2a).
90
Cooperberg CaPSURE T stage High risk
2008 T1 12.7% 9.3% 23.4% 26.1% P<0.001 localized
18369637 T2a/b 20.7% 14.6% 10.9% 10.4% (Cuzick test for prostate cancer
T2c 56.7% 64.8% 61.2% 60.7% trend) only
T3a 10.0% 11.4% 4.6% 2.8%
(1990-94) (1995-99) (2002- (2004-
03) 07)
71
Greene CaPSURE T stage
2005 1 43% 58% P<0.001
16194711 2 54% 41% (chi-square
3 2% 1% comparing 2
(1997- 99) (2000- periods)
03)
72
Mettlin NCDB 0-II 67.3% 64.7% NR
1994 III 13.0% 16.2%
8062197 IV 19.7% 19.1%
(1985) (1990)
73
Mettlin NCDB Stage 0-I 44.2% 29.4%
1996 Stage II 20.2% 39.9%
8640686 Stage II 14.6% 18.4%
Stage IV 20.9% 12.4%
(1987) (1992)
74
Mettlin NCDB pAJCC/cAJCC NR
1995 stage
8625214 0 1.9% 4.7%
I 18.8% 18.9%
II 9.5% 33.1%
III 6.7% 15.1%
IV 10.6% 10.4%
Unknown 52.6% 17.8%
(1986- (1992)
87)

C-63