Page 422 - An Evidence Review of Active Surveillance in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer

Appendix Table C3.2. KQ3 multivariable analyses (continued)
Author Factors Data source Duration Analyzed Population WW/AS Methods Results as described in paper
yr sample characteristics definitions
PMI
Barocas 161 Clinical, CaPSURE 1999- 1421 Localized No Binary 1. age at dx, >74 yr vs. ≤74 yr,
2008 social 2004 prostate treatment logistic OR=7.30 (CI 4.39, 12.21)
18707731 cancer. within 6 mo regression 2. risk of disease (modified
after dx AS D’Amico), low vs. not low,
OR=3.40 (CI 1.91, 6.04)
3. education level, high school or
less vs. some or more college,
OR=0.86 (CI 0.53, 1.41)

“Low risk” = PSA<10ng/ml, stage
T1 or T2a, PSA density <0.15, <
1/3 positive cores, and no Gleason
pattern 4 and 5. The OR for
patients who met all 4 criteria for
low risk was 2.7 (CI 1.9, 3.8) vs. all
other patients.
Konety 162 Clinical CaPSURE NR 11,261 Biopsy-proven Not Multinomial Model stratified for disease risk
2008 prostate cancer explicitly logistic category (see paper for other risk
18343440 provided regression categories):
WW vs. any
other primary low risk patients, using WW as the
therapy baseline,
- BT: ≥75 yr vs. <75 yr,
OR=0.234 (CI 0.161, 0.339)
- BT + EBRT: ≥75 yr vs. <75 yr,
OR=0.109 (CI 0.025, 0.473)
- EBRT: ≥75 yr vs. <75 yr,
OR=0.430 (CI 0.288, 0.641)
- PADT: ≥75 yr vs. <75 yr,
OR=0.744 (CI 0.507, 1.090)
- RP: ≥75 yr vs. <75 yr,
OR=0.014 (CI 0.008, 0.025)

Results were adjusted for
demographics and the number of
comorbidities at dx. There was no
significant interaction between age
and comorbidity level.

C-129