Page 542 - An Evidence Review of Active Surveillance in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer

Appendix Table C4.4. Comparison between watchful waiting and other active treatments (continued)

Author Study name Comparison Outcome Followup Sample Results Factors included in the model
Year /Database definition/ (yr) size per
Pubmed id measurement group
instrument
Morbidity of
primary
treatment
Elliott 218 CaPSURE RP+EBRT Treatment for Median RP+EBRT: Crude stricture rates: Age at treatment, clinical T stage,
2007 (combination urethral 2.7 yr 73 2/73 (2.7%) in patients Gleason score, PSA at diagnosis,
17570425 treatment) stricture (range 3 WW: 378 received RP+EBRT; clinical risk stratification, BMI,
vs. WW identified by days to 4/378 (1.1%) in patients urinary condition history,
Retrospective study 10.9 yr) received WW. comorbidity count, race, marital
cohort abstracted status, education, household
hospital HR=4.39 (0.72-26.69), income
records p=0.11
includes (ICD
codes)*
BT+EBRT BT+EBRT: Crude stricture rates: Age at treatment, clinical T stage,
(combination 231 12/231 (5.2%) in patients Gleason score, PSA at diagnosis,
treatment) WW: 378 received BT+EBRT; clinical risk stratification, BMI,
vs. WW 4/378 (1.1%) in patients urinary condition history,
received WW. comorbidity count, race, marital
status, education, household
HR=4.56 (1.23-16.88), income
p=0.02

C-189