You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 12, Issue 12
  • Time without PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of future biochemical recurrence, metastatic disease and prostate cancer death: a prospective Scandinavian cohort study

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Urology
Original research
Time without PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of future biochemical recurrence, metastatic disease and prostate cancer death: a prospective Scandinavian cohort study
  1. Mats Steinholtz Ahlberg1,
  2. Hans Garmo1,
  3. Hans-Olov Adami2,3,
  4. Ove Andrén4,
  5. Jan-Erik Johansson4,
  6. Gunnar Steineck5,
  7. Lars Holmberg6,
  8. Anna Bill-Axelson1
  1. 1Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
  2. 2Clinical Effectiveness Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  3. 3Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  4. 4Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
  5. 5Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Division of Clinical Cancer Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Gothenburg, Sweden
  6. 6School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mats Steinholtz Ahlberg; mats.ahlberg{at}surgsci.uu.se

Abstract

Objective Although surveillance after radical prostatectomy routinely includes repeated prostate specific antigen (PSA)-testing for many years, biochemical recurrence often occurs without further clinical progression. We therefore hypothesised that follow-up can be shortened for many patients without increasing the risk of prostate cancer death. We investigated the long-term probabilities of PSA recurrence, metastases and prostate cancer death in patients without biochemical recurrence five and 10 years after radical prostatectomy.

Design Prospective cohort study. Stratification by Gleason score (≤3+4=7 or ≥4+3=7), pathological tumour stage (pT2 or ≥pT3) and negative or positive surgical margins.

Setting Between 1989 and 1998, 14 urological centres in Scandinavia randomised patients to the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group study number 4 (SPCG-4) trial.

Participation All 306 patients from the SPCG-4 trial who underwent radical prostatectomy within 1 year from inclusion were eligible. Four patients were excluded due to surgery-related death (n=1) or salvage radiotherapy or hormonal treatment within 6 weeks from surgery (n=3).

Primary outcome measures Cumulative incidences and absolute differences in metastatic disease and prostate cancer death.

Results We analysed 302 patients with complete follow-up during a median of 24 years. Median preoperative PSA was 9.8 ng/mL and median age was 65 years. For patients without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy the 20-year probability of biochemical recurrence was 25% among men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 and 57% among men with Gleason score ≥4+3=7; the probabilities for metastases were 0.8% and 17%; and for prostate cancer death 0.8% and 12%, respectively. The long-term probabilities were higher for pT ≥3 versus pT2 and for positive versus negative surgical margins. Limitations include small size of the cohort.

Conclusion Many patients with favourable histopathology without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy could stop follow-up earlier than 10 years after radical prostatectomy.

  • Prostate disease
  • Urological tumours
  • Epidemiology

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Upon request to the study group (mats.ahlberg@surgsci.uu.se), data that underlie the results reported in this article will be shared, after de-identification, with researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to achieve the aims in the approved proposal.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057242

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

    • The long and complete prospective follow-up of relevant endpoints strengthen the validity of our results.

    • The fact that an independent committee determined cause of death increases the reliability of that endpoint.

    • The small size of the cohort is a limitation.

    Introduction

    Because lethal and prostate specific antigen (PSA) detected non-lethal prostate cancer cannot be reliably separated, millions of men who have undergone radical prostatectomy are unnecessarily followed for many years with repeated PSA tests in order to detect a biochemical recurrence. The American Urological Association guidelines recommend at least 10 years follow-up1 while the European Association of Urology guidelines have no stopping recommendation even if PSA remains undetectable.2 Thus, the potential benefit of follow-up needs to be weighed against the physical and psychological burden for the patient as well as the use of healthcare resources. However, it is not clear whether it is possible to shorten follow-up after radical prostatectomy for some patients, without increasing the risk of prostate cancer death.

    After a radical prostatectomy, the risk of biochemical recurrence is highest during the first 2 years but still remains after 10 years.3 4 High preoperative PSA, high Gleason score, high pathological tumour (pT)-stage and positive surgical margins are associated with increased risk of biochemical recurrence.5 In men with biochemical recurrence, high Gleason score and short PSA-doubling time are associated with increased risk of metastases and prostate cancer death while there are conflicting results regarding of pT-stage, surgical margins and time to biochemical recurrence.4 6–11

    We investigated the probabilities of future biochemical recurrence, metastases and death from prostate cancer conditioned on 5 and 10 years without biochemical recurrence for men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 or ≥4+3=7, pT2 or ≥pT3, and negative or positive surgical margins in the prostatectomy specimen. We hypothesised that men with no biochemical recurrence and favourable histopathology (Gleason score ≤3+4=7, pT2 or negative surgical margins) could stop follow-up earlier than 10 years after radical prostatectomy without increasing the probability of metastases or prostate cancer death.

    Methods

    Patients

    We included all patients from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group study number 4 (SPCG-4) who underwent radical prostatectomy within 1 year from randomisation (1989–1998). All data were derived from the SPCG-4 database. Details of the trial design has been previously published.12 Briefly, a total of 695 patients in 14 urological centres in Scandinavia were randomised to either watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy. All men gave oral consent to participate in the SPCG-4 study before randomisation. A total of 306 patients (289 randomised to radical prostatectomy and 17 randomised to watchful waiting) underwent radical prostatectomy, without evidence of lymph node invasion at frozen section, within 1 year from randomisation of whom 302 were included in the study (figure 1). No patient was lost to follow-up. About 75% of the patients in SPCG-4 had a palpable, clinically detected prostate cancer (cT2) while the remaining were detected by PSA testing or incidentally after transurethral resection of the prostate. The initial protocol for SPCG-4 promoted hormonal treatment only after onset of metastases.13 After introduction of Bicalutamide in 2003, urologists could use antiandrogen therapy as desired according to an amendment to the protocol.14 An independent committee determined cause of death in all deceased patients.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Patient selection and complementary treatment after radical prostatectomy. HT, hormonal treatment; RP, radical prostatectomy; RT, radiotherapy; SPCG4, Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group study nr. 4.

    We defined biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy as the second of two separate PSA values ≥0.2 ng/mL or one single PSA value >0.4 ng/mL. We also defined biochemical recurrence as initiation of hormonal treatment (two patients) or salvage radiotherapy (seven patients) if occurring before a PSA definition was reached. For all definitions at least 6 weeks had to pass after radical prostatectomy. We defined positive surgical margin as any amount of prostate cancer in the resection margin, and extra-prostatic extension of prostate cancer (pT3) as any tumour growth outside the prostate capsule. Due to similarities in long-term risk of metastases and prostate cancer death between Gleason score ≤3+3=6 and 3+4=7 (figure 2) we grouped patients into a favourable Gleason score-group (Gleason score ≤3+4=7) and a non-favourable Gleason score-group (Gleason score ≥4+3=7).15 We also grouped patients by pT-stage (pT2 or ≥pT3) and negative or positive surgical margins. Preoperative PSA refers to the last PSA before surgery.

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence, metastasis and death from prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. BCR, biochemical recurrence; PC, prostate cancer; pT, pathological T-stage; RP, radical prostatectomy.

    Statistical analyses

    We considered preoperative PSA and age as continuous variables and Gleason score, pT-stage and surgical margins as categorical variables. We present not normally distributed data as median and IQR.

    We estimated the long-term probability of future biochemical recurrence, metastases and prostate cancer death in men without biochemical recurrence, as cumulative incidence proportions conditioned on time after radical prostatectomy without biochemical recurrence.16 We considered death from other causes as a competing risk and censored at last day of follow-up. Follow-up was quantified using reverse Kaplan-Meier estimate of potential follow-up.17 18

    Missing data were handled by imputation using multiple imputation by changed equations.19 We estimated variance according to Rubin’s rule20 and performed a sensitivity analysis of one single PSA >0.6 ng/mL versus >0.4 ng/mL as one of the definitions of biochemical recurrence.

    Patient and public involvement

    Patient experiences and priorities are important knowledge that may influence the definition of research questions. Because we used existing data from the SPCG-4 study database, patients and the public were not involved in the design or conduct of the study, or in the interpretation of the study results.

    Results

    Descriptive characteristics

    In all, 302 men who underwent radical prostatectomy within 1 year from randomisation fulfilled the criteria for this study (figure 1). Median age at inclusion was 65 years, median (IQR) follow-up time was 24 (21–26) years and median preoperative PSA 9.8 ng/mL. Fifty-eight per cent of the radical prostatectomy specimens contained Gleason score ≤3+4=7, 48% were pT2 and 61% had negative surgical margins (table 1).

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Baseline characteristics of patients included in the study

    During follow-up 218 men died. We documented biochemical recurrence in 190 men (63%), metastases in 63 men (21%) and prostate cancer death in 49 men (16 %). Cumulative incidences for subgroups are shown in figure 2. Results of data analyses before and after imputation did not change the main result. Nor did sensitivity analysis of one single PSA >0.6 ng/mL versus >0.4 ng/mL—as one of the definitions of biochemical recurrence—change the results.

    Outcomes 20 years after radical prostatectomy conditioned on 5 years without biochemical recurrence

    The probability of an event 20 years after radical prostatectomy conditioned on time after surgery without biochemical recurrence is illustrated in figure 3. Table 2 shows the estimates at 10, 15 and 20 years after radical prostatectomy; these results are based on the same analysis as shown in figure 3. Absolute differences (95% CI) for Gleason score ≤3+4=7 versus ≥4+3=7; pT2 versus pT ≥3 and negative versus positive surgical margins, are shown in table 2. Twenty years after radical prostatectomy, the probabilities were 32% for biochemical recurrence, 4.5% for metastases and 3.3% for death from prostate cancer for all patients without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy.

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Probability (%) and absolute difference (% (95% CI)) of future biochemical recurrence, metastasis and prostate cancer death for men without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    20-year probability of event conditioned on time after radical prostatectomy without biochemical recurrence. Y-axis represents the probability of an event (biochemical recurrence, metastasis and PC-death) for the different subgroups within 20 years after radical prostatectomy; X-axis represents time after radical prostatectomy without biochemical recurrence. The green circle in (A) exemplifies the probability to experience a biochemical recurrence within 20 years from radical prostatectomy for a patient with GS ≤3+4=7 who was free from biochemical recurrence 6 years after radical prostatectomy. The red circle in (F) exemplifies the probability to die from prostate cancer within 20 years from radical prostatectomy for a patient with ≥pT3 who was free from biochemical recurrence 8 years after radical prostatectomy. BCR, biochemical recurrence; GS, Gleason score; PC, prostate cancer; pT, pathological T-stage; RP, radical prostatectomy.

    Among patients without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy, the 20-year probability of biochemical recurrence was 25% among those with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 and 57% among those with Gleason score ≥4+3=7; the corresponding probabilities for metastases were 0.8% and 17%; and for prostate cancer death 0.8% and 12%, respectively. Among men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy, 11 out of 111 men later received hormonal treatment for prostate cancer of whom two also underwent salvage radiotherapy.

    The 20-year probabilities of all events were numerically higher for pT ≥3 versus pT2 and for positive versus negative surgical margins even though the differences were not statistically significant for other than the probabilities of biochemical recurrence for patients with positive versus negative surgical margins. The probabilities of biochemical recurrence varied between 17% for men with negative surgical margins 10 years after radical prostatectomy and 48% for men with positive surgical margins 20 years after radical prostatectomy. The probabilities of death from prostate cancer resembled the probabilities of metastases but were considerably lower than the probabilities of biochemical recurrence (table 2).

    For patients without biochemical recurrence, the 20-year probabilities of metastases and death from prostate cancer in the whole cohort decreased by at least two-thirds during the first 3 years after radical prostatectomy (from 21% to 6% for metastases and from 15% to 5% for prostate cancer death) after which the decrease flattened out. We saw the same pattern, a decrease in probability of about 50% or more in the first 3 years, in all subgroups except in men with pT2 (figure 3).

    Outcomes 20 years after radical prostatectomy conditioned on 10 years without biochemical recurrence

    The probability of biochemical recurrence 20 years after radical prostatectomy for all patients without biochemical recurrence 10 years after radical prostatectomy was 17%. Among patients without biochemical recurrence 10 years after radical prostatectomy none was diagnosed with metastases or died from prostate cancer (figure 3). The 20-year probabilities (95% CI of absolute differences) of future biochemical recurrence were 9% for Gleason score ≤3+4=7 and 52% (21–66) for Gleason score ≥4+3=7; 10% for pT2 and 34% (6–42) for ≥pT3; and 12% for those with a negative and 34% (3–42) for those with positive surgical margins. Among men with Gleason score ≥4+3=7 without biochemical recurrence 10 years after radical prostatectomy, 3 out of 20 received hormonal treatment and none underwent salvage radiotherapy.

    Discussion

    Principal findings

    Following radical prostatectomy, patients with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy had low risk of metastases and prostate cancer death independent of pT-stage and surgical margins. The risk of clinical progression decreased drastically in the first 3 years after radical prostatectomy and after 10 years without biochemical recurrence, no patient was diagnosed with metastases or died from prostate cancer.

    Comparisons with other studies

    Loeb et al21 presented evidence for low risk of cancer related morbidity and mortality within 20 years after radical prostatectomy if PSA was undetectable 10 years after radical prostatectomy. Ahove et al,22 with 10 years of follow-up, showed that it is unlikely for patients with Gleason score 6 to develop late biochemical recurrence if PSA was undetectable 5 years after radical prostatectomy. In the present study with median follow-up of 24 years, men without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy still had a rather high probability of future biochemical recurrence, while the probability of metastases and prostate cancer death varied. Gleason score was the strongest predictor of outcomes. Among men with Gleason score ≥4+3=7 the long-term probability of biochemical recurrence was about two times higher than for men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 while the probabilities of metastasis and prostate cancer death were about 20 and 15 times higher, respectively. In all, 7 of 157 men with biochemical recurrence after more than 5 years were later diagnosed with metastatic disease and six of them died from prostate cancer. Only one of these men was in the favourable Gleason score-group.

    Several other studies evaluated how time to biochemical recurrence predicts metastases and prostate cancer death after radical prostatectomy with somewhat conflicting results. Freedland et al and Cair et al found that shorter time to biochemical recurrence was associated with higher prostate cancer specific mortality while Bolton et al was able to demonstrate this association in men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer but not in men with low-risk prostate cancer.9 10 23 Pound found evidence for that shorter time to biochemical was associated with metastases but not increased mortality.4 Boorjian et al, Zhou et al, Ward et al and Antonarakis et al, however, found no association between interval from radical prostatectomy to biochemical recurrence and oncological outcomes after adjusting for other clinicopathological features.3 6–8 11 No previous study had as long follow-up as in our study. Our findings clearly support that a longer interval between surgery and biochemical recurrence predicts lower risk of metastases and prostate cancer death. Our findings of a rapid decrease in probability of metastases and death from prostate cancer the first 3 years after radical prostatectomy are supported by earlier studies where 2–3 years after radical prostatectomy appears to be a cut-off when the risk of clinical progression declines.3 4

    Ten per cent of men in the favourable Gleason score-group without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy eventually received hormonal treatment. Some recent data indicate that immediate androgen deprivation therapy after biochemical recurrence can improve overall survival for men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.24 Other data suggest that early hormonal treatment is unlikely to reduce the risk of clinical progression in patients with favourable histopathology.25 26 In our study, 23 men underwent salvage radiotherapy, of which only two were in the favourable Gleason score-group without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy. Salvage radiotherapy after biochemical recurrence can provide sustainable PSA response and a survival benefit in men with a PSA doubling time less than 6 months.27 The timing of salvage radiotherapy is debated but early treatment is probably beneficial for patients with long life expectancy and non-favourable histopathology.28 29 Thus, in our study men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy, hormonal treatment or salvage radiotherapy is unlikely to substantially reduce risk of metastases or prostate cancer death.

    We did not adjust for pT-stage or surgical margins when we analysed probabilities of future metastases and prostate cancer death in the two Gleason score-groups. Thus, in the favourable Gleason score-group some patients had ≥pT3 tumours and/or positive surgical margins. In our study also other favourable histopathological characteristics (pT2 and negative surgical margins) predicted low risk of clinical progression. These findings support shorter follow-up in men with favourable histopathological characteristics without biochemical recurrence at 5 years. However, some patients will undergo surgery at a young age with far more than 20 years of expected remaining lifetime. Our results do not support a shorter follow-up in this patient group as their time at risk for metastases and prostate cancer death exceeds the follow-up of this study.

    Biochemical recurrence after 10 years was fairly common. We found, however, no metastatic disease and no death from prostate cancer in men without biochemical recurrence 10 years after radical prostatectomy. Only three men in the non-favourable Gleason score-group without biochemical recurrence after 10 years received hormonal treatment. Other studies also indicate that late biochemical recurrence often occurs without further progression to metastatic disease and death from prostate cancer.9 10 23 This finding can be explained by the slow progression of a prostate cancer with late biochemical recurrence and by increasing competing risks for death with ageing. According to our results there is indeed no advantage to find a biochemical recurrence more than 10 years after radical prostatectomy even in men with non-favourable histopathological characteristics unless they have a very long life expectancy.

    Anxiety during follow-up is described in a variety of cancers including prostate cancer.30 Scanxiety captures the particular distress reported by patients who are scheduled for surveillance and imaging to detect disease progression.31 The same phenomenon is described for prostate cancer survivors who experience physical or emotional distress around the time of PSA-testing.32 In addition, every PSA-test further diagnostic work-up and subsequent contact with a healthcare professional consume healthcare resources and it is important to balance risk and benefit with follow-up.

    SPCG-4 included patients enrolled from 1989 to 1998, before the PSA era. The trial was completed before the ISUP05 consensus where some Gleason three patterns by definition shifted to Gleason four resulting in an upwards grade shift.33 Also, most tumours were palpable, and in general more advanced than those detected by PSA-testing in more modern radical-prostatectomy cohorts. This probably explains the high proportion of ≥pT3 tumours and biochemical recurrences.

    PSA-testing remains the cornerstone in follow-up after radical prostatectomy and new imaging techniques with high sensitivity to detect local recurrence and metastases are used predominantly in patients with biochemical recurrence.2 If a biochemical recurrence does not lead to clinical progression, these imaging techniques may cause over-detection and as a corollary, over-treatment. Hence, it is profoundly important to understand if a PSA recurrence anticipates clinical progression.

    Strengths and limitations

    The size of the cohort is a limitation. The cohort was too small to perform a multivariable analysis including potential confounding factors. Further, there is about 7% missing data which is a limitation. We have imputed that data to reduce bias. In a randomised trial like SPCG-4, there is a risk that the cohort is healthier than the general population which decreases the risk for death from other cause in the competing risk analysis. This might make the results less generalisable. Also, the proportion of pT3 tumours (45%) in our study is high compared with a modern cohort which affects the generalisability. However, the long and complete prospective follow-up of all relevant endpoints and an independent committee that determined cause of death strengthen the validity of our results.

    Conclusion

    Our study indicates that men with favourable histopathology without biochemical recurrence at 5 years after radical prostatectomy can stop follow-up earlier than 10 years after radical prostatectomy while men with adverse pathology should continue with at least 10 years follow-up.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request. Upon request to the study group (mats.ahlberg@surgsci.uu.se), data that underlie the results reported in this article will be shared, after de-identification, with researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to achieve the aims in the approved proposal.

    Ethics statements

    Patient consent for publication

    Ethics approval

    This study involves human participants and was approved by Ethics review board at Örebro University Hospital (nr.251/89). Participants gave informed consent to participate in the study before taking part.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors would like to thank the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG) for enabling the study.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Prostate Cancer
      . Clinically Localized Guideline - American Urological Association. Available: https://www.auanet.org/guidelines/prostate-cancer-clinically-localized-guideline#x6906 [Accessed 23 Apr 2021].
    2. ↵
      EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG-Guidelines-on-Prostate-Cancer-2021V3.pdf. Available: https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG-Guidelines-on-Prostate-Cancer-2021V3.pdf [Accessed 26 Apr 2021].
    3. ↵
      1. Ward JF,
      2. Blute ML,
      3. Slezak J, et al
      . The long-term clinical impact of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer 5 or more years after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003;170:1872–6.doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000091876.13656.2epmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14532796
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. ↵
      1. Pound CR,
      2. Partin AW,
      3. Eisenberger MA, et al
      . Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1999;281:1591.doi:10.1001/jama.281.17.1591pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10235151
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      1. Kurbegovic S,
      2. Berg KD,
      3. Thomsen FB, et al
      . The risk of biochemical recurrence for intermediate-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Scand J Urol 2017;51:450–6.doi:10.1080/21681805.2017.1356369pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28762283
      OpenUrlPubMed
    6. ↵
      1. Boorjian SA,
      2. Thompson RH,
      3. Tollefson MK, et al
      . Long-Term risk of clinical progression after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy: the impact of time from surgery to recurrence. Eur Urol 2011;59:893–9.doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.02.026pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21388736
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Antonarakis ES,
      2. Feng Z,
      3. Trock BJ, et al
      . The natural history of metastatic progression in men with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up. BJU Int 2012;109:32–9.doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10422.xpmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21777360
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Antonarakis ES,
      2. Chen Y,
      3. Elsamanoudi SI, et al
      . Long-Term overall survival and metastasis-free survival for men with prostate-specific antigen-recurrent prostate cancer after prostatectomy: analysis of the center for prostate disease research national database. BJU Int 2011;108:378–85.doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09878.xpmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21091976
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Freedland SJ,
      2. Humphreys EB,
      3. Mangold LA, et al
      . Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005;294:433.doi:10.1001/jama.294.4.433pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16046649
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    10. ↵
      1. Bolton DM,
      2. Ta A,
      3. Bagnato M, et al
      . Interval to biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy does not affect survival in men with low-risk prostate cancer. World J Urol 2014;32:431–5.doi:10.1007/s00345-013-1125-0pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23824175
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      1. Zhou P,
      2. Chen M-H,
      3. McLeod D, et al
      . Predictors of prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:6992–8.doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.01.2906pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16192586
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    12. ↵
      1. Holmberg L,
      2. Bill-Axelson A,
      3. Helgesen F, et al
      . A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:781–9.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012794pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12226148
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    13. ↵
      1. Bill-Axelson m
      . fl- 2018 - Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Prost.pdf. Available: https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1807801/suppl_file/nejmoa1807801_protocol.pdf [Accessed July 01 July 2021].
    14. ↵
      1. Bill-Axelson A,
      2. Holmberg L,
      3. Ruutu M, et al
      . Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1977–84.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043739pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15888698
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    15. ↵
      1. Bill-Axelson A,
      2. Holmberg L,
      3. Garmo H, et al
      . Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Prostate Cancer - 29-Year Follow-up. N Engl J Med 2018;379:2319–29.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1807801pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30575473
      OpenUrlPubMed
    16. ↵
      1. Kalbfleisch JD,
      2. Prentice RL
      . The statistical analysis of failure time data: Kalbfleisch/The statistical. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2002.
    17. ↵
      1. Altman DG,
      2. De Stavola BL,
      3. Love SB, et al
      . Review of survival analyses published in cancer journals. Br J Cancer 1995;72:511–8.doi:10.1038/bjc.1995.364pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7640241
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    18. ↵
      1. Schemper M,
      2. Smith TL
      . A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time. Control Clin Trials 1996;17:343–6.doi:10.1016/0197-2456(96)00075-Xpmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8889347
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    19. ↵
      1. van BS,
      2. Groothuis-Oudshoorn K
      . Mice: multivariate imputation by Chained equations in R. J Stat Softw 2011;45:1–67.doi:10.18637/jss.v045.i03
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    20. ↵
      1. Rubin DB,
      2. Schenker N
      . Multiple imputation in health-care databases: an overview and some applications. Stat Med 1991;10:585–98.doi:10.1002/sim.4780100410pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2057657
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    21. ↵
      1. Loeb S,
      2. Feng Z,
      3. Ross A, et al
      . Can we stop prostate specific antigen testing 10 years after radical prostatectomy? J Urol 2011;186:500–5.doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.116pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21679999
      OpenUrlPubMed
    22. ↵
      1. Ahove DA,
      2. Hoffman KE,
      3. Hu JC, et al
      . Which patients with undetectable PSA levels 5 years after radical prostatectomy are still at risk of recurrence?--implications for a risk-adapted follow-up strategy. Urology 2010;76:1201–5.doi:10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.092pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20709376
      OpenUrlPubMed
    23. ↵
      1. Caire AA,
      2. Sun L,
      3. Ode O, et al
      . Delayed prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: how to identify and what are their clinical outcomes? Urology 2009;74:643–7.doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.02.049pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19501891
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    24. ↵
      1. Duchesne GM,
      2. Woo HH,
      3. Bassett JK, et al
      . Timing of androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer with a rising PSA (TROG 03.06 and VCOG PR 01-03 [TOAD]): a randomised, multicentre, non-blinded, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:727–37.doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00107-8pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27155740
      OpenUrlPubMed
    25. ↵
      1. Moul JW,
      2. Wu H,
      3. Sun L, et al
      . Early versus delayed hormonal therapy for prostate specific antigen only recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2008;179:S53–9.doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.138pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18405753
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    26. ↵
      1. Siddiqui SA,
      2. Boorjian SA,
      3. Inman B, et al
      . Timing of androgen deprivation therapy and its impact on survival after radical prostatectomy: a matched cohort study. J Urol 2008;179:1830–7.doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.022pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18353378
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    27. ↵
      1. Trock BJ,
      2. Han M,
      3. Freedland SJ, et al
      . Prostate cancer-specific survival following salvage radiotherapy vs observation in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2008;299:2760–9.doi:10.1001/jama.299.23.2760pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18560003
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Tay KJ,
      2. Polascik TJ,
      3. Howard LE, et al
      . Salvage radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer: can the prognostic grade group system inform treatment timing? Clin Genitourin Cancer 2019;17:e930–8.doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2019.05.007pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31257075
      OpenUrlPubMed
    29. ↵
      1. Fossati N,
      2. Karnes RJ,
      3. Cozzarini C, et al
      . Assessing the optimal timing for early salvage radiation therapy in patients with prostate-specific antigen rise after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2016;69:728–33.doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.009pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26497924
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    30. ↵
      1. Meissner VH,
      2. Herkommer K,
      3. Marten-Mittag B, et al
      . Prostate cancer-related anxiety in long-term survivors after radical prostatectomy. J Cancer Surviv 2017;11:800–7.doi:10.1007/s11764-017-0619-ypmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28528448
      OpenUrlPubMed
    31. ↵
      1. Feiler B
      . Health Special: Cancer - TIME, 2011. Available: http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2075133_2075127_2075107,00.html [Accessed 08 May 2021].
    32. ↵
      1. Dale W,
      2. Bilir P,
      3. Han M, et al
      . The role of anxiety in prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2005;104:467–78.doi:10.1002/cncr.21198
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    33. ↵
      1. Epstein JI,
      2. Allsbrook WC,
      3. Amin MB, et al
      . The 2005 International Society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228–42.doi:10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16096414
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @fettMats

    • Contributors The study was conceived, planned and designed by MSA, HG, LH and AB-A. H-OA, OA, J-EJ, GS, LH and AB-A acquired the data. Statistical analysis was done by MSA and HG. MSA, LH and AB-A drafted the manuscript. All authors contributed with interpretation of results, revised and reviewed the manuscript. MSA, HG, LH and AB-A had full access to the full data. The corresponding author (MSA) is guarantor of the study and had the final responsibility to submit for publication. All authors provided final approval to submit the manuscript for publication.

    • Funding This work was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society (2016/466 and 2014/1275), the Swedish Research Council (2016-00177 and 2016-01293), the Swedish Prostate Cancer Foundation (grant number: N/A) and the Percy Falk Foundation (grant number: N/A) to Dr Bill-Axelson. The funders had no role in the study design or in the collection, analysis or interpretation of data, writing the report or the decision to submit the article for publication.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.