Waiting to Remove Prostate Cancer Doesn't Harm Quality of Life
A study of nearly 3,500 men found that delaying robot-assisted prostate removal after active surveillance doesn't worsen overall quality of life or erectile function. The finding could reshape treatment decisions for early-stage prostate cancer, potentially reducing unnecessary surgeries and their associated costs while patients are monitored for disease progression.
Originaltitel: Functional outcomes after primary vs delayed robot-assisted radical prostatectomy following active surveillance
<p>Background It is unknown if a period of active surveillance before prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa) worsens functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare functional outcomes after primary vs delayed robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Methods We included men registered in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden with low and favorable intermediate-risk PCa who underwent robot-assisted prostatectomy in 2018-2020 and had filled a questionnaire on patient-reported outcome measures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to compare the functional outcomes of primary and delayed prostatectomy.Results 2571 men underwent primary, and 921 men underwent delayed prostatectomy. Delayed prostatectomy was not associated with reduced overall quality of life (adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.55) or erectile dysfunction (adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69-1.22). Urinary incontinence was slightly more common after delayed prostatectomy (15% vs 11%; adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.91-2.01). There were weak associations between time to prostatectomy and urinary symptoms and bother, with a 3% annual increase in the risk for urinary incontinence (adjusted OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.94-1.13).Conclusion These results suggest that a period on active surveillance before robot-assisted radical prostatectomy has little detrimental effect on functional outcomes. Since only around half of men on active surveillance will transit to prostatectomy, these outcomes represent a worst-case scenario for men who start active surveillance. These results support the use of active surveillance for men with low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk PCa.</p>