-
ADD TIME NEWS
- MOBILE APPS
- NEWSLETTERS
Prostate Cancer: Cut or Wait?
Ima
Predictable as that conclusion might seem, doctors consider the study a landmark. Physicians have debated for years how aggressively they should treat cancer of the prostate. Because the disease tends to be very slow growing, many more men will die with prostate cancer than from it. Nobody wants to undergo surgery or radiation treatment if that can be avoided, especially because in the case of prostate cancer the side effects typically include impotence and incontinence. On the other hand, you don't want to die of prostate cancer if you can help it. If the cancer spreads to the bones, it can be excruciatingly painful, and once it spreads, death is often unavoidable.
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
What does this mean for you? The New England Journal study probably tilts the equation toward treatment especially if you have early-stage prostate cancer and expect to live 10 more years. (On average, it may take such a tumor, if it recurs, a decade or more after treatment to cause death.) Watchful waiting probably makes more sense for older men, particularly if they are frail.
As with any other complex medical study, however, there are some tricky caveats. First off, prostate cancer is treated differently in Scandinavia, where watchful waiting is the norm, than it is in the U.S. Moreover, because Scandinavian men are not screened for prostate cancer as aggressively as American men, they tend to be older when they get their first diagnosis. And though the men in the surgery group were less likely to die of prostate cancer than the watchful waiters, it turned out there was no statistically significant difference in how long they lived.
Such a result is not as contradictory as it sounds. Given that follow-up averaged just over six years, it's quite possible that the study didn't last long enough to show an appreciable difference in the two groups' death rates. Even if it turns out that the men in the surgery group didn't live any longer and were merely spared death from prostate cancer, that's quite an accomplishment, says Dr. Patrick Walsh at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions in Baltimore, Md., who invented a widely used nerve-sparing prostate surgery. "If you had a choice of dying of prostate cancer vs. dying of a heart attack," he says, "you'd pick dying of a heart attack."
Still unknown is whether screening someone for prostate cancer with blood tests that look for prostate-specific antigen (psa) reduces the risk of death from prostate cancer. Studies designed to answer that question are under way. Until then, you will have to gather and weigh all the information you can when deciding how, or even whether, to treat prostate cancer.
For more information, search for "prostate" at cancer.gov
Most Popular »
- The Growing Backlash Against Overparenting
- Prehistoric Super-Crocodiles May Have Dined on Dinosaurs
- Amid Concern About India's Lost Clout, Singh Comes to Washington
- Woman Loses Benefits over Facebook Photo
- Toilets
- The Fall of Greg Craig, Obama's Top Lawyer
- Can the A380 Bring the Party Back to the Skies?
- Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin
- Man in Coma Heard Everything for 23 Years
- Troubling Rise of Facebook's Top Game Company
- The Growing Backlash Against Overparenting
- Prehistoric Super-Crocodiles May Have Dined on Dinosaurs
- How One Army Town Copes With Post- Traumatic Stress
- Beijing: 10 Things to Do in 24 Hours
- Man in Coma Heard Everything for 23 Years
- Will Private Equity Be the Next Meltdown?
- The Fall of Greg Craig, Obama's Top Lawyer
- Female Sexual Dysfunction: Myth or Malady?
- U.N.: More Children in School, Fewer Dying
- Troubling Rise of Facebook's Top Game Company







RSS