The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Survival Associated With Treatment vs Observation of Localized Prostate Cancer in Elderly Men
Abstract
CONTEXT: Prostate-specific antigen screening has led to an increase in the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer. However, the role of active treatment of low- and intermediate-risk disease in elderly men is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between treatment (with radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy) compared with observation and overall survival in men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational US cohort from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare data. PATIENTS: At total of 44,630 men aged 65 to 80 years who were diagnosed between 1991 and 1999 with organ-confined, well- or moderately differentiated prostate cancer and who had survived more than a year past diagnosis. Patients were followed up until death or study end (December 31, 2002). Patients were classified as having received treatment (n=32,022) if they had claims for radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy during the first 6 months after diagnosis. They were classified as having received observation (n=12,608) if they did not have claims for radical prostatectomy, radiation, or hormonal therapy. Patients who received only hormonal therapy were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Overall survival. RESULTS: At the end of the 12-year study period, 4663 men (37%) in the observational group and 7639 men (23.8%) in the treatment group had died. The treatment group had longer 5- and 10-year survival than the observation group. After using propensity scores to adjust for potential confounders (tumor characteristics, demographics, and comorbidities), there was a statistically significant survival advantage associated with treatment (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.72). A benefit associated with treatment was seen in all subgroups examined, including older men (aged 75-80 years at diagnosis), black men, and men with low-risk disease. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a survival advantage is associated with active treatment for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer in elderly men aged 65 to 80 years. Because observational data cannot completely adjust for potential selection bias and confounding, these results must be validated in randomized controlled trials of alternative management strategies in elderly men with localized prostate cancer.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Radical Prostatectomy versus Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer
Bill-Axelson, A., Holmberg, L., Ruutu, M., Häggman, M., Andersson, S.-O., Bratell, S., Spångberg, A., Busch, C., Nordling, S., Garmo, H., et al. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa043739 · Cited by 1,111
The Effectiveness of Adjustment by Subclassification in Removing Bias in Observational Studies
Cochran, W. G. (1968) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2528036 · Cited by 961
Cited by
Fenton, J. J., Weyrich, M. S., Durbin, S., Liu, Y., Bang, H., & Melnikow, J. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.3712 · Cited by 555
Metadata
- Authors
- Wong, Y.-N., Mitra, N., Hudes, G., Localio, R., Schwartz, J. S., Wan, F., Montagnet, C., & Armstrong, K.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-12-13
- Volume
- 296
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 2683
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2031048427
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 26.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survival Associated With Treatment vs Observation of Localized Prostate Cancer in Elderly Men. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.296.22.2683
- The paper
- Wong, Y.-N., Mitra, N., Hudes, G., Localio, R., Schwartz, J. S., Wan, F., Montagnet, C., & Armstrong, K. (2006). Survival Associated With Treatment vs Observation of Localized Prostate Cancer in Elderly Men. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.22.2683
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.