Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 928

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Results of Conservative Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

Chodak, Gerald W., Thisted, Ronald A., Gerber, Glenn S., Johansson, Jan-Erik, Adolfsson, Jan, Jones, George W., Chisholm, Geoff D., Moskovitz, Boaz, Livne, Pinhas M., Warner, John·1994·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The selection of treatment for patients with localized prostate cancer requires reliable information about the outcome of conservative management. Previous studies of this question are generally considered unreliable because they were uncontrolled and nonrandomized. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of 828 case records from six nonrandomized studies, published since 1985, of men treated conservatively (with observation and delayed hormone therapy but no radical surgery or irradiation) for clinically localized prostate cancer. A Cox regression analysis was performed to determine which factors influenced survival among patients who did not die of causes other than prostate cancer (disease-specific survival). Kaplan-Meier curves for overall and metastasis-free survival among such patients were compared with use of the log-rank method and the Mantel-Haenszel test. RESULTS: Factors that had a significant effect on disease-specific survival were grade 3 tumors (risk ratio, 10.04), residence in Israel (risk ratio, 2.48) or New York (risk ratio, 0.37), and age under 61 years (risk ratio, 0.32). Ten years after diagnosis, disease-specific survival (with data on men who died from causes other than prostate cancer censored) was 87 percent for men with grade 1 or 2 tumors and 34 percent for those with grade 3 tumors; metastasis-free survival among men who had not died of other causes was 81 percent for grade 1, 58 percent for grade 2, and 26 percent for grade 3 disease. These findings were not affected by the inclusion of men who had early-stage cancer, were older, had worse-than-average health, or underwent delayed radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy of initial conservative management and delayed hormone therapy is a reasonable choice for some men with grade 1 or 2 clinically localized prostate cancer, particularly for those who have an average life expectancy of 10 years or less. New treatment strategies are needed for men with grade 3 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199401273300403

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 928

Metadata

Authors
Chodak, G. W., Thisted, R. A., Gerber, G. S., Johansson, J.-E., Adolfsson, J., Jones, G. W., Chisholm, G. D., Moskovitz, B., Livne, P. M., & Warner, J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1994-01-27
Volume
330
Issue
4
Pages
242-248
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2045644088
Cited by
928
References
2
FWCI
95.12
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: Results of Conservative Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199401273300403
The paper
Chodak, G. W., Thisted, R. A., Gerber, G. S., Johansson, J.-E., Adolfsson, J., Jones, G. W., Chisholm, G. D., Moskovitz, B., Livne, P. M., & Warner, J. (1994). Results of Conservative Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199401273300403

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.