The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with localized prostate cancer; however, important questions regarding long-term benefit remain. METHODS: Between 1989 and 1999, we randomly assigned 695 men with early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy and followed them through the end of 2012. The primary end points in the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) were death from any cause, death from prostate cancer, and the risk of metastases. Secondary end points included the initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy. RESULTS: During 23.2 years of follow-up, 200 of 347 men in the surgery group and 247 of the 348 men in the watchful-waiting group died. Of the deaths, 63 in the surgery group and 99 in the watchful-waiting group were due to prostate cancer; the relative risk was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.77; P=0.001), and the absolute difference was 11.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.5 to 17.5). The number needed to treat to prevent one death was 8. One man died after surgery in the radical-prostatectomy group. Androgen-deprivation therapy was used in fewer patients who underwent prostatectomy (a difference of 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 17.7 to 32.3). The benefit of surgery with respect to death from prostate cancer was largest in men younger than 65 years of age (relative risk, 0.45) and in those with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (relative risk, 0.38). However, radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduced risk of metastases among older men (relative risk, 0.68; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Extended follow-up confirmed a substantial reduction in mortality after radical prostatectomy; the number needed to treat to prevent one death continued to decrease when the treatment was modified according to age at diagnosis and tumor risk. A large proportion of long-term survivors in the watchful-waiting group have not required any palliative treatment. (Funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and others.).
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
Cited by
Tosoian, J. J., Mamawala, M., Epstein, J. I., Landis, P., Wolf, S., Trock, B. J., & Carter, H. B. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.62.5764 · Cited by 555
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
Van den Broeck, T., van den Bergh, R. C. N., Arfi, N., Gross, T., Moris, L., Briers, E., Cumberbatch, M., De Santis, M., Tilki, D., Fanti, S., et al. (2019) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.011 · Cited by 523
Conceptualizing overdiagnosis in cancer screening
Marcus, P. M., Prorok, P. C., Miller, A. B., DeVoto, E. J., & Kramer, B. S. (2015) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djv014 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Bill-Axelson, A., Holmberg, L., Garmo, H., Rider, J. R., Taari, K., Busch, C., Nordling, S., Häggman, M., Andersson, S.-O., Spångberg, A., Andrén, O., Palmgren, J., Steineck, G., Adami, H.-O., & Johansson, J.-E.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2014-03-06
- Volume
- 370
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 932-942
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2905153461
- Cited by
- 981
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 114.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1311593
- The paper
- Bill-Axelson, A., Holmberg, L., Garmo, H., Rider, J. R., Taari, K., Busch, C., Nordling, S., Häggman, M., Andersson, S.-O., Spångberg, A., Andrén, O., Palmgren, J., Steineck, G., Adami, H.-O., & Johansson, J.-E. (2014). Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1311593
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.