The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intermediate and Longer-Term Outcomes From a Prospective Active-Surveillance Program for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: To assess long-term outcomes of men with favorable-risk prostate cancer in a prospective, active-surveillance program. Methods: Curative intervention was recommended for disease reclassification to higher cancer grade or volume on prostate biopsy. Primary outcomes were overall, cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival. Secondary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of reclassification and curative intervention. Factors associated with grade reclassification and curative intervention were evaluated in a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: A total of 1,298 men (median age, 66 years) with a median follow-up of 5 years (range, 0.01 to 18.00 years) contributed 6,766 person-years of follow-up since 1995. Overall, cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival rates were 93%, 99.9%, and 99.4%, respectively, at 10 years and 69%, 99.9%, and 99.4%, respectively, at 15 years. The cumulative incidence of grade reclassification was 26% at 10 years and was 31% at 15 years; cumulative incidence of curative intervention was 50% at 10 years and was 57% at 15 years. The median treatment-free survival was 8.5 years (range, 0.01 to 18 years). Factors associated with grade reclassification were older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.06), prostate-specific antigen density (HR, 1.21 per 0.1 unit increase; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.46), and greater number of positive biopsy cores (HR, 1.47 for each additional positive core; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.69). Factors associated with intervention were prostate-specific antigen density (HR, 1.38 per 0.1 unit increase; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.56) and a greater number of positive biopsy cores (HR, 1.35 for one additional positive core; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.53). Conclusion: Men with favorable-risk prostate cancer should be informed of the low likelihood of harm from their diagnosis and should be encouraged to consider surveillance rather than curative intervention.
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
Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement
Moyer, V. A., & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-00459 · Cited by 2,522
Radical Prostatectomy versus Observation for Localized Prostate Cancer
Wilt, T. J., Brawer, M. K., Jones, K. M., Barry, M. J., Aronson, W. J., Fox, S., Gingrich, J. R., Wei, J. T., Gilhooly, P., Grob, B. M., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1113162 · Cited by 1,770
Schröder, F. H., Hugosson, J., Roobol, M. J., Tammela, T. L. J., Zappa, M., Nelen, V., Kwiatkowski, M., Lujan, M., Määttänen, L., Lilja, H., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60525-0 · Cited by 1,566
Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA Guideline
Carter, H. B., Albertsen, P. C., Barry, M. J., Etzioni, R., Freedland, S. J., Greene, K. L., Holmberg, L., Kantoff, P., Konety, B. R., Murad, M. H., et al. (2013) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.119 · Cited by 1,242
Self-citationLong-Term Follow-Up of a Large Active Surveillance Cohort of Patients With Prostate Cancer
Klotz, L., Vesprini, D., Sethukavalan, P., Jethava, V., Zhang, L., Jain, S., Yamamoto, T., Mamedov, A., & Loblaw, A. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.55.1192 · Cited by 1,221
20-Year Outcomes Following Conservative Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer
Albertsen, P. C. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.17.2095 · Cited by 1,187
Time Trends and Local Variation in Primary Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer
Cooperberg, M. R., Broering, J. M., & Carroll, P. R. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.26.0133 · Cited by 1,006
Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer
Bill-Axelson, A., Holmberg, L., Garmo, H., Rider, J. R., Taari, K., Busch, C., Nordling, S., Häggman, M., Andersson, S.-O., Spångberg, A., et al. (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1311593 · Cited by 981
Predicting 15-Year Prostate Cancer Specific Mortality After Radical Prostatectomy
Eggener, S. E., Scardino, P. T., Walsh, P. C., Han, M., Partin, A. W., Trock, B. J., Feng, Z., Wood, D. P., Eastham, J. A., Yossepowitch, O., et al. (2011) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.057 · Cited by 640
Self-citationPrognostic G leason grade grouping: data based on the modified G leason scoring system
Pierorazio, P. M., Walsh, P. C., Partin, A. W., & Epstein, J. I. (2013) · British Journal of Urology · doi:10.1111/j.1464-410x.2012.11611.x · Cited by 630
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tosoian, J. J., Mamawala, M., Epstein, J. I., Landis, P., Wolf, S., Trock, B. J., & Carter, H. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2015-10-20
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 30
- Pages
- 3379-3385
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2140583819
- Cited by
- 555
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 55.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Intermediate and Longer-Term Outcomes From a Prospective Active-Surveillance Program for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2015.62.5764
- The paper
- Tosoian, J. J., Mamawala, M., Epstein, J. I., Landis, P., Wolf, S., Trock, B. J., & Carter, H. B. (2015). Intermediate and Longer-Term Outcomes From a Prospective Active-Surveillance Program for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.62.5764
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.