News • Adherence to recommended treatments

Prostate cancer guidelines improve outcomes, study finds

Most men who are treated for prostate cancer according to modern guidelines have good survival rates and the majority of these men will die of causes other than prostate cancer.

This is revealed in a new study from Uppsala University published in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

“We were surprised by how much life expectancy affected the prognosis. This shows the importance of a thorough assessment of the general health of a man with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. The patient’s life expectancy has a substantial impact on the choice of appropriate treatment strategy,” says Marcus Westerberg, researcher at the Department of Surgical Sciences at Uppsala University, who led the study.

In prostate cancer, the disease progression often takes decades and the risk of dying from prostate cancer therefore depends on both the characteristics of the cancer and life expectancy based on the man’s age and other diseases at the time of diagnosis. Recommendations in guidelines and care programmes are therefore also based on both cancer characteristics and life expectancy. This means that the recommended initial treatment can range from active monitoring for low-risk cancer to combinations of local and systemic treatment for high-risk cancer.

As the average age at diagnosis of prostate cancer is often high and the cancer often progresses very slowly, it is particularly important to know the long-term risk of death from prostate cancer in order to choose the best treatment for patients. Previously, not much has been known about this.

Article • Research, diagnostics, therapy

Focus on prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is not only one of the most common, but also one of the deadliest types of cancer in men. Diagnostics are correspondingly sophisticated, from imaging via ultrasound or MRI to various biopsy techniques – often even in combination. Keep reading for current developments in early detection, staging, therapy and research.

“We wanted to fill that knowledge gap, so we looked at outcomes up to 30 years after the men were diagnosed. In all cases, we had information about the characteristics of the cancer, treatment and the patient’s life expectancy based on age and comorbidity,” says Westerberg.

The researchers used data from the Prostate Cancer Database Sweden (PCBase), which contains information from the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR) and other health data registers. They focused on men who had received the recommended treatment for prostate cancer that had not spread in the body. Using statistical modelling, the researchers estimated the lifetime risk of dying from prostate cancer and other causes.

Risk of death and cause of death 30 years after diagnosis as a proportion of 100 men: Grey figures indicate the proportion of men alive after 30 years, blue figures the proportion of men who died of other causes, and black figures the proportion of men who died of prostate cancer.

Image source: Uppsala University/Marcus Westerberg

For men with low-risk cancer and short life expectancy (less than 10 years), the risk of dying from prostate cancer was 11% and the risk of dying from other causes was 89% within 30 years of diagnosis. For men with high-risk cancer (e.g. stage T3, PSA 30 ng/ml and Gleason score 8) and long life expectancy (over 15 years), the risk of dying from prostate cancer was 34% and the risk of dying from other causes was 55% within 30 years of diagnosis.

“We hope that our results will be used to provide a realistic picture of the prognosis for men with prostate cancer. Our study shows that most men who receive the recommended treatment have a good prognosis,” Westerberg concludes.

Life expectancy was based on age and comorbidity. Examples of low-risk cancers are stage T1, PSA 5 ng/ml and Gleason score 6. Examples of high-risk cancers are stage T3, PSA 30 ng/ml and Gleason score 8.

Source: Uppsala University

17.07.2025