This Article Full Text (Online First [PDF]) Perspective on This Article Finasteride and Prostate Cancer: New York Times Article All Versions of this Article: 1940-6207.CAPR-07-0007v1 1/3/182    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pinsky, P. Articles by Ford, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pinsky, P. Articles by Ford, L. Related Collections Clinical Intervention Clinical Intervention: Biostatistics/Bioinformatics Commentary

Estimating Rates of True High-Grade Disease in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

Authors' Affiliations: Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.

Requests for reprints: Paul F. Pinsky, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, 6130 Executive Boulevard, EPN 3064, Bethesda, MD 20892. E-mail: pp4f@nih.gov.

Abstract

The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) showed a decreased prostate cancer rate but an increased rate of high Gleason grade disease on biopsy for finasteride versus placebo. The results from radical prostatectomy (RP) on 25% of the men undergoing RP have recently been reported and suggest that grading artifacts in biopsy Gleason scoring may have occurred. We used a statistical model to extrapolate the RP Gleason results to all men in the PCPT using a missing-at-random assumption. We estimated the rates of true high-grade (Gleason 7-10) and true low-grade disease, where true Gleason grade is what is (or would have been) found on RP. We also estimated misclassification rates on biopsy of true high-grade and low-grade disease. We show that the rate of upgrading of biopsy low-grade disease to high-grade on RP is a function of misclassification rates as well as the ratio of true low-grade to high-grade disease. The estimated relative risks for true low-grade and true high-grade disease for finasteride compared with placebo were 0.61 (95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.71) and 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.05), respectively. The misclassification rate of true high-grade disease (to low-grade disease on biopsy) was significantly lower for finasteride (34.6%) than for placebo (52.6%). Although misclassification rates differed, upgrading rates were similar in each arm due to the different ratios of true low-grade to high-grade disease in each arm. Results from RP show that misclassification rates on biopsy were higher in the placebo arm and that the rate of true high-grade disease may have been lower in the finasteride arm.

Key Words: Biopsy • Finasteride • Gleason Grade • Prostate Cancer • Radical Prostatectomy

Commentary

High-Grade Prostate Cancer and the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

Christopher J. Logothetis and Paul F. Schellhammer
Cancer Prevention Research 2008 1: 151-152. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. R. Marshall Keeping Our Eye on the Ball: The American Society of Preventive Oncology in 2009 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., October 1, 2009; 18(10): 2796 - 2802. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Li and J. Kim Molecular Profiles of Finasteride Effects on Prostate Carcinogenesis Cancer Prevention Research, June 1, 2009; 2(6): 518 - 524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. A. Klein and I. M. Thompson Current Status of Chemoprevention of Prostate Cancer ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 276 - 281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. S. Lucia Abstract CN01-02: The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial: An update on pathology Cancer Prevention Research, November 1, 2008; 1(7_MeetingAbstracts): CN01-02 - CN01-02.