An increasing number of comparatively young men are diagnosed today with prostate cancer in an apparently early stage. Most studies that have examined the natural course of early stage prostate cancer have come to the same conclusion: The course of the disease is fairly indolent for the first 15 yr, but after that, a considerable increase in prostate cancer mortality is seen [1]. This pattern has been seen as a reason for men with a very long life expectancy to undergo immediate curative therapy, even when diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer. Recently, the need for immediate treatment of all young men has been challenged, and the concept of active monitoring has gained popularity as a treatment policy. The idea is tha
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
An increasing number of comparatively young men are diagnosed today with prostate cancer in an appar...
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. In the United States, about 244 000 men will be fo...
Context: Due to early detection strategies, prostate cancer is diagnosed early in its natural histor...
A pressing clinical issue is the choice of management for men who are newly diagnosed with localized...
In 1989–96, men with prostate cancer who participated in a treatment trial were randomized to either...
Today, the majority of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer will present with low-risk features ...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
An increasing number of comparatively young men are diagnosed today with prostate cancer in an appar...
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. In the United States, about 244 000 men will be fo...
Context: Due to early detection strategies, prostate cancer is diagnosed early in its natural histor...
A pressing clinical issue is the choice of management for men who are newly diagnosed with localized...
In 1989–96, men with prostate cancer who participated in a treatment trial were randomized to either...
Today, the majority of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer will present with low-risk features ...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
TO THE EDITOR: In their cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment versus observation for low-risk pro...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...
TO THE EDITOR: The population-based cohort in the article by Daskivich and colleagues (1) does not n...