Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer

4 min


The authors previously found no significant difference in mortality between men who underwent surgery for localised prostate cancer and those who were treated with observation only over 12 years of follow-up of the PIVOT trial.

However, there is still uncertainty regarding non-fatal health outcomes and longer term mortality.


To determine all-cause and prostate-cancer specific mortality over almost 20 years of follow-up; and to describe disease progression, treatments received, and patient-reported outcomes during the original follow-up period of 12 years.


From November 1994 through January 2002, 731 men with localized prostate cancer were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy or observation (PIVOT trial).

From the original follow-up period to January 2010, follow-up was extended to August 2014 for the primary outcome of all-cause mortality and the main secondary outcome of prostate-cancer mortality (minimum 12 years, maximum 19.5 years follow-up).

Disease progression (local, regional, systemic or biochemical (PSA) progression, symptomatic or asymptomatic), treatments received (surgery, radiation, hormone therapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy), and patient-reported outcomes (urinary incontinence, erectile/sexual dysfunction, worry about health, “bother” due to the cancer or the treatment, physical discomfort, satisfaction with sexual function, functional limitations due to cancer or treatment) were assessed until January 2010.


During 19.5 years of follow-up (median, 12.7 years), 223 of 364 men (61.3%) assigned to surgery died from any cause compared to 245 of 367 men (66.8%) assigned to observation (absolute difference in risk = 5.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.5 to 12.4; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.01; P=0.06).

Death attributed to prostate cancer or treatment occurred in 27 men (7.4%) assigned to surgery and in 42 men (11.4%) assigned to observation (absolute difference in risk, 4.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.2 to 8.3; hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.02; P=0.06).

Surgery was associated with lower all-cause mortality than observation among men with intermediate-risk disease (absolute difference, 14.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.8 to 25.6) but not among those with low-risk disease (absolute difference, 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -10.5 to 11.8) or high-risk disease (absolute difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -11.5 to 16.1) (P=0.08 for interaction).

Treatment for disease progression was less frequent with surgery than with observation (absolute difference, 26.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 19.0 to 32.9); treatment was primarily for asymptomatic, local, or biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) progression.

Urinary incontinence and erectile and sexual dysfunction were each greater with surgery than with observation over 10 years of follow-up.

Disease-related or treatment-related limitations in activities of daily living were greater with surgery than with observation through two years follow-up.


After nearly 20 years of follow-up among men with localised prostate cancer, surgery was not associated with significantly lower all-cause or prostate-cancer specific mortality than observation.

Surgery was associated with a higher frequency of adverse events than observation but a lower frequency of treatment for disease progression, mostly for asymptomatic, local, or biochemical progression.

Did you find this page helpful?

Information provided on this website is not a substitute for medical advice

Call 000 for emergency services

If you or someone you know needs urgent medical attention.

Call MensLine Australia on 1300 78 99 78 for 24/7 support

MensLine Australia is a telephone and online counselling service for men with emotional health and relationship concerns.

Sign up to our newsletter

We release two monthly newsletters – one written for men, family and friends, and another for health practitioners.

Your preferred mailing list

Your name

Your email

Stay up to date


Healthy Male acknowledges the traditional owners of the land. We pay our respects to elders past, present and future. We are committed to providing respectful, inclusive services and work environments where all individuals feel accepted, safe, affirmed and celebrated.


Healthy Male is funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. This website does not host any form of advertisement. Information provided on this website is not a substitute for medical advice.

Trusted information partner of