Survival rates of familial and sporadic prostate cancer patients

J. Plonis, M. Nakazawa-Miklasevica, A. Malevskis, P. Vaganovs, S. Pildava, E. Vjaters, J. Gardovskis, E. Miklasevics

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Aim: To compare cancer-specific survival rates for familial and sporadic prostate cancer patients. Materials and Methods: Gleason score and age at diagnosis of familial group and sporadic group were compared by χ2 and t-test. Cancer-specific survival rates were analyzed by the Kaplan - Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Statistically significant level was set at p < 0.05. Results: Among 1175 prostate cancer patients, familial group consisted of 215 (18.3%) patients, the sporadic group consisted of 960 (81.7%) patients. The familial group patient's mean age at diagnosis (58.9 years old, 95% confidence interval (CI) 57.8-60.1) was significantly younger than that of sporadic group patients (67.2 years old, 95% CI 66.7-67.6) (p < 0.0001). Comparing Gleason score between familial group and sporadic group revealed no statistically significant difference. The analysis showed that 92% (95% CI 0.88-0.97) of familial group patients had a 10-year cancer-specific survival rates, which was a significantly better outcome than that of sporadic group with 69% (95% CI 0.60-0.78) 10-year cancer-specific survival rates (p = 0.0237). Conclusion: The study data demonstrate statistically significant difference between familial group and sporadic group concerning age and cancer-specific survival rates, but not Gleason score.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)154-155
Number of pages2
JournalExperimental Oncology
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2015


  • Familial
  • Hereditary
  • Prostate cancer
  • Survival rates

Field of Science*

  • 3.2 Clinical medicine

Publication Type*

  • 1.1. Scientific article indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus database


Dive into the research topics of 'Survival rates of familial and sporadic prostate cancer patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this