The discussion and debate over the "best" treatment for clinically localize
d prostate cancer will be an iterative process based on a combination of op
inions and data. Success is a measure of both cancer control and quality of
life such that in a disease with a long natural history, one must be very
cautious about over-interpreting short- or medium-term results. As with man
y treatment approaches in the rapidly evolving world of medicine, outcomes
improve over time so that retrospective studies are useful but of limited v
alue due to changes in patient selection and therapeutic technique. Overly
aggressive multimodality approaches will produce excellent short-term resul
ts such as PSA biochemical NED (bNED), yet these may be more costly in term
s of toxicity and expense than necessary compared to uni-modality therapy.
(C) 2001 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.