LAUSR

Abstract Net survival, estimated in a relative survival (RS) or cause-specific survival (CSS) framework, is a key measure of the effectiveness of cancer management. We compared RS and CSS in men with prostate cancer (PCa) according to age and risk category, using Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden, including 168,793 men younger than age 90 years, diagnosed 1998–2016 with PCa. RS and CSS were compared according to age and risk category based on TNM (tumor, nodes, and metastases) stage, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen level. Each framework requires assumptions that are unlikely to be appropriate for PCa. Ten-year RS was substantially higher than CSS in men aged 80–89 with low-risk PCa: 125% (95% confidence interval: 113, 138) versus 85% (95% confidence interval: 82, 88). In contrast, RS and CSS were similar for men under age 70 and for all men with regional or distant metastases. Both RS and CSS produce biased estimates of net survival for men with low- and intermediate-risk PCa, in particular for men over 80. Due to biases, net survival is overestimated in analysis of RS but underestimated in analysis of CSS. These results highlight the importance of evaluating the underlying assumptions for each method, because the “true” net survival is expected to lie between the limits of RS and CSS.