CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-08-26. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v0.8.
Verdict No. 2974 · Search date 2026-08-26 · Methodology v0.8

PSA-based active monitoring for PSA-detected localized prostate cancer,
does it really help with Fifteen-year prostate-cancer mortality versus surgery or radiotherapy?

30-Second Summary
D
Evidence Grade D · 34 · Safety caution
Mortality did not differ significantly at 15 years, but equivalence was not proved and metastasis and progression were higher
Treatment choices carry different harms. Surgery affected continence and erectile function, radiotherapy affected bowel and sexual function, and monitoring had more metastasis and progression.
What the
research shows
Grade D. Prostate-cancer deaths were 17/545 (3.1%) with monitoring, 12/553 (2.2%) with surgery, and 16/545 (2.9%) with radiotherapy, overall P=.53. This was not a noninferiority trial, so it did not prove the strategies equivalent.
What the
ads claim
A nonsignificant mortality comparison cannot be rewritten as proof that watching gives the same outcomes. Monitoring carried more metastasis and progression, and many participants later crossed to radical treatment.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Median follow-up was 15 years, range 11 to 21.
  • At 10 years deaths were 8/5/4 and metastases 33/13/16; at 15 years they accumulated to 17/12/16 and 51/26/27.
  • The 15-year paper reported no new treatment complications after the 10-year analysis.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2974 · D 34
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

ProtecT randomized 1,643 men aged 50 to 69 to monitoring, 545, surgery, 553, or radiotherapy, 545, and followed them for a median 15 years. The NIHR HTA Programme was the main funder, NIHR and MRC supported follow-up, and the University of Oxford sponsored the trial.

Axis 6 B0 evidence ① Allocation concealment: "Treatment allocation was performed centrally by computer." ② Masking: Treatment could not be masked, but the primary cause of death was "adjudicated by an independent cause-of-death committee." ③ Analysis population and missing data: "We ... compare[d] ... on an intention-to-treat basis." Follow-up was complete for 1,610/1,643 (98%). ④ Prespecified primary endpoint: "The primary outcome was definite or probable prostate cancer mortality" — matches ISRCTN20141297 · NCT02044172

02

Why this is classified as D (34)

A clean long-term randomized trial had a null mortality primary endpoint but was not designed to establish equivalence, while metastasis and progression were higher with monitoring, giving D with 34 points.

Counterpoint. Surgery affected continence and erectile function, while radiotherapy affected bowel and sexual function; these harms matter in treatment choice.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Null 15-year prostate-cancer mortality superiority comparison and higher metastasis and progression with monitoring

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE0Null
PrecisionC0The confidence interval leaves room for benefit

The scoring table and the verdict agree (D).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Significant difference in 15-year prostate-cancer mortalityDOverall P=.53.
Equivalent metastasis and clinical progressionDBoth were clearly higher with monitoring.

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Three-arm randomized superiority comparison with long-term follow-up1,610Public NIHR HTA Programme, NIHR, and MRC fundingDeath from prostate cancer adjudicated by an independent cause-of-death committee17/545 (3.1%) vs 12/553 (2.2%) vs 16/545 (2.9%); overall P=.53Pivotal 15-year hard-outcome trial
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-26).

Hamdy FC, et al. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1547-1558. PMID: 36912538.
checked
Hamdy FC, et al. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27626136.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Verification cutoff: 2026-08-26 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

No Benefit of Active Monitoring for 15-Year Mortality in PSA-Detected Localized Prostate Cancer Evidence Grade D card
[Chamgap] No Benefit of Active Monitoring for 15-Year Mortality in PSA-Detected Localized Prostate Cancer — Evidence Grade D·34. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/mens/psa-detected-localized-prostate-cancer-active-monitoring-mortality/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.