OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with pathologically organ-confined (OC) prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: Clinical and pathological characteristics of 331 consecutive men with pT2N0 PCa treated solely with RP were used in Cox proportional hazard models to identify independent predictors of prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure (PSA > or = 0.1 ng/ml). All pathologic specimens were step sectioned at 3 mm. RESULTS: Twelve patients (3.6%) failed at a median follow-up of 26 months (range 0.2-99.6 months) and 120 men remained at risk 3 years after RP. In univariate Cox models PSA (P < 0.001), percentage of high-grade cancer (P < 0.001) total and high-grade cancer volume (P = 0.001 and P < 0.0001, respectively) and RP Gleason sum (P = 0.003) represented significant predictors of PSA failure. Clinical stage (P = 0.4), surgical margin status (P = 0.3), age (P = 0.2), and pathologic evidence of unilateral versus bilateral PCa (P = 0.6) failed to reveal significance. In receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses, high-grade cancer volume achieved highest outcome predictive accuracy (area under the curve (AUC 0.93)), which was not exceeded by Cox regression-based nomogram combining serum PSA, RP Gleason sum, margin status and pathologic evidence of unilateral versus bilateral PCa (AUC 091). Predictive accuracy of this multivariate nomogram was not enhanced by adding total cancer volume (AUC 0.93), high-grade cancer volume (AUC 0.90), or percentage of high-grade cancer (AUC 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: In pT2N0 PCa high-grade cancer volume appears to represent the most important pathologic factor for prediction of outcome following RP. However, similar predictive accuracy may be achieved by combining routinely available tumor characteristics.
OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with pathologically organ-confined (OC) prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: Clinical and pathological characteristics of 331 consecutive men with pT2N0 PCa treated solely with RP were used in Cox proportional hazard models to identify independent predictors of prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure (PSA > or = 0.1 ng/ml). All pathologic specimens were step sectioned at 3 mm. RESULTS: Twelve patients (3.6%) failed at a median follow-up of 26 months (range 0.2-99.6 months) and 120 men remained at risk 3 years after RP. In univariate Cox models PSA (P < 0.001), percentage of high-grade cancer (P < 0.001) total and high-grade cancer volume (P = 0.001 and P < 0.0001, respectively) and RP Gleason sum (P = 0.003) represented significant predictors of PSA failure. Clinical stage (P = 0.4), surgical margin status (P = 0.3), age (P = 0.2), and pathologic evidence of unilateral versus bilateral PCa (P = 0.6) failed to reveal significance. In receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses, high-grade cancer volume achieved highest outcome predictive accuracy (area under the curve (AUC 0.93)), which was not exceeded by Cox regression-based nomogram combining serum PSA, RP Gleason sum, margin status and pathologic evidence of unilateral versus bilateral PCa (AUC 091). Predictive accuracy of this multivariate nomogram was not enhanced by adding total cancer volume (AUC 0.93), high-grade cancer volume (AUC 0.90), or percentage of high-grade cancer (AUC 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: In pT2N0 PCa high-grade cancer volume appears to represent the most important pathologic factor for prediction of outcome following RP. However, similar predictive accuracy may be achieved by combining routinely available tumor characteristics.
Authors: Theodorus H van der Kwast; Laurence Collette; Hein Van Poppel; Paul Van Cangh; Kris Vekemans; Luigi DaPozzo; Jean-François Bosset; Karl H Kurth; Fritz H Schröder; Michel Bolla Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2006-08-29 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Georg Müller; Malte Rieken; Gernot Bonkat; Joel Roman Gsponer; Tatjana Vlajnic; Christian Wetterauer; Thomas C Gasser; Stephen F Wyler; Alexander Bachmann; Lukas Bubendorf Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2014-08-17 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Luke T Lavallée; Rodney H Breau; Mark A Preston; Gayanna Raju; Christopher Morash; Steve Doucette; Ronald G Gerridzen; James Eastham; Ilias Cagiannos Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Christian Arsov; Nikolaus Becker; Robert Rabenalt; Andreas Hiester; Michael Quentin; Frederic Dietzel; Gerald Antoch; Helmut E Gabbert; Peter Albers; Lars Schimmöller Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Christian P Meyer; Jens Hansen; Katharina Boehm; Derya Tilki; Firas Abdollah; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Margit Fisch; Guido Sauter; Markus Graefen; Hartwig Huland; Felix K H Chun; Sascha A Ahyai Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 4.226