Literature DB >> 12216087

Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in patients with extraprostatic carcinoma after radical prostatectomy.

Sankar J Kausik1, Michael L Blute, Thomas J Sebo, Bradley C Leibovich, Erik J Bergstralh, Jeff Slezak, Horst Zincke.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A significant number of prostate adenocarcinoma patients undergoing radical prostatectomy are found to have microscopic extraprostatic disease extension. A majority of these patients have focal extraprostatic extension limited to one or both sides of the prostate. In addition, positive surgical margins are a common pathologic finding in this patient subgroup. In the current study, the authors evaluated the impact of positive surgical margins as an independent predictive factor for prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression in patients with pT3a/b N0M0 carcinoma.
METHODS: The Mayo Clinic prostate cancer registry list provided 1202 patients with pT3a/b NO prostate carcinoma (no seminal vesicle or regional lymph node involvement) who underwent a radical prostatectomy between 1987-1995. To reduce confounding variables, patients who received preoperative therapy or adjuvant therapy were excluded, resulting in 842 patients who were eligible for analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 354 patients (42%) had > or = 1 positive surgical margins whereas 488 patients (58%) demonstrated no margin involvement. The sites of margin positivity were as follows: apex (n = 163), base (n = 47), posterior prostate (n = 227), and anterior prostate (n = 11). A total of 111 patients had > or = 2 positive surgical margins. The 5-year survival free of clinical recurrence and/or biochemical failure (postoperative PSA level > 0.2 ng/mL) for patients with no positive surgical margins was 76% and was 65% for patients with 1 positive surgical margin (P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in biochemical disease progression between patients with 1 versus those with > or = 2 surgical margins (65% vs. 62%). Multivariate analysis revealed that positive surgical margins were a significant predictor (P = 0.0017) of clinical disease recurrence and biochemical failure (relative risk, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.04) after controlling for preoperative PSA, Gleason score, and DNA ploidy.
CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, positive surgical margins were found to be a significant predictor of disease recurrence in patients with pT3a/b NO prostate carcinoma, a finding that is independent of PSA, Gleason score, and DNA ploidy. The benefit of adjuvant therapy in optimizing recurrence-free survival remains to be tested. Copyright 2002 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12216087     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.10871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  17 in total

Review 1.  [Indications for and results of radical prostatectomy].

Authors:  M Graefen; P G Hammerer; A Haese; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Factors determining biochemical recurrence in low-risk prostate cancer patients who underwent radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Sıtkı Ün; Hakan Türk; Osman Koca; Rauf Taner Divrik; Ferruh Zorlu
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2015-06

3.  Do robotic prostatectomy positive surgical margins occur in the same location as extraprostatic extension?

Authors:  Matthew T Johnson; Mitchell L Ramsey; Joshua J Ebel; Ronney Abaza; Debra L Zynger
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-06       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  [Intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of the genitourinary tract].

Authors:  S Bertz; B J Schmitz-Dräger; C Protzel; A Hartmann
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.011

5.  Long-term oncological outcomes of apical positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital cohort.

Authors:  H Wadhwa; M K Terris; W J Aronson; C J Kane; C L Amling; M R Cooperberg; S J Freedland; M R Abern
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 5.554

6.  Surgical margin status of specimen and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience after 400 procedures.

Authors:  Francesco Porpiglia; Cristian Fiori; Matteo Manfredi; Susanna Grande; Massimiliano Poggio; Enrico Bollito; Mauro Papotti; Roberto Mario Scarpa
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Interobserver variability in histologic evaluation of radical prostatectomy between central and local pathologists: findings of TAX 3501 multinational clinical trial.

Authors:  George J Netto; Mario Eisenberger; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-12-13       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  [(11)C]choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy.

Authors:  Giampiero Giovacchini; Maria Picchio; Elisa Coradeschi; Vincenzo Scattoni; Valentino Bettinardi; Cesare Cozzarini; Massimo Freschi; Ferruccio Fazio; Cristina Messa
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-01-16       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 9.  Salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Charles Catton; Michael Milosevic
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2003-08-16       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Impact of capsular incision on biochemical recurrence after radical perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  K W Kwak; H M Lee; H Y Choi
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 5.554

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.