Literature DB >> 15028451

No difference in six-year biochemical failure rates with or without pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy in low-risk patients with localized prostate cancer.

Nivedita Bhatta-Dhar1, Alwyn M Reuther, Craig Zippe, Eric A Klein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare differences in the actuarial biochemical relapse-free survival rates at 6 years in a contemporary series of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy with and without pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND). Biochemical failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level greater than 0.2 ng/mL confirmed at least 1 week later.
METHODS: The records of 806 consecutive radical prostatectomy cases performed between January 1995 and June 1999 were reviewed. A total of 336 patients with favorable tumor characteristics (prostate-specific antigen 10 ng/mL or less, biopsy Gleason score 6 or less, and clinical Stage T1 or T2) not receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy were divided into two groups according to whether PLND was performed (PLND group, n = 140) or omitted (no-PLND group, n = 196). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the effect of age, race, family history, initial prostate-specific antigen level, tumor stage, biopsy Gleason score, PLND, extracapsular extension, and seminal vesicle invasion on the likelihood of biochemical failure. Biochemical relapse-free survival for each group was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The mean follow-up time for the entire group was 60.0 months, with a similar follow-up for both cohorts (mean 61.8 and 58.2 months, respectively, P value not statistically significant). Follow-up information was obtained through an institutional review board-approved prospective patient registry.
RESULTS: The 6-year biochemical relapse-free rate for the PLND versus no-PLND group was 86% and 88%, respectively (P = 0.28). On multivariate analysis, PLND was not an independent predictor of outcome (P = 0.33).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study results demonstrated that the omission of PLND in patients with favorable tumor characteristics does not adversely affect biochemical relapse rates at 6 years after surgery. Such patients can be spared the morbidity and cost of PLND without affecting the chance for cure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15028451     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2003.09.064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  14 in total

1.  Current status of pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ilija Aleksic; Tyler Luthringer; Vladimir Mouraviev; David M Albala
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2013-12-11

2.  Systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a review and update.

Authors:  Joshua E Logan; Edward N Rampersaud; Geoffrey A Sonn; Karim Chamie; Arie S Belldegrun; Allan J Pantuck; Dennis J Slamon; Fairooz F Kabbinavar
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2012

Review 3.  Is extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer the only recommended option? A systematic over-view of the literature.

Authors:  Thomas Rees; Nicholas Raison; Mohammed Iqbal Sheikh; Zahra Jaffry; Sanjeev Madaan; Ben Challacombe; Kamran Ahmed; Prokar Dasgupta
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2016-12

4.  Racial/ethnic differences in receipt of pelvic lymph node dissection among men with localized/regional prostate cancer.

Authors:  Matthew H Hayn; Heather Orom; Vickie L Shavers; Martin G Sanda; Mark Glasgow; James L Mohler; Willie Underwood
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  PSA density versus risk stratification for lymphadenectomy-making decision in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Petros Perimenis
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2011-03-26       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  Guideline for optimization of surgical and pathological quality performance for radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer management: evidentiary base.

Authors:  Joseph L Chin; John Srigley; Linda A Mayhew; R Bryan Rumble; Claire Crossley; Amber Hunter; Neil Fleshner; Bish Bora; Robin McLeod; Sheila McNair; Bernard Langer; Andrew Evans
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 7.  Extended lymph node dissection for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stephan Jeschke; Fiona C Burkhard; Ramesh Thurairaja; Nivedita Dhar; Urs E Studer
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 8.  [Role of lymph node dissection in prostate cancer].

Authors:  T Schlomm; C Börgermann; H Heinzer; H Rübben; H Huland; M Graefen
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  Quality of care indicators and their related outcomes: A population-based study in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Colleen Webber; D Robert Siemens; Michael Brundage; Patti A Groome
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.862

10.  Is More Always Better? An Assessment of the Impact of Lymph Node Yield on Outcome for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer with Low/Intermediate Risk Pathology (pT2-3a/pN0) Managed with Prostatectomy Alone.

Authors:  Steven N Seyedin; Darrion L Mitchell; Sarah L Mott; J Kyle Russo; Chad R Tracy; Anthony N Snow; Jessica R Parkhurst; Mark C Smith; John M Buatti; John M Watkins
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 3.201

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.