Literature DB >> 16360451

Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients.

Pierre I Karakiewicz1, James A Eastham, Markus Graefen, Ilias Cagiannos, Phillip D Stricker, Eric Klein, Thomas Cangiano, Fritz H Schröder, Peter T Scardino, Michael W Kattan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic significance of a positive surgical margin in the radical prostatectomy specimen, and to test for the presence of statistically significant interactions between surgical margin status and select pathologic stage variables.
METHODS: We combined prospectively collected data from 7816 consecutive patients treated with radical prostatectomy at eight institutions. The pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, pathologic Gleason sum, surgical margin status (positive versus negative), presence of extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle involvement, and pelvic lymph node status were examined as predictors of the rate of biochemical progression in 5831 patients with complete records.
RESULTS: In multivariate Cox regression models, a positive surgical margin was associated with a 3.7-fold greater risk of progression (P = 0.001). Moreover, a statistically significant interaction was found between surgical margin status and Gleason sum 7 to 10 (P = 0.008) and lymph node invasion (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a positive surgical margin in the radical prostatectomy specimen has an adverse effect on prognosis. The greatest risk of biochemical recurrence may be expected if a positive surgical margin is present with Gleason sum 7 to 10 disease or lymph node invasion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16360451     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.108

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


  62 in total

1.  Prognostic value of unifocal and multifocal positive surgical margins in a large series of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Etienne Xavier Keller; Jacqueline Bachofner; Anna Jelena Britschgi; Karim Saba; Ashkan Mortezavi; Basil Kaufmann; Christian D Fankhauser; Peter Wild; Tullio Sulser; Thomas Hermanns; Daniel Eberli; Cédric Poyet
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Hand-held spectroscopic device for in vivo and intraoperative tumor detection: contrast enhancement, detection sensitivity, and tissue penetration.

Authors:  Aaron M Mohs; Michael C Mancini; Sunil Singhal; James M Provenzale; Brian Leyland-Jones; May D Wang; Shuming Nie
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 6.986

Review 3.  [Organ-limited prostate cancer with positive resection margins. Importance of adjuvant radiation therapy].

Authors:  D Porres; D Pfister; B Brehmer; A Heidenreich
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Evidence-based comparison of robotic and open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  William T Lowrance; Tatum V Tarin; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2010-11-16

5.  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

6.  Impact of positive surgical margins on oncological outcome following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP): long-term results.

Authors:  Jonas Busch; Carsten Stephan; Annett Klutzny; Stefan Hinz; Carsten Kempkensteffen; Ergin Kilic; Michael Lein; Steffen Weikert; Kurt Miller; Ahmed Magheli
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Pathologic analysis of capsular and incisional denudation and positive margin status in the development of a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy program.

Authors:  Stephen B Williams; D E Sutherland; H A Frazier; A Schwartz; J D Engel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-06-11

8.  A multi-institutional comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Eric E Coronato; Justin D Harmon; Phillip C Ginsberg; Richard C Harkaway; Kulwant Singh; Leonard Braitman; Bruce B Sloane; Jamison S Jaffe
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-10-01

9.  Toward microendoscopic electrical impedance tomography for intraoperative surgical margin assessment.

Authors:  Ryan J Halter; Young-Joong Kim
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 4.538

10.  Prostate cancer that is within 0.1 mm of the surgical margin of a radical prostatectomy predicts greater likelihood of recurrence.

Authors:  Jason P Izard; Lawrence D True; Philip May; William J Ellis; Paul H Lange; Bruce Dalkin; Daniel W Lin; Rodney A Schmidt; Jonathan L Wright
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 6.394

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.