Literature DB >> 16515984

Delay of radical prostatectomy and risk of biochemical progression in men with low risk prostate cancer.

Stephen J Freedland1, Christopher J Kane, Christopher L Amling, William J Aronson, Joseph C Presti, Martha K Terris.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer are faced with multiple treatment options. Understanding these options and their associated side effects, and making a decision often requires time, resulting in a delay before receiving treatment. This is particularly pertinent in men with low risk disease who may be considered candidates for watchful waiting and, thus, may not experience strong pressure to undergo treatment promptly. Whether delays and especially prolonged delays, eg greater than 180 days, before RP negatively impact the disease outcome is unclear.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined the association between time from diagnosis to surgery, and pathological features of the RP specimen and risk of biochemical progression in 895 men with low risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml and biopsy Gleason sum 6 or less) treated with RP between 1988 and 2004 in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital Database using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards, respectively.
RESULTS: Time from biopsy to surgery was not significantly related to high grade disease in the RP specimen, positive surgical margins or extraprostatic extension (all p-trend >0.05). After adjustment for multiple clinical covariates a longer time from biopsy to surgery was significantly associated with an increased risk of biochemical progression (p-trend = 0.002). However, this increased risk of progression was only apparent in men with delays greater than 180 days (median 263, vs 90 or fewer days RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.94).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that patients with low risk prostate cancer can be reassured that immediate treatment is not necessary. Whether long delays (greater than 180 days) decrease the likelihood of curability in some patients requires further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16515984     DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00646-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  22 in total

1.  Impact of immediate TRUS rebiopsy in a patient cohort considering active surveillance for favorable risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Andre C King; Andrew Livermore; Timo A J Laurila; Wei Huang; David F Jarrard
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 3.498

2.  [Active surveillance of low risk prostate cancer].

Authors:  K Lellig; B Beyer; M Graefen; D Zaak; C Stief
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Incremental value of magnetic resonance imaging in the advanced management of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Liang Wang
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2009-12-31

4.  The impact of delaying radical nephrectomy for stage II or higher renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Kwang Hyun Kim; Dalsan You; In Gab Jeong; Cheryn Song; Jun Hyuk Hong; Hanjong Ahn; Choung-Soo Kim
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 4.553

5.  Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect patient pathological outcome? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort.

Authors:  Marc Zanaty; Mansour Alnazari; Kelsey Lawson; Mounsif Azizi; Emad Rajih; Abdullah Alenizi; Pierre-Alain Hueber; Malek Meskawi; Cedric Lebacle; Thierry Lebeau; Serge Benayoun; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Assaad El-Hakim; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Time between diagnosis and surgical treatment on pathological and clinical outcomes in prostate cancer: does it matter?

Authors:  Mariana Andozia Morini; Roberto Lodeiro Muller; Paulo César Barbosa de Castro Junior; Rafael José de Souza; Eliney Ferreira Faria
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-03-16       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  Timing of curative treatment for prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Roderick C N van den Bergh; Peter C Albertsen; Chris H Bangma; Stephen J Freedland; Markus Graefen; Andrew Vickers; Henk G van der Poel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Treatment outcomes of radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for 3 published active surveillance protocols.

Authors:  C Shad Thaxton; Stacy Loeb; Kimberly A Roehl; Donghui Kan; William J Catalona
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 9.  [Active surveillance for prostate cancer].

Authors:  M Graefen; S Ahyai; R Heuer; G Salomon; T Schlomm; H Isbarn; L Budäus; H Heinzer; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 0.639

10.  Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort.

Authors:  Marc Zanaty; Mansour Alnazari; Khaled Ajib; Kelsey Lawson; Mounsif Azizi; Emad Rajih; Abdullah Alenizi; Pierre-Alain Hueber; Côme Tolmier; Malek Meskawi; Fred Saad; Raisa S Pompe; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Assaad El-Hakim; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.