OBJECTIVES: Locally advanced prostate cancer is frequently treated with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation because of the greater rate of extracapsular disease and the concern that radical prostatectomy (RP) may not be curative in most cases. A case for surgery for locally advanced disease may be made on the basis of a lower rate of local recurrence compared with radiotherapy in our comparative database, data suggesting a survival advantage with pelvic lymph node dissection in those with positive nodes, and the observation of improved survival in those with metastatic disease treated by RP compared with radiotherapy. We report on the feasibility of RP as a primary treatment modality for locally advanced disease. METHODS: A total of 281 consecutive patients treated by RP between January 1998 and June 2004 were reviewed. Locally advanced disease was defined as clinical Stage T2b or worse, prostate-specific antigen level greater than 15 ng/mL, and/or a Gleason score of 8 or greater. Data on the pathologic characteristics, operative complications, and follow-up were obtained from a prospectively maintained institutional review board-approved database. RESULTS: Pathologic examination demonstrated organ-confined disease in 11.7%, extracapsular extension in 56.9%, seminal vesicle involvement in 23.1%, and positive lymph nodes in 8.9%. The overall complication rate was 9.7% compared with 6.9% for all patients undergoing RP. At a mean follow-up of 34 months (range 1 to 78), 198 (70.4%) of 281 patients had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level at the last follow-up examination. CONCLUSIONS: RP for locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible, with acute morbidity similar to RP for more localized disease. Furthermore, RP results in short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival similar to that of combined radiotherapy and androgen ablation.
OBJECTIVES: Locally advanced prostate cancer is frequently treated with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation because of the greater rate of extracapsular disease and the concern that radical prostatectomy (RP) may not be curative in most cases. A case for surgery for locally advanced disease may be made on the basis of a lower rate of local recurrence compared with radiotherapy in our comparative database, data suggesting a survival advantage with pelvic lymph node dissection in those with positive nodes, and the observation of improved survival in those with metastatic disease treated by RP compared with radiotherapy. We report on the feasibility of RP as a primary treatment modality for locally advanced disease. METHODS: A total of 281 consecutive patients treated by RP between January 1998 and June 2004 were reviewed. Locally advanced disease was defined as clinical Stage T2b or worse, prostate-specific antigen level greater than 15 ng/mL, and/or a Gleason score of 8 or greater. Data on the pathologic characteristics, operative complications, and follow-up were obtained from a prospectively maintained institutional review board-approved database. RESULTS: Pathologic examination demonstrated organ-confined disease in 11.7%, extracapsular extension in 56.9%, seminal vesicle involvement in 23.1%, and positive lymph nodes in 8.9%. The overall complication rate was 9.7% compared with 6.9% for all patients undergoing RP. At a mean follow-up of 34 months (range 1 to 78), 198 (70.4%) of 281 patients had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level at the last follow-up examination. CONCLUSIONS: RP for locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible, with acute morbidity similar to RP for more localized disease. Furthermore, RP results in short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival similar to that of combined radiotherapy and androgen ablation.
Authors: Phillip M Pierorazio; Ashley E Ross; Misop Han; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-08-22 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Ryan K Berglund; Catherine M Tangen; Isaac J Powell; Bruce A Lowe; Gabriel P Haas; Peter R Carroll; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Ralph deVere White; George P Hemstreet; E David Crawford; Ian M Thompson; Eric A Klein Journal: Urology Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Jonas Busch; Ahmed Magheli; Natalia Leva; Stefan Hinz; Michelle Ferrari; Frank Friedersdorff; Tom Florian Fuller; Kurt Miller; Mark L Gonzalgo Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-03-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Quoc-Dien Trinh; Maxine Sun; Simon P Kim; Jesse Sammon; Keith J Kowalczyk; Ariella A Friedman; Shyam Sukumar; Praful Ravi; Fred Muhletaler; Piyush K Agarwal; Shahrokh F Shariat; Jim C Hu; Mani Menon; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Phillip M Pierorazio; Jeffrey K Mullins; John B Eifler; Kipp Voth; Elias S Hyams; Misop Han; Christian P Pavlovich; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Alan W Partin; Mohamad E Allaf; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 5.588