Literature DB >> 18257855

Radical prostatectomy in men aged >or=70 years: effect of age on upgrading, upstaging, and the accuracy of a preoperative nomogram.

Lee Richstone1, Fernando J Bianco, Hiral H Shah, Michael W Kattan, James A Eastham, Peter T Scardino, Douglas S Scherr.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of age on clinicopathological features, the accuracy of the preoperative nomogram, and survival after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), as there are limited data on elderly men undergoing RRP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A database of 258 men aged >or=70 years and 3777 aged <70 years who had RRP was reviewed to compare the clinicopathological features and survival between the age groups. The effect of age on the frequency of upgrading from biopsy Gleason sum 2-6 to pathology Gleason sum >or=7, and upstaging from clinical T1-T2 to pathological stage T3-T4 was also evaluated.
RESULTS: Men aged >or=70 years had cancers of higher clinical stage (P = 0.001), pathology Gleason sums (P = 0.01) and a lower frequency of organ-confined disease than men aged <70 years (58.1% and 69.9%, respectively, P = 0.001). There was upgrading in 76/169 (45.0%) men aged >or=70 years and in 936/2656 (35.2%) of men aged <70 years (P = 0.01). However, age was not associated with upgrading on a multivariate analysis. Upstaging was more frequent in older than in younger men (40.2% and 29.3%, respectively, P = 0.001). Age >or=70 years was associated with upstaging on multivariate logistic regression but did not affect the accuracy of the Partin tables (P = 0.14) or Kattan nomograms (P = 0.53). There was no difference in cancer-specific survival (96% at 10 years, P = 0.33) or biochemical progression-free probability between the age groups (74% and 75% at 10 years, respectively, P = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients aged >or=70 years are more likely to be upstaged after RRP, but this does not affect cancer control. In addition, nomograms maintain their accuracy and remain valid tools in this rapidly growing patient population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18257855     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07410.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  31 in total

1.  Older age does not impact perioperative complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Leah Y Nakamura; Rafael N Nunez; Paul E Andrews; Robert G Ferrigni; Mitchell R Humphreys; Scott K Swanson; Christopher E Wolter; Erik P Castle
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-02-05

2.  Unscreened older men diagnosed with prostate cancer are at increased risk of aggressive disease.

Authors:  J J Tosoian; R Alam; C Gergis; A Narang; N Radwan; S Robertson; T McNutt; A E Ross; D Y Song; T L DeWeese; P T Tran; P C Walsh
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 5.554

3.  Younger patients have poorer biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sung Kyu Hong; Jung Soo Nam; Woong Na; Jong Jin Oh; Cheol Yong Yoon; Chang Wook Jeong; Hyun June Kim; Seok-Soo Byun; Sang Eun Lee
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 3.285

4.  Predicting the risk of harboring high-grade disease for patients diagnosed with prostate cancer scored as Gleason ≤ 6 on biopsy cores.

Authors:  Thomas Seisen; Françoise Roudot-Thoraval; Pierre Olivier Bosset; Aurélien Beaugerie; Yves Allory; Dimitri Vordos; Claude-Clément Abbou; Alexandre De La Taille; Laurent Salomon
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  [Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in elderly patients: surgical, oncological and functional outcomes].

Authors:  D Porres; D Pfister; A P Labanaris; V Zugor; J H Witt; A Heidenreich
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  [Approach to prostate cancer in men older than 75 years: active or passive?].

Authors:  M Spahn; K Haeni
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  Postoperative upgrading of prostate cancer in men ≥75 years: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Annika Herlemann; Alexander Buchner; Alexander Kretschmer; Maria Apfelbeck; Christian G Stief; Christian Gratzke; Stefan Tritschler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Age at diagnosis on prostate cancer survival undergoing androgen deprivation therapy as primary treatment in daily practice: results from Japanese observational cohort.

Authors:  Teruo Inamoto; Haruhito Azuma; Shiro Hinotsu; Taiji Tsukamoto; Mototsugu Oya; Osamu Ogawa; Tadaichi Kitamura; Suzuki Kazuhiro; Seiji Naito; Mikio Namiki; Kazuo Nishimura; Yoshihiko Hirao; Michiyuki Usami; Masaru Murai; Hideyuki Akaza
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.553

9.  Prostate Biopsy Characteristics: A Comparison Between the Pre- and Post-2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Prostate Cancer Screening Guidelines.

Authors:  Navin Shah; Vladimir Ioffe; Thomas Huebner; Ivelina Hristova
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2018

10.  Population based time trends and socioeconomic variation in use of radiotherapy and radical surgery for prostate cancer in a UK region: continuous survey.

Authors:  Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Josephine M Barbiere; David C Greenberg; Karen A Wright; David E Neal
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-04-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.