Christopher R King1, Michelle Ferrari, James D Brooks. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Urologic Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. crking@stanford.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: Transition zone (TZ) cancers are reported to have better biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) after radical prostatectomy (RP) than cancers from the peripheral zone (PZ). To understand the influence of tumor location, we compared bRFS for TZ and PZ cancers stratified for risk using known clinical and pathological prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The surgical pathology and outcomes of 494 patients were reviewed. Cancers originating from the TZ and PZ were identified from step sectioning of surgical specimens and tumor mapping. Univariate and multivariate analyses of bRFS after RP were compared. RESULTS: TZ cancers were present in 89 (18%) patients. On univariate analysis, most factors predicted bRFS, although cancer location did not: 5-year bRFS was 85% for TZ vs. 77% for PZ (P = 0.12). However, on multivariate analysis, all factors except SV involvement were significant, including TZ cancer location (P = 0.04, HR = 1.88 [1.02-3.47]). Interestingly, TZ location was correlated with improved 5-year bRFS for cancers > 2 cc (81% for TZ vs. 65% for PZ, P = 0.017), for preop PSA >10 (80% for TZ vs. 59% for PZ, P = 0.027), and for PSAV > 2 (85% for TZ vs. 66% for PZ, P = 0.08). However, TZ cancers showed no difference in outcome for small volumes, low preop PSA, low PSAV, or high Gleason grade. CONCLUSIONS: TZ cancers that are large, with high preop PSA, low Gleason scores, and high PSAV show better outcomes than their PZ counterparts. However, high-grade cancer tumor location had no apparent influence on outcome. Tumor location could be considered in subsets for optimal prognostication.
PURPOSE: Transition zone (TZ) cancers are reported to have better biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) after radical prostatectomy (RP) than cancers from the peripheral zone (PZ). To understand the influence of tumor location, we compared bRFS for TZ and PZ cancers stratified for risk using known clinical and pathological prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The surgical pathology and outcomes of 494 patients were reviewed. Cancers originating from the TZ and PZ were identified from step sectioning of surgical specimens and tumor mapping. Univariate and multivariate analyses of bRFS after RP were compared. RESULTS: TZ cancers were present in 89 (18%) patients. On univariate analysis, most factors predicted bRFS, although cancer location did not: 5-year bRFS was 85% for TZ vs. 77% for PZ (P = 0.12). However, on multivariate analysis, all factors except SV involvement were significant, including TZ cancer location (P = 0.04, HR = 1.88 [1.02-3.47]). Interestingly, TZ location was correlated with improved 5-year bRFS for cancers > 2 cc (81% for TZ vs. 65% for PZ, P = 0.017), for preop PSA >10 (80% for TZ vs. 59% for PZ, P = 0.027), and for PSAV > 2 (85% for TZ vs. 66% for PZ, P = 0.08). However, TZ cancers showed no difference in outcome for small volumes, low preop PSA, low PSAV, or high Gleason grade. CONCLUSIONS: TZ cancers that are large, with high preop PSA, low Gleason scores, and high PSAV show better outcomes than their PZ counterparts. However, high-grade cancer tumor location had no apparent influence on outcome. Tumor location could be considered in subsets for optimal prognostication.
Authors: T Steuber; P I Karakiewicz; H Augustin; A Erbersdobler; I Lange; A Haese; K-H F Chun; J Walz; M Graefen; H Huland Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Deep A Patel; Joseph C Presti; John E McNeal; Harcharan Gill; James D Brooks; Christopher R King Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Herbert Augustin; Andreas Erbersdobler; Markus Graefen; Salvador Fernandez; Jüri Palisaar; Hartwig Huland; Peter Hammerer Journal: Prostate Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Herbert Augustin; Peter G Hammerer; Jakob Blonski; Markus Graefen; Jüri Palisaar; Fedor Daghofer; Hartwig Huland; Andreas Erbersdobler Journal: Urology Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Andreas Pettersson; Rebecca E Graff; Scott R Bauer; Michael J Pitt; Rosina T Lis; Edward C Stack; Neil E Martin; Lauren Kunz; Kathryn L Penney; Azra H Ligon; Catherine Suppan; Richard Flavin; Howard D Sesso; Jennifer R Rider; Christopher Sweeney; Meir J Stampfer; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Philip W Kantoff; Martin G Sanda; Edward L Giovannucci; Eric L Ding; Massimo Loda; Lorelei A Mucci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: J Joy Lee; I-Chun Thomas; Rosalie Nolley; Michelle Ferrari; James D Brooks; John T Leppert Journal: Prostate Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: James D Brooks; Wei Wei; Sarah Hawley; Heidi Auman; Lisa Newcomb; Hilary Boyer; Ladan Fazli; Jeff Simko; Antonio Hurtado-Coll; Dean A Troyer; Peter R Carroll; Martin Gleave; Raymond Lance; Daniel W Lin; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Lawrence D True; Ziding Feng; Jesse K McKenney Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.240