Literature DB >> 19864083

Unilateral prostate cancer cannot be accurately predicted in low-risk patients.

Hendrik Isbarn1, Pierre I Karakiewicz, Susanne Vogel, Claudio Jeldres, Giovanni Lughezzani, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi, Paul Perrotte, Sascha A Ahyai, Lars Budäus, Christian Eichelberg, Roman Heuer, Jens Köllermann, Guido Sauter, Thorsten Schlomm, Thomas Steuber, Alexander Haese, Mario Zacharias, Margit Fisch, Hans Heinzer, Hartwig Huland, Felix K H Chun, Markus Graefen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Hemiablative therapy (HAT) is increasing in popularity for treatment of patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The validity of this therapeutic modality, which exclusively treats PCa within a single prostate lobe, rests on accurate staging. We tested the accuracy of unilaterally unremarkable biopsy findings in cases of low-risk PCa patients who are potential candidates for HAT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study population consisted of 243 men with clinical stage <or=T2a, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration of <10 ng/ml, a biopsy-proven Gleason sum of <or=6, and a maximum of 2 ipsilateral positive biopsy results out of 10 or more cores. All men underwent a radical prostatectomy, and pathology stage was used as the gold standard. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were tested for significant predictors of unilateral, organ-confined PCa. These predictors consisted of PSA, % fPSA (defined as the quotient of free [uncomplexed] PSA divided by the total PSA), clinical stage (T2a vs. T1c), gland volume, and number of positive biopsy cores (2 vs. 1).
RESULTS: Despite unilateral stage at biopsy, bilateral or even non-organ-confined PCa was reported in 64% of all patients. In multivariable analyses, no variable could clearly and independently predict the presence of unilateral PCa. This was reflected in an overall accuracy of 58% (95% confidence interval, 50.6-65.8%).
CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of patients with unilateral low-risk PCa, confirmed by clinical stage and biopsy findings, have bilateral or non-organ-confined PCa at radical prostatectomy. This alarming finding questions the safety and validity of HAT. (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19864083     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.05.068

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  3 in total

1.  [Focal therapy of prostate cancer].

Authors:  R Ganzer; T Franiel; J Köllermann; T Kuru; D Baumunk; A Blana; B Hadaschik; J von Hardenberg; T Henkel; K-U Köhrmann; U-B Liehr; S Machtens; A Roosen; G Salomon; H-P Schlemmer; L Sentker; J Wendler; U Witzsch; M Schostak
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Validation of the current eligibility criteria for focal therapy in men with localized prostate cancer and the role of MRI.

Authors:  Raisa S Pompe; Bieke Kühn-Thomä; Yamini Nagaraj; Valia Veleva; Felix Preisser; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Markus Graefen; Hartwig Huland; Derya Tilki; Georg Salomon
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  [High intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) : Importance in the treatment of prostate cancer].

Authors:  R Ganzer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 0.635

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.