Literature DB >> 20533547

Surgery confounds biology: the predictive value of stage-, grade- and prostate-specific antigen for recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a function of surgeon experience.

Andrew J Vickers1, Caroline J Savage, Fernando J Bianco, Eric A Klein, Michael W Kattan, Fernando P Secin, Bertrand D Guilloneau, Peter T Scardino.   

Abstract

Statistical models predicting cancer recurrence after surgery are based on biologic variables. We have shown previously that prostate cancer recurrence is related to both tumor biology and to surgical technique. Here, we evaluate the association between several biological predictors and biochemical recurrence across varying surgical experience. The study included two separate cohorts: 6,091 patients treated by open radical prostatectomy and an independent replication set of 2,298 patients treated laparoscopically. We calculated the odds ratios for biological predictors of biochemical recurrence-stage, Gleason grade and prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-and also the predictive accuracy (area under the curve, AUC) of a multivariable model, for subgroups of patients defined by the experience of their surgeon. In the open cohort, the odds ratio for Gleason score 8+ and advanced pathologic stage, though not PSA or Gleason score 7, increased dramatically when patients treated by surgeons with lower levels of experience were excluded (Gleason 8+: odds ratios 5.6 overall vs. 13.0 for patients treated by surgeons with 1,000+ prior cases; locally advanced disease: odds ratios of 6.6 vs. 12.2, respectively). The AUC of the multivariable model was 0.750 for patients treated by surgeons with 50 or fewer cases compared to 0.849 for patients treated by surgeons with 500 or more. Although predictiveness was lower overall for the independent replication set cohort, the main findings were replicated. Surgery confounds biology. Although our findings have no direct clinical implications, studies investigating biological variables as predictors of outcome after curative resection of cancer should consider the impact of surgeon-specific factors.
Copyright © 2010 UICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20533547      PMCID: PMC2970654          DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  17 in total

1.  Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew J Stephenson; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Fernando J Bianco; Zohar A Dotan; Christopher J DiBlasio; Alwyn Reuther; Eric A Klein; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition.

Authors:  Andrew J Stephenson; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham; Zohar A Dotan; Fernando J Bianco; Hans Lilja; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-08-20       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer.

Authors:  P M Ravdin; L A Siminoff; G J Davis; M B Mercer; J Hewlett; N Gerson; H L Parker
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Does a delay between diagnosis and radical prostatectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence?

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Fernando J Bianco; Stephen Boorjian; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  A clinicobiological model predicting survival in medulloblastoma.

Authors:  Amit Ray; Michael Ho; Jing Ma; Robert K Parkes; Todd G Mainprize; Shigeo Ueda; John McLaughlin; Eric Bouffet; James T Rutka; Cynthia E Hawkins
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2004-11-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew J Stephenson; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Fernando J Bianco; Zohar A Dotan; Paul A Fearn; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-05-17       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Trends in distribution and prognostic significance of Gleason grades on radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens between 1989 and 2001.

Authors:  Shomik Sengupta; Jeffrey M Slezak; Michael L Blute; Bradley C Leibovich; Thomas J Sebo; Robert P Myers; John C Cheville; Eric J Bergstralh; Horst Zincke
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Postoperative nomogram predicting risk of recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.

Authors:  Bernard H Bochner; Michael W Kattan; Kinjal C Vora
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-07-24       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Effects of pathologic stage on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy: evidence that recurrence in organ-confined cancer is largely related to inadequate surgical technique.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Fernando J Bianco; Mithat Gonen; Angel M Cronin; James A Eastham; Deborah Schrag; Eric A Klein; Alwyn M Reuther; Michael W Kattan; J Edson Pontes; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-01-14       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Caroline J Savage; Marcel Hruza; Ingolf Tuerk; Philippe Koenig; Luis Martínez-Piñeiro; Gunther Janetschek; Bertrand Guillonneau
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 41.316

View more
  1 in total

1.  Treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer: a case report and narrative review.

Authors:  Frank Peinemann; Michael Pinkawa
Journal:  Case Rep Urol       Date:  2012-12-17
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.