PURPOSE: The effect of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) on radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for prostate cancer is various and remains a controversy for urologists. We conducted this study to comparatively evaluate whether NHT before RRP is indicated and beneficial in the aspects of postoperative complications, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2006 and December 2009, 69 men were scheduled for RRP as a treatment for clinically localized and locally advanced prostate cancer and were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n=31, 44.9%) was treated with RRP only, and group 2 (n=38, 55.1%) underwent RRP with preoperative NHT. We evaluated clinical parameters, surgical parameters, and the positive margin rate in surgical specimens and the biochemical recurrence rate. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in age, body mass index (BMI), preoperative biopsy Gleason score, initial serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), or quality of life (QoL) between the two groups (p>0.05). We also observed no differences in the transfusion rate, mean catheterization time, or positive margin rate (p>0.05). However, the mean operative time was significantly higher in the RRP with preoperative NHT group than in the other group (p=0.034). There was no significant difference in the biochemical recurrence rate during the last follow-up according to NHT (p=0.102) or positive surgical margin (p=0.473). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that there were no clinical benefits to the administration of NHT before RRP from the viewpoint of biochemical recurrence.
PURPOSE: The effect of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) on radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for prostate cancer is various and remains a controversy for urologists. We conducted this study to comparatively evaluate whether NHT before RRP is indicated and beneficial in the aspects of postoperative complications, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2006 and December 2009, 69 men were scheduled for RRP as a treatment for clinically localized and locally advanced prostate cancer and were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n=31, 44.9%) was treated with RRP only, and group 2 (n=38, 55.1%) underwent RRP with preoperative NHT. We evaluated clinical parameters, surgical parameters, and the positive margin rate in surgical specimens and the biochemical recurrence rate. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in age, body mass index (BMI), preoperative biopsy Gleason score, initial serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), or quality of life (QoL) between the two groups (p>0.05). We also observed no differences in the transfusion rate, mean catheterization time, or positive margin rate (p>0.05). However, the mean operative time was significantly higher in the RRP with preoperative NHT group than in the other group (p=0.034). There was no significant difference in the biochemical recurrence rate during the last follow-up according to NHT (p=0.102) or positive surgical margin (p=0.473). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that there were no clinical benefits to the administration of NHT before RRP from the viewpoint of biochemical recurrence.
Authors: S L Goldenberg; L H Klotz; J Srigley; M A Jewett; D Mador; Y Fradet; J Barkin; J Chin; J M Paquin; M J Bullock; S Laplante Journal: J Urol Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Anthony V D'Amico; James W Denham; Juanita Crook; Ming-Hui Chen; Samuel Z Goldhaber; David S Lamb; David Joseph; Keen-Hun Tai; Shawn Malone; Charles Ludgate; Allison Steigler; Philip W Kantoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Dae Keun Kim; Jaspreet Singh Parihar; Young Suk Kwon; Sinae Kim; Brian Shinder; Nara Lee; Nicholas Farber; Thomas Ahlering; Douglas Skarecky; Bertram Yuh; Nora Ruel; Wun-Jae Kim; Koon Ho Rha; Isaac Yi Kim Journal: Asian J Androl Date: 2018 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.285