Literature DB >> 22654901

Calculated tumor volume is an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence in patients who underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy.

Nobumichi Tanaka1, Kiyohide Fujimoto, Akihide Hirayama, Yasushi Nakai, Yoshitomo Chihara, Satoshi Anai, Atsushi Tomioka, Keiji Shimada, Noboru Konishi, Yoshihiko Hirao.   

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the clinicopathological biopsy findings can predict the oncological outcome in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods. Between January 1997 and March 2006, 255 patients with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate (clinical T1-3N0M0) who had undergone retropubic radical prostatectomy were enrolled in this study. None of the patients received neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. Clinicopathological parameters were assessed to determine a predictive parameter of biochemical recurrence. Results. Of the total 255 patients, 77 showed biochemical recurrence during the follow-up period. The estimated 5-year overall survival, 5-year cause-specific survival, and 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rates were 97.7%, 99.5%, and 67.3%, respectively. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model showed that calculated cancer volume was an independent predictor among the preoperative clinicopathological parameters (P < 0.05). SVI and PSM were independent predictors among the postoperative parameters (SVI; P < 0.001, PSM; P = 0.049). Among the significant preoperative and postoperative parameters, calculated cancer volume remained an independent predictive parameter in multivariate analysis (P < 0.01). Conclusions. Tumor volume, as calculated by preoperative parameters, is an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence in patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy.

Entities:  

Year:  2012        PMID: 22654901      PMCID: PMC3359669          DOI: 10.1155/2012/204215

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Urol        ISSN: 1687-6369


1. Introduction

Radical prostatectomy has been the gold standard of definitive therapy for patients with localized prostate cancer for years [1]. Now, not only laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, but recently also robotic radical prostatectomy has remained popular over the years all across the world [2, 3]. Prostate cancer patients have been able to choose their primary treatment modality among several treatment options since the technical development of radiation therapy such as 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3-DCRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-brachytherapy), and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-brachytherapy) [4]. If it is possible to predict the oncological outcome based on the clinicopathological findings at diagnosis, it will be possible to choose the most suitable treatment option in patients who receive definitive therapy. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the clinicopathological biopsy findings can predict the oncological outcome in patients who are undergoing radical prostatectomy.

2. Material and Methods

Between January 1997 and March 2006, there were 577 patients who consecutively underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy at Nara Medical University Hospital and its affiliate hospitals. Among all of these patients, 255 patients who did not receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy and had clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate (clinical T1-3N0M0; 2002 UICC classification [5]) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The mean follow-up period was 53 months (range: 12–127 months). The mean age at surgery and PSA value at diagnosis were 67.4 years and 10.9 ng/mL, respectively. Patients' course was followed every 3 to 6 months until 5 years after surgery, and then every 6–12 months thereafter. At each visit, PSA was measured and digital rectal examination was performed. If clinical recurrence was suspected, patients underwent a bone scan, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance examination. Biochemical recurrence was defined as a PSA value of 0.2 ng/mL or greater. Regarding preoperative clinicopathological findings, age at surgery, PSA at diagnosis, biopsy Gleason score, clinical T stage, percent positive biopsy cores, risk classification by D'Amico et al. [6], and calculated cancer volume reported by D'Amico et al. [7] were used to predict biochemical recurrence. Patients were stratified by PSA level at diagnosis of 10 ng/mL or less, greater than 10 ng/mL to 20 ng/mL or less, and greater than 20 ng/mL, respectively, by Gleason score (biopsy and surgical) of 6 or less, 7 and 8–10, respectively. Patients were stratified by a volume of 2.0 mL or less, greater than 2.0 mL to 4.0 mL or less, and greater than 4.0 mL, respectively. Patients were also stratified by positive biopsy core of less than 34%, 34% or greater but less than 50%, and 50% or greater, respectively, and D'Amico risk classification [6] was used for risk classification. Regarding postoperative pathological findings, pathological T stage, extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle involvement (SVI), positive surgical margin (PSM), and surgical Gleason score were examined in the same manner. Biochemical recurrence-free rate was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of the biochemical recurrence-free rate stratified by clinicopathological parameters was tested by the log rank test. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the predictive parameter of biochemical recurrence among the preoperative and the postoperative parameters both in univariate and multivariate analyses. Finally, the Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the predictive parameter using the significant predictive parameters among the preoperative and postoperative parameters in multivariate analysis. To examine differences in categorical parameters, the chi-square test was used. Mann-Whitney U test was used to examine differences in continuous variables. All P values below 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. The institutional reviewer board approved this retrospective study, and the obtainment of informed consent from the patients was exempted in view of the aim and methods of this study.

3. Results

Of the total 255 patients, 77 showed biochemical recurrence during the follow-up period. Of these 77 patients, 2 patients showed clinical recurrence, and 63 patients underwent salvage therapy (44 patients: androgen deprivation therapy, 11 patients: radiotherapy, and 8 patients: both androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy), while 14 patients took a wait-and-see approach after biochemical recurrence. The estimated 5-year overall survival, cause-specific survival and biochemical recurrence-free survival rates were 97.7%, 99.5%, and 67.3%, respectively. The estimated 10-year overall survival, cause-specific survival, and biochemical recurrence-free survival rates were 80.2%, 99.5%, and 56.2%, respectively. Patients' demographics are listed in Tables 1 and 2. PSA level at diagnosis, biopsy Gleason score, clinical T stage, calculated cancer volume, percent positive biopsy core and risk classification were statistically higher in patients who showed biochemical recurrence than in those who did not show biochemical recurrence.
Table 1

Preoperative clinicopathological parameters.

All patients (n = 255)Biochem. recur. (+) (n = 77)Biochem. recur. (−) (n = 178) P value
 Age67.4 ± 5.867.1 ± 5.467.6 ± 5.9n.s.§
PSA at biopsy (ng/mL)
 Mean ± SD10.9 ± 7.214.1 ± 9.99.6 ± 5.2<0.001§
 10 or less15135116
 10–20842856
 Greater than 2020146<0.001*

Biopsy Gleason score
 6 or less14432112
 7632043
 8–1025916
 Unknown23914<0.001*

Clinical stage
 T115138113
 T21023864
 T32110.001*

Calculated cancer volume (mL)
 2.0 or less1121795
 2.0–4.0471730
 Greater than 4.0312011
 unknown652342<0.001*
 Mean ± SD2.48 ± 2.384.01 ± 3.381.88 ± 1.45<0.001§

% positive biopsy core
 Less than 3415838120
 34–5022616
 50 or greater663234
 unknown9180.001*

Biochem. recur.: Biochemical recurrence. *Chi-square test and §Mann Whitney U test.

Table 2

Postoperative clinicopathological parameters.

All patients (n = 255)Biochem. recur. (+) (n = 77)Biochem. recur. (−) (n = 178) P value
Surgical Gleason score
 ≦61223092
 7892960
 8–10231310
 Unknown215160.009*

Pathological stage
 T0514
 T217040130
 T3a682543
 T3b1091
 T42200.001*

EPE
 Positive743044
 Negative181471340.017*

Surgical margin
 Positive642935
 Negative16435129
 Unknown331320<0.001*

SVI
 Positive12111
 Negative24366177<0.001*

Biochem. recur.: biochemical recurrence, EPE: extraprostatic extension, SVI: seminal vesicle involvement.

*Chi-square test and §Mann Whitney U test.

3.1. Biochemical Recurrence-Free Rate of Preoperative Clinicopathological Parameters

Regarding the clinical T stage, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of T1a-b, T1c, T2, and T3a were 80.0%, 74%, 57%, and 51%, respectively. There was a significant difference between T1c and T2 stage (P = 0.0379). Stratified by the biopsy Gleason score, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of a Gleason score of 6 or less, 7, and 8–10 were 76.2%, 68.2%, and 24.4%, respectively. Patients with a Gleason score of 6 or less showed a significant higher biochemical recurrence-free rate than those with a Gleason score of 7 and 8–10, respectively (P = 0.0377 and P < 0.001). There was a significant biochemical recurrence-free rate difference between Gleason score 7 and 8–10 (P = 0.0159). The estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with a PSA level at diagnosis of 10 ng/mL or less, 10.1–20 ng/mL, and greater than 20 ng/mL were 74.4%, 65.7%, and 23.3%, respectively. There were significant differences between the 10 ng/mL or less and the greater than 20 ng/mL groups, and between the 10.1–20 ng/mL and the greater than 20 ng/mL groups, respectively (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0002). Stratified by the percent positive core, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with less than 34%, 34% to less than 50% and 50% or greater were 75.3%, 55.0%, and 45.1%, respectively. There were significant differences between patients with less than 34% and those with 50% or greater (P < 0.0001). Risk classification also showed a significant difference in the biochemical recurrence-free rate. The estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with a low risk, an intermediate risk, and a high risk were 79.0%, 71.9% and 48.8%, respectively. The high-risk patient group showed a significantly higher biochemical recurrence rate compared with the low- and intermediate-risk patient groups (P = 0.0004 and 0.0375). Stratified by calculated cancer volume, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with 2.0 mL or less, 2.1–4.0 mL, and greater than 4.0 mL were 81.1%, 51.0%, and 12.0%, respectively. Patients with 2.0 mL or less showed a significantly lower biochemical recurrence-free rate than those with 2.1–4.0 mL and greater than 4.0 mL, respectively (P = 0.0008, and P < 0.0001). Patients with 2.1–4.0 mL also showed a significantly lower biochemical recurrence rate than those with greater than 4.0 mL (P = 0.0109).

3.2. Biochemical Recurrence-Free Rate of Postoperative Pathological Parameters

Regarding the pathological parameters obtained at surgery, the pathological Gleason score and the pathological T stage were statistically higher in patients who showed biochemical recurrence, and the number of patients who showed EPE, PSM, or SVI was also statistically greater than those without biochemical recurrence. The estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of pathological T0, T2, T3a, T3b, and T4 were 80.0%, 76.1%, 57.0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. A log rank test showed significant differences among the pathological T stages. Regarding EPE, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with positive and negative EPE were 72.8% and 53.2%, respectively (P = 0.0167). Regarding SVI, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with positive and negative SVI were 71.0% and 0%, respectively (P < 0.0001). Regarding the surgical margin status, the estimated 5-year biochemical recurrence-free rates of patients with a positive and a negative surgical margin were 76.0% and 47.6%, respectively (P < 0.0001).

3.3. Multivariate Analysis Using Preoperative and Postoperative Clinicopathological Parameters

Regarding the preoperative clinicopathological parameters, biopsy Gleason score, clinical stage, PSA at biopsy, percent positive cores, and calculated cancer volume were independent predictors of biochemical recurrence in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model showed that the calculated cancer volume was the independent predictor (P < 0.05) (Table 3).
Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analysis in preoperative clinicopathological parameters.

ParameterUnivariateMultivariates
Hazard ratio95% C.I. P valueHazard ratio95% C.I. P value
Age (continuous)0.9840.944–1.0270.462 N.A.
Biopsy Gleason score
 6 or less1 1
 71.2690.663–2.4300.4720.6580.281–1.5430.336
 8–104.1032.199–7.656<0.0010.9250.312–2.7390.888

Clinical stage
 T11 1
 T21.7191.048–2.8190.0321.1910.652–2.1770.567
 T34.2980.583–31.6540.1524.0370.507–32.1210.187

PSA at biopsy (ng/mL)
 10 or less1 1
 10–20.01.5430.892–2.6680.1210.9610.398–2.3240.930
 Greater than 204.5552.314–8.965<0.0010.8920.258–3.0890.857

% positive cores
 Less than 341 1
 34–501.1390.444–2.9200.78710.333–2.9991.000
 50 or greater2.3401.384–3.9560.0021.8070.949–3.4440.072

Calculated cancer volume (mL)
 2.0 or less1 1
 2.0–4.02.7161.323–5.5770.0063.0221.144–7.9810.026
 Greater than 4.07.1163.595–14.085<0.0016.9621.755–27.6240.006

N.A.: not available. C.I: confidence interval.

Regarding postoperative pathological parameters, surgical Gleason score, EPE, SVI, and PSM were independent predictors of biochemical recurrence in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model showed that SVI and PSM were the independent predictors (SVI; P < 0.001, PSM; P = 0.049) (Table 4).
Table 4

Univariate and multivariate analysis in postoperative clinicopathological parameters.

ParameterUnivariateMultivariates
Hazard ratio95% C.I. P valueHazard ratio95% C.I. P value
Surgical Gleason score
 6 or less1 1
 71.3290.748–2.3600.3320.8840.458–1.7060.713
 8–103.3451.716–6.522<0.0011.8580.840–4.1130.126

EPE
 Negative1 1
 Positive2.0261.232–3.3310.0051.3370.735–2.4310.342

SVI
 Negative1 1
 Positive8.4254.219–16.825<0.0014.6151.996–10.672<0.001

Surgical margin
 Negative1 1
 Positive2.9431.704–5.080<0.0011.9021.001–3.6140.049

EPE: extraprostatic extentions, SVI: seminal vesicle involvement, C.I.: confidence interval.

We conducted multivariate analysis using calculated cancer volumes, SVI and PSM, which were significant predictors in multivariate analysis of both preoperative and postoperative parameters. Consequently, SVI and PSM lost their significance and calculated cancer volume was the independent predictor (P < 0.01) (Table 5).
Table 5

Univariate and multivariate analysis in both preoperative and postoperative clinicopathological parameters.

UnivariateMultivariates
Parameter Hazard ratio95% C.I. P valueHazard ratio95% C.I. P value
SVI
 Negative 1 1
 positive 8.4254.219–16.825<0.0012.4600.919–6.5800.073

Surgical marrgin
 Negative 1 1
 positive 2.9431.704–5.080<0.0012.0570.975–4.3390.058

Calculated cancer volume (mL)
 2.0 or less 1 1
 2.1–4.0 2.7161.323–5.5770.0063.1911.397–7.2910.006
 Greater than 4.0 7.1163.595–14.058<0.0014.4981.749–11.5640.002

SVI: seminal vesicle involvement, C.I: confidence Interval.

4. Discussion

Many investigators have tried to determine independent predictors of biochemical recurrence in patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy [8-20]. Among the preoperative clinicopathological parameters, PSA at biopsy, biopsy Gleason score, clinical stage, percent biopsy core, risk classification, and calculated tumor volume were reported as independent predictors, while pathological stage, EPE, SVI, PSM, tumor volume, and surgical Gleason score were reported as independent predictors of biochemical recurrence among the postoperative pathological parameters. Regarding the predictive potency of tumor volume in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy, some investigators take an affirmative stance [17, 21], while others postulate a dismissive view [22-25]. Taking the affirmative stance, the prediction of the tumor volume of prostate cancer leads to the prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. This prediction is not only useful in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy, but also those who receive definitive radiation therapy (e.g., IMRT, high-dose-rate and low-dose-rate brachytherapy). An attempt to calculate the tumor volume of prostate cancer has been reported by several investigators [17-21]. In the present study, we calculated the tumor volume according to the equation reported by D'Amico et al. [7]. Using the preoperative parameters, tumor volume had an independent potency of prediction of biochemical recurrence in multivariate analysis. Using the postoperative parameters, SVI and PSM remained as independent predictors. Using these three independent preoperative and postoperative parameters, only tumor volume remained significant. SVI and PSM were marginal predictive values (P = 0.073, and 0.058, resp.). On the other hand, Chan and Stamey verified the equation to calculate tumor volume reported by D'Amico, and they reported that there was a significant correlation between the calculated cancer volume and the actual total cancer volume (r = 0.537; P < 0.0001) [22]. However, they concluded that PSA was a much stronger predictor of cancer volume than calculated prostate cancer volume. Our present study has several limitations, namely, the number of patients is small (n = 255), the mean follow-up period is short (53 months), and we have not calculated the tumor volume by using radical prostatectomy specimens yet. The correlation between calculated tumor volume and true tumor volume in our patients is unknown. However, the calculated tumor volume indeed had an independent predictive potency for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in multivariate analyses not only among preoperative parameters, but also pre- and postoperative parameters. Since the progress in definitive radiation therapy, pretreatment predictive parameters of oncological outcomes after definitive therapy in patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer are expected.

5. Conclusion

The calculated tumor volume by preoperative parameters can be an independent predictor of recurrence for patients and will experience biochemical recurrence.
  25 in total

1.  Systematic assessment of the ability of the number and percentage of positive biopsy cores to predict pathologic stage and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Felix K-H Chun; Georg C Hutterer; Andrea Gallina; Shahrokh F Shariat; Andrea Salonia; Vincenzo Scattoni; Luc Valiquette; Francesco Montorsi; Patrizio Rigatti; Markus Graefen; Hartwig Huland; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-03-06       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Tumour volume and high grade tumour volume are the best predictors of pathologic stage and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Felix K-H Chun; Alberto Briganti; Claudio Jeldres; Andrea Gallina; Andreas Erbersdobler; Thorsten Schlomm; Jochen Walz; Christian Eichelberg; Georg Salomon; Alexander Haese; Eike Currlin; Sascha A Ahyai; François Bénard; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 9.162

3.  External validation of University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score.

Authors:  Kevin H Zhao; David J Hernandez; Misop Han; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Leslie A Mangold; Alan W Partin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; J A Eastham; A M Stapleton; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-05-20       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Calculated volume of prostate cancer identifies patients with clinical stage T1C disease at high risk of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: a preliminary study.

Authors:  A F Olumi; J P Richie; D J Schultz; A V D'Amico
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-08-01       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Calculated prostate cancer volume: the optimal predictor of actual cancer volume and pathologic stage.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; H Chang; E Holupka; A Renshaw; A Desjarden; M Chen; K R Loughlin; J P Richie
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg; David J Pasta; Eric P Elkin; Mark S Litwin; David M Latini; Janeen Du Chane; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results.

Authors:  Kimberly A Roehl; Misop Han; Christian G Ramos; Jo Ann V Antenor; William J Catalona
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; K Blank; G A Broderick; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; I Kaplan; C J Beard; A Wein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique.

Authors:  P C Walsh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  6 in total

1.  A Novel System for Estimating Residual Disease and Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Claire Murphy; Lawrence True; Funda Vakar-Lopez; Jing Xia; Roman Gulati; Bruce Montgomery; Maria Tretiakova
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.104

2.  Proposed salvage treatment strategy for biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Makito Miyake; Nobumichi Tanaka; Isao Asakawa; Yosuke Morizawa; Satoshi Anai; Kazumasa Torimoto; Katsuya Aoki; Tatsuo Yoneda; Masatoshi Hasegawa; Noboru Konishi; Kiyohide Fujimoto
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-10-20       Impact factor: 3.481

3.  Focal Cryotherapy in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Are We Treating the Cancer or the Mind? - The Cancer.

Authors:  Rodrigo Donalisio da Silva; Fernando J Kim
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

4.  Effect of serum testosterone and percent tumor volume on extra-prostatic extension and biochemical recurrence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Eu Chang Hwang; Seong Hyeon Yu; Yang Hyun Jo; Seung Il Jung; Taek Won Kang; Dong Deuk Kwon; Chan Choi; Suk Hee Heo; Jun Eul Hwang; Sung-Hoon Jung; Tae-Young Jung
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 5.  Factors influencing biochemical recurrence in patients who have received salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhong-Wei Jia; Kun Chang; Bo Dai; Yun-Yi Kong; Yue Wang; Yuan-Yuan Qu; Yi-Ping Zhu; Ding-Wei Ye
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.285

6.  The tumor volume after radical prostatectomy and its clinical impact on the prognosis of patients with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hyeong Dong Yuk; Seok-Soo Byun; Sung Kyu Hong; Hakmin Lee
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-09       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.