Literature DB >> 22770616

Pathologic findings in radical prostatectomy specimens from patients eligible for active surveillance with highly selective criteria: a multicenter study.

Jean-Baptiste Beauval1, Guillaume Ploussard, Michel Soulié, Christian Pfister, Simon Van Agt, Sébastien Vincendeau, Sébastien Larue, Jérome Rigaud, Nicolas Gaschignard, Morgan Rouprêt, Sarah Drouin, Mickael Peyromaure, Jean Alexandre Long, Francois Iborra, Guy Vallancien, Francois Rozet, Laurent Salomon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pathologic features of surgical specimens after radical prostatectomy in patients with low-risk prostate cancer fulfilling the strictest pathologic selection criteria for active surveillance.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 10 785 consecutive radical prostatectomy performed in 10 university hospitals (January 2003 through December 2008). A total of 919 patients fulfilled the following unique and very stringent criteria: T1c, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <10 ng/mL, a single positive biopsy, tumor length <3 mm, and Gleason score <7. Clinico-biologic and pathologic data at diagnosis and after radical prostatectomy, prostatic and tumor volume, pathologic Gleason score and stage, positive surgical margins, insignificant prostate cancer, and PSA outcomes were recorded.
RESULTS: Median age was 63 years. Mean prebiopsy PSA level was 6.2 ng/mL. At radical prostatectomy, Gleason score was upgraded in 34% of patients, including 1.2% Gleason score 8-9. Pathologic stages were pT2 in 87.3%, pT3 in 11.1%, and pT4 in 1.4% of cases. Extraprostatic extension was found in 12.5%. Only 26% of patients had "insignificant" tumors. Biochemical recurrence-free survival at 5 years was 92.3%. There was no significant difference in survival between patients with "significant" and "insignificant" tumors (90.1% vs 93.4%; P = .06).
CONCLUSION: Despite of a stringent selection of patients with low-risk prostate cancer, active surveillance definition included a significant proportion of patients with upstaged (about 12%) and upgraded (about one-third) disease at diagnosis. Only a quarter of active surveillance patients have a pathologically confirmed "insignificant" cancer.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22770616     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  18 in total

1.  Multiparametric MRI of the prostate at 3 T: limited value of 3D (1)H-MR spectroscopy as a fourth parameter.

Authors:  Stephan H Polanec; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Peter Brader; Dietmar Georg; Shahrokh Shariat; Claudio Spick; Martin Susani; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal A Baltzer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Pathological outcomes of Japanese men eligible for active surveillance after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Takahiro Inoue; Hidefumi Kinoshita; Hidekazu Inui; Yoshihiro Komai; Masayuki Nakagawa; Naoki Oguchi; Gen Kawa; Motohiko Sugi; Chisato Ohe; Chika Miyasaka; Yorika Nakano; Noriko Sakaida; Yoshiko Uemura; Tadashi Matsuda
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Adverse Pathologic Features at Radical Prostatectomy: Effect of Preoperative Risk on Oncologic Outcomes.

Authors:  Mariam Imnadze; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Comparison of oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men diagnosed with prostate cancer with PSA levels below and above 4 ng/mL.

Authors:  Charles Dariane; Chloé Le Cossec; Sarah J Drouin; Benoit Wolff; Benjamin Granger; Pierre Mozer; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Shahrokh F Shariat; Olivier Cussenot; Morgan Rouprêt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Defining the threshold for significant versus insignificant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Theo H Van der Kwast; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  Oncologic outcomes following radical prostatectomy in the active surveillance era.

Authors:  Alyssa S Louis; Robin Kalnin; Manjula Maganti; Melania Pintilie; Andrew G Matthew; Antonio Finelli; Alexandre R Zlotta; Neil Fleshner; Girish Kulkarni; Robert Hamilton; Michael Jewett; Michael Robinette; Shabbir M H Alibhai; John Trachtenberg
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  Pathologic Outcomes in Men with Low-risk Prostate Cancer Who Are Potential Candidates for Contemporary, Active Surveillance Protocols.

Authors:  Ho Won Kang; Joo Yong Lee; Jong Kyou Kwon; Seong Uk Jeh; Hae Do Jung; Kang Su Cho; Won Sik Ham; Young Deuk Choi
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Localization of higher grade tumor foci in potential candidates for active surveillance who opt for radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Sung Kyu Hong; James A Eastham; Samson W Fine
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2013-12-30

Review 9.  Prostate Cancer Biomarker Development: National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group Review.

Authors:  Michael A Liss; Robin J Leach; Martin G Sanda; Oliver J Semmes
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Prostate volume and biopsy tumor length are significant predictors for classical and redefined insignificant cancer on prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men with favorable pathologic features on biopsy.

Authors:  Masahiro Yashi; Tomoya Mizuno; Hideo Yuki; Akinori Masuda; Tsunehito Kambara; Hironori Betsunoh; Hideyuki Abe; Yoshitatsu Fukabori; Osamu Muraishi; Koyu Suzuki; Yoshimasa Nakazato; Takao Kamai
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 2.264

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.