OBJECTIVE: To update the 2007 Partin tables in a contemporary patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 5,629 consecutive men who underwent RP and staging lymphadenectomy at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between January 1, 2006 and July 30, 2011 and met inclusion criteria. Polychotomous logistic regression analysis was used to predict the probability of each pathologic stage category: organ-confined disease (OC), extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle involvement (SV+), or lymph node involvement (LN+) based on preoperative criteria. Preoperative variables included biopsy Gleason score (6, 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10), serum PSA (0-2.5, 2.6-4.0, 4.1-6.0, 6.1-10.0, greater than 10.0 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1c, T2c, and T2b/T2c). Bootstrap re-sampling with 1000 replications was performed to estimate 95% confidence intervals for predicted probabilities of each pathologic state. RESULTS: The median PSA was 4.9 ng/mL, 63% had Gleason 6 disease, and 78% of men had T1c disease. 73% of patients had OC disease, 23% had EPE, 3% had SV+ but not LN+, and 1% had LN+ disease. Compared to the previous Partin nomogram, there was no change in the distribution of pathologic state. The risk of LN+ disease was significantly higher for tumours with biopsy Gleason 9-10 than Gleason 8 (O.R. 3.2, 95% CI 1.3-7.6). The c-indexes for EPE vs. OC, SV+ vs. OC, and LN+ vs. OC were 0.702, 0.853, and 0.917, respectively. Men with biopsy Gleason 4+3 and Gleason 8 had similar predicted probabilities for all pathologic stages. Most men presenting with Gleason 6 disease or Gleason 3+4 disease have <2% risk of harboring LN+ disease and may have lymphadenectomy omitted at RP. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of pathologic stages did not change at our institution between 2000-2005 and 2006-2011. The updated Partin nomogram takes into account the updated Gleason scoring system and may be more accurate for contemporary patients diagnosed with prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To update the 2007 Partin tables in a contemporary patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 5,629 consecutive men who underwent RP and staging lymphadenectomy at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between January 1, 2006 and July 30, 2011 and met inclusion criteria. Polychotomous logistic regression analysis was used to predict the probability of each pathologic stage category: organ-confined disease (OC), extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle involvement (SV+), or lymph node involvement (LN+) based on preoperative criteria. Preoperative variables included biopsy Gleason score (6, 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10), serum PSA (0-2.5, 2.6-4.0, 4.1-6.0, 6.1-10.0, greater than 10.0 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1c, T2c, and T2b/T2c). Bootstrap re-sampling with 1000 replications was performed to estimate 95% confidence intervals for predicted probabilities of each pathologic state. RESULTS: The median PSA was 4.9 ng/mL, 63% had Gleason 6 disease, and 78% of men had T1c disease. 73% of patients had OC disease, 23% had EPE, 3% had SV+ but not LN+, and 1% had LN+ disease. Compared to the previous Partin nomogram, there was no change in the distribution of pathologic state. The risk of LN+ disease was significantly higher for tumours with biopsy Gleason 9-10 than Gleason 8 (O.R. 3.2, 95% CI 1.3-7.6). The c-indexes for EPE vs. OC, SV+ vs. OC, and LN+ vs. OC were 0.702, 0.853, and 0.917, respectively. Men with biopsy Gleason 4+3 and Gleason 8 had similar predicted probabilities for all pathologic stages. Most men presenting with Gleason 6 disease or Gleason 3+4 disease have <2% risk of harboring LN+ disease and may have lymphadenectomy omitted at RP. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of pathologic stages did not change at our institution between 2000-2005 and 2006-2011. The updated Partin nomogram takes into account the updated Gleason scoring system and may be more accurate for contemporary patients diagnosed with prostate cancer.
Authors: M L Blute; E J Bergstralh; A W Partin; P C Walsh; M W Kattan; P T Scardino; J E Montie; J D Pearson; J M Slezak; H Zincke Journal: J Urol Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Phillip M Pierorazio; Ashley E Ross; Edward M Schaeffer; Jonathan I Epstein; Misop Han; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Stacy Loeb; Edward M Schaeffer; Bruce J Trock; Jonathan I Epstein; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Patrick C Walsh Journal: Urology Date: 2009-11-22 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Ilias Cagiannos; Pierre Karakiewicz; James A Eastham; Makato Ohori; Farhang Rabbani; Claudia Gerigk; Victor Reuter; Markus Graefen; Peter G Hammerer; Andreas Erbersdobler; Hartwig Huland; Patrick Kupelian; Eric Klein; David I Quinn; Susan M Henshall; John J Grygiel; Robert L Sutherland; Phillip D Stricker; Christopher G Morash; Peter T Scardino; Michael W Kattan Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael A Gorin; Heather J Chalfin; Jonathan I Epstein; Zhaoyong Feng; Alan W Partin; Bruce J Trock Journal: Urology Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: F O'Kelly; S Elamin; A Cahill; P Aherne; J White; J Buckley; K N O'Regan; A Brady; D G Power; M F O'Brien; P Sweeney; N Mayer; P J Kelly Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: John R Srigley; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; Hemamali Samaratunga; John Yaxley; Andrew J Evans Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Zachary Klaassen; Abhay A Singh; Lauren E Howard; Zhaoyong Feng; Bruce Trock; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher L Amling; Christopher J Kane; Alan Partin; Misop Han; Stephen J Freedland Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Mark W Ball; Michael A Gorin; Sam B Bhayani; Craig G Rogers; Michael D Stifelman; Jihad H Kaouk; Homayoun Zargar; Susan Marshall; Jeffrey A Larson; Haider M Rahbar; Bruce J Trock; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 3.498