Literature DB >> 23546546

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

Takahiro Inoue1, 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.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the pathological features of prostatectomy specimens from patients with low-risk prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance (AS) and evaluate preoperative data suitable for predicting upstaged (≥pT3) or upgraded disease (Gleason score of ≥7), defined as 'reclassification'.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 521 consecutive radical prostatectomy procedures (January 2005 through to December 2011) performed at our institution without neoadjuvant hormonal therapy was performed. Eighty-four patients fulfilled the following criteria-clinical T1 or T2 disease, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≤10 ng/ml, one or two positive biopsies, and Gleason score of <7. Clinicopathological features at diagnosis were compared between patients with and without reclassification after radical prostatectomy.
RESULTS: Forty of 84 patients (47.6 %) had a Gleason score of ≥7, and 8 (9.5 %) had upstaged disease (≥pT3). Seven patients with upstaged disease also showed upgraded reclassification. Two patients with reclassification showed biochemical recurrence at 59 and 89 months after surgery, respectively. Preoperative parameters evaluated included age, PSA level, PSA density (PSAD), clinical T stage, and number and percentage of positive prostate cores. Among 82 patients with complete data, univariate analysis showed that PSAD (ng/ml(2)) was a significant parameter to discriminate patients with reclassified disease and those without reclassified disease (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that PSAD was the only independent variable to predict disease with reclassification (p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative PSAD may be a good indicator for selecting patients eligible for AS in the Japanese population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23546546     DOI: 10.1007/s10147-013-0553-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 1341-9625            Impact factor:   3.402


  16 in total

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

Authors:  Jean-Baptiste Beauval; 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
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-07-07       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis.

Authors:  Amita Shukla-Dave; Hedvig Hricak; Michael W Kattan; Darko Pucar; Kentaro Kuroiwa; Hui-Ni Chen; Jessica Spector; Jason A Koutcher; Kristen L Zakian; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Delay of surgery in men with low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Daniel O'Brien; Stacy Loeb; Gustavo F Carvalhal; Barry B McGuire; Donghui Kan; Matthias D Hofer; Jessica T Casey; Brian T Helfand; William J Catalona
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Effect of intra-observer variation in prostate volume measurement on prostate-specific antigen density calculations among prostate cancer active surveillance participants.

Authors:  Joan S Ko; Patricia Landis; H Ballentine Carter; Alan W Partin
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 5.588

5.  Risk stratification of men choosing surveillance for low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kenneth S Tseng; Patricia Landis; Jonathan I Epstein; Bruce J Trock; H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-03-20       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Marc A Dall'Era; Peter C Albertsen; Christopher Bangma; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland; Laurence H Klotz; Christopher Parker; Mark S Soloway
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance.

Authors:  Nicholas J van As; Andrew R Norman; Karen Thomas; Vincent S Khoo; Alan Thompson; Robert A Huddart; Alan Horwich; David P Dearnaley; Christopher C Parker
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-03-07       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer.

Authors:  J I Epstein; P C Walsh; M Carmichael; C B Brendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort.

Authors:  Marc A Dall'Era; Badrinath R Konety; Janet E Cowan; Katsuto Shinohara; Frank Stauf; Matthew R Cooperberg; Maxwell V Meng; Christopher J Kane; Nanette Perez; Viraj A Master; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-06-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz; Liying Zhang; Adam Lam; Robert Nam; Alexandre Mamedov; Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  2 in total

1.  Is it appropriate to conduct conventional active surveillance for Asian men with low-risk prostate cancer?

Authors:  Ming Xu; Li Zhang; Chaozhao Liang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Combined analysis of CRMP4 methylation levels and CAPRA-S score predicts metastasis and outcomes in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Qun-Xiong Huang; Chu-Tian Xiao; Zheng Chen; Min-Hua Lu; Jun Pang; Jin-Ming Di; Zi-Huan Luo; Xin Gao
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2018 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.285

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.