Eric C Kauffman1, Min-Jung Lee2, Sylvia V Alarcon2, Sunmin Lee2, Anthony N Hoang3, Annerleim Walton Diaz3, Raju Chelluri3, Srinivas Vourganti4, Jane B Trepel2, Peter A Pinto3. 1. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Departments of Urology and Cancer Genetics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo. Electronic address: Eric.Kauffman@RoswellPark.org. 2. Developmental Therapeutics Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 3. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Urology, State University of New York, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: While the significance of circulating tumor cells in clinically localized cancer remains controversial, it has been reported that surgical tumor manipulation can increase circulating tumor cells, including during open prostatectomy. To our knowledge it is unknown whether this cell shedding also occurs during minimally invasive prostatectomy, which minimizes tumor palpation and uses earlier vascular control. We tested the impact of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on intraoperative circulating tumor cell levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Circulating tumor cell counts were compared in peripheral blood specimens from 25 patients treated with robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy preoperatively vs intraoperatively after prostate excision, in addition to 11 healthy blood donors. Circulating tumor cell detection was performed using EpCAM immunomagnetic enrichment and multiparametric flow cytometry quantification of viable EpCAM positive/prostate specific membrane antigen positive/CD45 negative cells. Intraoperative cell counts and increases were tested in univariable analyses for associations with perioperative variables, histopathology and postoperative progression. RESULTS: Circulating tumor cells were detected in 0% of healthy controls compared to 48% and 52% of prostatectomy cases preoperatively and intraoperatively, respectively (range 1 to 8 cells). There was no difference in the incidence or mean number of circulating tumor cells preoperatively vs intraoperatively. Of the patients 60% had no intraoperative change from preoperative levels. Intraoperative cell increases vs decreases were equally infrequent (each 20%) with no intraoperative increase greater than 1 circulating tumor cell. Intraoperative circulating tumor cell detection was not significantly associated with prostatectomy operative characteristics, histopathology or early postoperative progression at a median 21-month followup. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy does not cause significant intraoperative increases in circulating tumor cells in contrast to historical reports of open prostatectomy. These findings may aid urologists in counseling candidates for robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding the possibility of intraoperative tumor cell shedding.
PURPOSE: While the significance of circulating tumor cells in clinically localized cancer remains controversial, it has been reported that surgical tumor manipulation can increase circulating tumor cells, including during open prostatectomy. To our knowledge it is unknown whether this cell shedding also occurs during minimally invasive prostatectomy, which minimizes tumor palpation and uses earlier vascular control. We tested the impact of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on intraoperative circulating tumor cell levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Circulating tumor cell counts were compared in peripheral blood specimens from 25 patients treated with robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy preoperatively vs intraoperatively after prostate excision, in addition to 11 healthy blood donors. Circulating tumor cell detection was performed using EpCAM immunomagnetic enrichment and multiparametric flow cytometry quantification of viable EpCAM positive/prostate specific membrane antigen positive/CD45 negative cells. Intraoperative cell counts and increases were tested in univariable analyses for associations with perioperative variables, histopathology and postoperative progression. RESULTS: Circulating tumor cells were detected in 0% of healthy controls compared to 48% and 52% of prostatectomy cases preoperatively and intraoperatively, respectively (range 1 to 8 cells). There was no difference in the incidence or mean number of circulating tumor cells preoperatively vs intraoperatively. Of the patients 60% had no intraoperative change from preoperative levels. Intraoperative cell increases vs decreases were equally infrequent (each 20%) with no intraoperative increase greater than 1 circulating tumor cell. Intraoperative circulating tumor cell detection was not significantly associated with prostatectomy operative characteristics, histopathology or early postoperative progression at a median 21-month followup. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy does not cause significant intraoperative increases in circulating tumor cells in contrast to historical reports of open prostatectomy. These findings may aid urologists in counseling candidates for robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding the possibility of intraoperative tumor cell shedding.
Authors: Anish Thomas; Arun Rajan; Arlene Berman; Yusuke Tomita; Christina Brzezniak; Min-Jung Lee; Sunmin Lee; Alexander Ling; Aaron J Spittler; Corey A Carter; Udayan Guha; Yisong Wang; Eva Szabo; Paul Meltzer; Seth M Steinberg; Jane B Trepel; Patrick J Loehrer; Giuseppe Giaccone Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: T Wiggers; J Jeekel; J W Arends; A P Brinkhorst; H M Kluck; C I Luyk; J D Munting; J A Povel; A P Rutten; A Volovics Journal: Br J Surg Date: 1988-05 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: P Eschwège; S Moutereau; S Droupy; R Douard; J-L Gala; G Benoit; M Conti; P Manivet; S Loric Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Anish Thomas; Nobuyuki Takahashi; Vinodh N Rajapakse; Xiaohu Zhang; Yilun Sun; Michele Ceribelli; Kelli M Wilson; Yang Zhang; Erin Beck; Linda Sciuto; Samantha Nichols; Brian Elenbaas; Janusz Puc; Heike Dahmen; Astrid Zimmermann; Jillian Varonin; Christopher W Schultz; Sehyun Kim; Hirity Shimellis; Parth Desai; Carleen Klumpp-Thomas; Lu Chen; Jameson Travers; Crystal McKnight; Sam Michael; Zina Itkin; Sunmin Lee; Akira Yuno; Min-Jung Lee; Christophe E Redon; Jessica D Kindrick; Cody J Peer; Jun S Wei; Mirit I Aladjem; William Douglas Figg; Seth M Steinberg; Jane B Trepel; Frank T Zenke; Yves Pommier; Javed Khan; Craig J Thomas Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Jung-Min Lee; Jayakumar Nair; Alexandra Zimmer; Stanley Lipkowitz; Christina M Annunziata; Maria J Merino; Elizabeth M Swisher; Maria I Harrell; Jane B Trepel; Min-Jung Lee; Mohammad H Bagheri; Dana-Adriana Botesteanu; Seth M Steinberg; Lori Minasian; Irene Ekwede; Elise C Kohn Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Fatima Karzai; David VanderWeele; Ravi A Madan; Helen Owens; Lisa M Cordes; Amy Hankin; Anna Couvillon; Erin Nichols; Marijo Bilusic; Michael L Beshiri; Kathleen Kelly; Venkatesh Krishnasamy; Sunmin Lee; Min-Jung Lee; Akira Yuno; Jane B Trepel; Maria J Merino; Ryan Dittamore; Jennifer Marté; Renee N Donahue; Jeffrey Schlom; Keith J Killian; Paul S Meltzer; Seth M Steinberg; James L Gulley; Jung-Min Lee; William L Dahut Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 13.751