Riu Hamada1, Jun Nakashima2, Makoto Ohori2, Yoshio Ohno2, Osamu Komori3, Kunihiro Yoshioka2, Masaaki Tachibana2. 1. Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, Tokyo Medical University, 6-7-2 Nishi-shinjyuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan. hamao1103@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, Tokyo Medical University, 6-7-2 Nishi-shinjyuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan. 3. Department of Mathematical Analysis and Statistical Inference, The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To identify preoperative predictive factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and to further stratify its risk in high-risk localized prostate cancer patients receiving radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: Subjects included 195 high-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing RP from 2000 to 2012. RP consisted of retropubic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, involving 84 cases and 111 cases, respectively. BCR was defined as a prostate serum antigen (PSA) level ≥0.2 ng/mL. BCR-free survival (BCRFS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Preoperative predictors of BCR were assessed with Cox's proportional hazard regression analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients (45.6 %) experienced recurrence. BCRFS rates 3 and 5 years after RP were 58 and 50 %, respectively. Prostate volume, transition zone volume, and Gleason score were not significantly associated with BCR. Patients with higher preoperative PSA, PSA density (PSAD), PSA density of the transition zone, percentage of positive cores (PPC), and PPC from the dominant side showed significantly lower BCRFS. The PPC from the dominant side and PSAD were significant independent prognostic factors for BCR. Using these variables, the hazard ratio of BCR could be calculated and patients stratified into three risk groups. The 5-year BCRFS rates for Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 64.9 %, 48.1 %, and 21.3 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer as currently defined do not have uniformly poor prognosis after RP. PPC from the dominant side and PSAD are significant predictors of BCR. These factors can identify high-risk patients with very poor prognosis.
BACKGROUND: To identify preoperative predictive factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and to further stratify its risk in high-risk localized prostate cancerpatients receiving radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: Subjects included 195 high-risk prostate cancerpatients undergoing RP from 2000 to 2012. RP consisted of retropubic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, involving 84 cases and 111 cases, respectively. BCR was defined as a prostate serum antigen (PSA) level ≥0.2 ng/mL. BCR-free survival (BCRFS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Preoperative predictors of BCR were assessed with Cox's proportional hazard regression analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients (45.6 %) experienced recurrence. BCRFS rates 3 and 5 years after RP were 58 and 50 %, respectively. Prostate volume, transition zone volume, and Gleason score were not significantly associated with BCR. Patients with higher preoperative PSA, PSA density (PSAD), PSA density of the transition zone, percentage of positive cores (PPC), and PPC from the dominant side showed significantly lower BCRFS. The PPC from the dominant side and PSAD were significant independent prognostic factors for BCR. Using these variables, the hazard ratio of BCR could be calculated and patients stratified into three risk groups. The 5-year BCRFS rates for Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 64.9 %, 48.1 %, and 21.3 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer as currently defined do not have uniformly poor prognosis after RP. PPC from the dominant side and PSAD are significant predictors of BCR. These factors can identify high-risk patients with very poor prognosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biochemical recurrence; High-risk prostate cancer; PSA density; PSA density of the transition zone; Percentage of positive cores from the dominant side; Radical prostatectomy
Authors: William Y Kim; Young E Whang; Raj S Pruthi; Maria Q Baggstrom; W Kimryn Rathmell; Julian G Rosenman; Eric M Wallen; Lav K Goyal; Gayle Grigson; Catharine Watkins; Paul A Godley Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2009-12-21 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; J Fondurulia; M H Chen; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; A Wein; J P Richie Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 44.544
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
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: Aaron C Spalding; Stephanie Daignault; Howard M Sandler; Rajal B Shah; Charlie C Pan; Michael E Ray Journal: Urology Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Sung Han Kim; Weon Seo Park; Sun Ho Kim; Boram Park; Jungnam Joo; Geon Kook Lee; Jae Young Joung; Ho Kyung Seo; Jinsoo Chung; Kang Hyun Lee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katharina Beyer; Lisa Moris; Michael Lardas; Anna Haire; Francesco Barletta; Simone Scuderi; Megan Molnar; Ronald Herrera; Abdul Rauf; Riccardo Campi; Isabella Greco; Kirill Shiranov; Saeed Dabestani; Thomas van den Broeck; Sujenthiran Arun; Mauro Gacci; Giorgio Gandaglia; Muhammad Imran Omar; Steven MacLennan; Monique J Roobol; Bahman Farahmand; Eleni Vradi; Zsuzsanna Devecseri; Alex Asiimwe; Jihong Zong; Sara J Maclennan; Laurence Collette; James NDow; Alberto Briganti; Anders Bjartell; Mieke Van Hemelrijck Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 2.692