Jiwoong Yu1, Young Suk Kwon2, Sinae Kim2, Christopher Sejong Han3, Nicholas Farber3, Jongmyung Kim3, Seok Soo Byun4, Wun-Jae Kim5, Seong Soo Jeon6, Isaac Yi Kim7. 1. Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Division of Urology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick. 2. Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Division of Urology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick; Department of Biostatistics, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, New Jersey. 3. Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Division of Urology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick. 4. Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Urology, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Republic of Korea. 6. Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: seongsoo.jeon@samsung.com. 7. Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Division of Urology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick. Electronic address: kimiy@cinj.rutgers.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Active surveillance is now the treatment of choice in men with low risk prostate cancer. Although there is no consensus on which patients are eligible for active surveillance, prostate specific antigen above 10 ng/ml is generally excluded. In an attempt to determine the validity of using a prostate specific antigen cutoff of 10 ng/ml to counsel men considering active surveillance we analyzed a multi-institution database to determine the pathological outcome in men with prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml but histologically favorable risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database of men with histologically favorable risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2003 and 2015. The cohort was categorized into 3 groups based on prostate specific antigen level, including low-less than 10 ng/ml, intermediate-10 or greater to less than 20 and high-20 or greater. Associations of prostate specific antigen group with adverse pathological and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 2,125 patients 1,327 were categorized with histologically favorable risk disease. However on multivariate analyses the rates of up staging and upgrading were similar between the intermediate and low prostate specific antigen groups. In contrast compared to the intermediate prostate specific antigen group the high group had higher incidences of up staging (p = 0.02) and upgrading to 4 + 3 or greater disease (p = 0.046). Biochemical recurrence-free survival rates revealed no pairwise intergroup differences except between the low and high groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preoperatively elevated prostate specific antigen between 10 and less than 20 ng/ml who otherwise had histologically favorable risk prostate cancer were not at higher risk for adverse pathological outcomes than men with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml.
PURPOSE: Active surveillance is now the treatment of choice in men with low risk prostate cancer. Although there is no consensus on which patients are eligible for active surveillance, prostate specific antigen above 10 ng/ml is generally excluded. In an attempt to determine the validity of using a prostate specific antigen cutoff of 10 ng/ml to counsel men considering active surveillance we analyzed a multi-institution database to determine the pathological outcome in men with prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml but histologically favorable risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database of men with histologically favorable risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2003 and 2015. The cohort was categorized into 3 groups based on prostate specific antigen level, including low-less than 10 ng/ml, intermediate-10 or greater to less than 20 and high-20 or greater. Associations of prostate specific antigen group with adverse pathological and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 2,125 patients 1,327 were categorized with histologically favorable risk disease. However on multivariate analyses the rates of up staging and upgrading were similar between the intermediate and low prostate specific antigen groups. In contrast compared to the intermediate prostate specific antigen group the high group had higher incidences of up staging (p = 0.02) and upgrading to 4 + 3 or greater disease (p = 0.046). Biochemical recurrence-free survival rates revealed no pairwise intergroup differences except between the low and high groups. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with preoperatively elevated prostate specific antigen between 10 and less than 20 ng/ml who otherwise had histologically favorable risk prostate cancer were not at higher risk for adverse pathological outcomes than men with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml.
Authors: Jüri R Palisaar; Joachim Noldus; Björn Löppenberg; Christian von Bodman; Florian Sommerer; Thilo Eggert Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Guillaume Ploussard; Hendrik Isbarn; Alberto Briganti; Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Christian I Surcel; Laurent Salomon; Massimo Freschi; Cristian Mirvald; Henk G van der Poel; Anna Jenkins; Piet Ost; Inge M van Oort; Ofer Yossepowitch; Gianluca Giannarini; Roderick C N van den Bergh Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark S Soloway; Cynthia T Soloway; Ahmed Eldefrawy; Kristell Acosta; Bruce Kava; Murugesan Manoharan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jennifer R Stark; Sven Perner; Meir J Stampfer; Jennifer A Sinnott; Stephen Finn; Anna S Eisenstein; Jing Ma; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Tobias Kurth; Massimo Loda; Edward L Giovannucci; Mark A Rubin; Lorelei A Mucci Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-05-11 Impact factor: 44.544