Literature DB >> 26875178

Clinical significance of pelvic lymph node status in prostate cancer: review of 1690 cases.

Livia Maccio1, Valeria Barresi2, Federica Domati3, Eugenio Martorana4, Anna Maria Cesinaro1, Mario Migaldi1, Francesco Iachetta5, Antonio Ieni2, Luca Reggiani Bonetti1.   

Abstract

To assess whether any relationship exists between the number of histologically examined lymph nodes and the detection of metastases in pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) specimens taken from patients with radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostatic adenocarcinoma. 1690 cases of RP with PNLD were included in the study; 54 % of the patients were submitted to extended PLND (ePLND). Kaplan-Meier curves confirm the negative prognostic significance of nodal metastases on the overall patients' survival (P < 0.0001). Nodal metastases are significantly associated with older age of patients (P = 0.0466), higher pT status (P < 0.0001), higher Gleason score (P < 0.0001) and positive surgical margin (P < 0.0001). The frequency of nodal metastases is significantly increased in cases submitted to ePLND (P < 0.0001), presumably due to the significantly higher number of lymphnodes retrieved using this procedure (P < 0.0001). In addition, regardless of the extent of PLND procedure, entire histological examination of PLND specimens is significantly associated with a higher frequency of nodal metastases (P < 0.0001). When we considered only pN0 cases, 21 display adverse prognosis and died of disease during the follow-up. The number of pelvic lymphnodes examined is significantly lower in the group of patients who die of the disease compared to that of survivors (P = 0.0448). In addition, Kaplan-Meier analysis shows that patients with 10 or fewer examined lymphnodes have significantly shorter disease-specific survival (P = 0.0151). Our findings confirm the negative prognostic significance of N status in prostate cancer. We suggest the examination of a minimum number of 10 lymphnodes, together with entire PLND processing, for accurate assessment of N status.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lymph nodes dissection; Lymphadenectomy; Metastases; Prostatic cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26875178     DOI: 10.1007/s11739-015-1375-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intern Emerg Med        ISSN: 1828-0447            Impact factor:   3.397


  16 in total

1.  Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Alessandro Larcher; Firas Abdollah; Umberto Capitanio; Andrea Gallina; Nazareno Suardi; Marco Bianchi; Maxine Sun; Massimo Freschi; Andrea Salonia; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  [Lymphadenectomy and prostate cancer: a statement of the committee of cancerology of the French Association of Urology].

Authors:  L Salomon; M Peyromaure; G Fromont; F Rozet; D Eiss; C Bastide; P Beuzeboc; N Gachignard; L Cormier; C Hennequin; P Mongiat-Artus; M Soulié
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 0.915

Review 3.  International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling.

Authors:  Hemamali Samaratunga; Rodolfo Montironi; Lawrence True; Jonathan I Epstein; David F Griffiths; Peter A Humphrey; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas M Wheeler; John R Srigley; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 4.  The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; William C Allsbrook; Mahul B Amin; Lars L Egevad
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.394

5.  [EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease].

Authors:  A Heidenreich; J Bellmunt; M Bolla; S Joniau; M Mason; V Matveev; N Mottet; H P Schmid; T van der Kwast; T Wiegel; F Zattoni
Journal:  Actas Urol Esp       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 0.994

6.  Total submission of pelvic lymphadenectomy tissues removed during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer increases lymph node yield and detection of micrometastases.

Authors:  Joanna Perry-Keene; Peter Ferguson; Hemamali Samaratunga; John N Nacey; Brett Delahunt
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 7.  Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Michael L Blute; James H Eastham; Markus Graefen; Axel Heidenreich; Jeffrey R Karnes; Francesco Montorsi; Urs E Studer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Standard versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer in patients with a predicted probability of nodal metastasis greater than 1%.

Authors:  Karim Touijer; Farhang Rabbani; Javier Romero Otero; Fernando P Secin; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Bertrand Guillonneau
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-05-11       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Impact of surgical volume on the rate of lymph node metastases in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Umberto Capitanio; Felix K-H Chun; Andrea Gallina; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Salonia; Luigi F Da Pozzo; Renzo Colombo; Valerio Di Girolamo; Roberto Bertini; Giorgio Guazzoni; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Francesco Montorsi; Patrizio Rigatti
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Karen F Gold; Chris L Pashos; Shilpa S Mehta; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  1 in total

1.  Prognostic significance of lymph node ratio in node-positive cervical cancer patients.

Authors:  Ji Hyeon Joo; Young Seok Kim; Joo-Hyun Nam
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.889

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.