Literature DB >> 27650933

Management of prostate cancer patients with locally adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy: feasibility of active surveillance for cases with Gleason grade 3 + 4 = 7.

Xun Shangguan1, Baijun Dong1, Yanqing Wang1, Fan Xu1, Xiaoguang Shao1, Jianjun Sha1, Yinjie Zhu1, Jiahua Pan2, Wei Xue3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of the new Gleason grade groups (GGGs) to stratify risk in prostate cancer patients with locally adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy (RP) thereby allowing more accurate assessment for planning eventual adjuvant therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on 172 patients with locally adverse pathologic features (including seminal vesicle invasion, extracapsular extension, or positive surgical margins) who had been treated with wait and see policy after RP were retrospectively analyzed for biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to test the association between the GGGs and BCR. Finally, concordance indices of different grading classifications were calculated to evaluate the predictive accuracy for biochemical failure after RP.
RESULTS: The five-year BCR-free survival rates were 71.2, 66.9, 25.7, 17.4, and 8.3 % for GGG 1-5 assessed on surgical specimens (p < 0.001, log-rank test). In the two-way log-rank test, men with prostatectomy GGG 2 had a lower progression risk relative to GGG 3 (p = 0.001), though similar risk as GGG 1 (p = 0.105). In multivariate Cox regression analysis, specimen GGG ≥3 and early postoperative PSA ≥0.1 ng/ml were independent risk factors for biochemical failure (p < 0.001). In addition, GGGs had higher predictive accuracy compared with the alternate classification system (improvement in concordance index by 0.036-0.141).
CONCLUSIONS: For the appropriate patient, depending on age, physical condition, early postoperative PSA, patient desire, etc., could be a candidate for wait and see policy with specimen GGG 2 disease, so to distinguish this from GGG 3 may facilitate discussions at the point of treatment decision making.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biochemical recurrence; Gleason grade; Pathology; Prostate cancer; Radiotherapy

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27650933     DOI: 10.1007/s00432-016-2262-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0171-5216            Impact factor:   4.553


  28 in total

1.  Cancer-specific survival and predictors of prostate-specific antigen recurrence and survival in patients with seminal vesicle invasion after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Fernando P Secin; Fernando J Bianco; Andrew J Vickers; Victor Reuter; Thomas Wheeler; Paul A Fearn; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Impact of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy after radical prostatectomy on the survival of patients with pathological T3b prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sameer A Siddiqui; Stephen A Boorjian; Michael L Blute; Laureano J Rangel; Eric J Bergstralh; Robert Jeffrey Karnes; Igor Frank
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  T Y Chan; A W Partin; P C Walsh; J I Epstein
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 4.  The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 5.  Risk of Gleason grade inaccuracies in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance.

Authors:  Ronald H Shapiro; Peter A S Johnstone
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95.

Authors:  Thomas Wiegel; Dirk Bottke; Ursula Steiner; Alessandra Siegmann; Reinhard Golz; Stephan Störkel; Norman Willich; Axel Semjonow; Rainer Souchon; Michael Stöckle; Christian Rübe; Lothar Weissbach; Peter Althaus; Udo Rebmann; Tilman Kälble; Horst Jürgen Feldmann; Manfred Wirth; Axel Hinke; Wolfgang Hinkelbein; Kurt Miller
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3?

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

8.  Evaluation of the 2015 Gleason Grade Groups in a Nationwide Population-based Cohort.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Yasin Folkvaljon; David Robinson; Ingela Franck Lissbrant; Lars Egevad; Pär Stattin
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of followup.

Authors:  J I Epstein; M Carmichael; A W Partin; P C Walsh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  The use of early postoperative prostate-specific antigen to stratify risk in patients with positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stepan Vesely; Ladislav Jarolim; Katerina Duskova; Marek Schmidt; Pavel Dusek; Marko Babjuk
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 2.264

View more
  3 in total

1.  Cell cycle progression score improves risk stratification in prostate cancer patients with adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Xun Shangguan; Hongyang Qian; Zhou Jiang; Zhixiang Xin; Jiahua Pan; Baijun Dong; Wei Xue
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 2.  Positive surgical margin is associated with biochemical recurrence risk following radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis from high-quality retrospective cohort studies.

Authors:  Lijin Zhang; Bin Wu; Zhenlei Zha; Hu Zhao; Yuefang Jiang; Jun Yuan
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 2.754

3.  The impact of lymphovascular invasion in patients with prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy and its association with their clinicopathological features: An updated PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wei Jiang; Lijin Zhang; Bin Wu; Zhenlei Zha; Hu Zhao; Yuan Jun; Yuefang Jiang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.817

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.