Parth K Modi1, Megan Bock1, Sinae Kim2, Eric A Singer1, Rahul R Parikh3. 1. Section of Urologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ. 2. Biometrics Division, Department of Biostatistics, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ. Electronic address: parikhrr@cinj.rutgers.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is not recommended for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, the rate of PLND in this population is unknown. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Data Base for PCa patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2010 to 2013 and stratified them by D'Amico risk classification. We identified the frequency of PLND in low-risk patients and identified factors associated with receipt of PLND. Further, we determined the number of lymph nodes evaluated (quality) and proportion of patients with detected nodal metastatic disease (utility) in each risk group. RESULTS: Of 51,971 patients with low-risk PCa who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, 19,059 (36.7%) received PLND. Predictors of PLND in low-risk patients included rural residence (odds ratio [OR], 1.157; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.009-1.327), treatment at an academic center (OR, 1.492; 95% CI 1.188-1.874), and high-volume facility (OR, 1.327; 95% CI, 1.078-1.633). The mean number of lymph nodes obtained in low-risk patients was lower than in intermediate/high-risk patients (4.74 vs. 5.86, P < .0001). Lymph node positivity was identified in 0.4% of low-risk patients and 4.6% of intermediate/high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: While PLND is not recommended for low-risk PCa by clinical practice guidelines, it was performed frequently (36.7%) in a large hospital-based data set. PLND in this population was of lower quality (nodal yield) and had less utility of detecting nodal metastatic disease than PLND in intermediate/high-risk PCa. Treatment at a high-volume or academic center was associated with increased use of PLND. Reasons for the variation in practice patterns should be investigated to improve the value of PCa care.
INTRODUCTION: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is not recommended for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, the rate of PLND in this population is unknown. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Data Base for PCa patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2010 to 2013 and stratified them by D'Amico risk classification. We identified the frequency of PLND in low-risk patients and identified factors associated with receipt of PLND. Further, we determined the number of lymph nodes evaluated (quality) and proportion of patients with detected nodal metastatic disease (utility) in each risk group. RESULTS: Of 51,971 patients with low-risk PCa who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, 19,059 (36.7%) received PLND. Predictors of PLND in low-risk patients included rural residence (odds ratio [OR], 1.157; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.009-1.327), treatment at an academic center (OR, 1.492; 95% CI 1.188-1.874), and high-volume facility (OR, 1.327; 95% CI, 1.078-1.633). The mean number of lymph nodes obtained in low-risk patients was lower than in intermediate/high-risk patients (4.74 vs. 5.86, P < .0001). Lymph node positivity was identified in 0.4% of low-risk patients and 4.6% of intermediate/high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: While PLND is not recommended for low-risk PCa by clinical practice guidelines, it was performed frequently (36.7%) in a large hospital-based data set. PLND in this population was of lower quality (nodal yield) and had less utility of detecting nodal metastatic disease than PLND in intermediate/high-risk PCa. Treatment at a high-volume or academic center was associated with increased use of PLND. Reasons for the variation in practice patterns should be investigated to improve the value of PCa care.
Authors: Ian Thompson; James Brantley Thrasher; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Michael S Cookson; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine M Tangen Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Luis A Kluth; Evanguelos Xylinas; Malte Rieken; Felix K-H Chun; Harun Fajkovic; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Niccolo Passoni; Michael Herman; Yair Lotan; Christian Seitz; Paul Schramek; Mesut Remzi; Wolfgang Loidl; Bertrand Guillonneau; Morgan Rouprêt; Alberto Briganti; Douglas S Scherr; Markus Graefen; Ashutosh K Tewari; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Florian Rudolf Schroeck; Bruce L Jacobs; Sam B Bhayani; Paul L Nguyen; David Penson; Jim Hu Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-03-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Elyn H Wang; James B Yu; Cary P Gross; Robert Abouassaly; Edward E Cherullo; Marc C Smaldone; Nilay D Shah; Jonathon Kiechle; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Maxine Sun; Simon P Kim Journal: Urology Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: L S Mertens; R P Meijer; E van Werkhoven; A Bex; H G van der Poel; B W van Rhijn; W Meinhardt; S Horenblas Journal: World J Urol Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Alberto Briganti; Felix K-H Chun; Andrea Salonia; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Gallina; Luigi Filippo Da Pozzo; Marco Roscigno; Giuseppe Zanni; Luc Valiquette; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-08-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Izak Faiena; Viktor Y Dombrovskiy; Parth K Modi; Neal Patel; Rutveej Patel; Amirali H Salmasi; Jaspreet S Parihar; Eric A Singer; Isaac Y Kim Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Timothy A Masterson; Fernando J Bianco; Andrew J Vickers; Christopher J DiBlasio; Paul A Fearn; Farhang Rabbani; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Kushan D Radadia; Zorimar Rivera-Núñez; Sinae Kim; Nicholas J Farber; Joshua Sterling; Marissa Falkiewicz; Parth K Modi; Sharad Goyal; Rahul Parikh; Robert E Weiss; Isaac Y Kim; Sammy E Elsamra; Thomas L Jang; Eric A Singer Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 3.498