Literature DB >> 29460290

Extent of lymph node dissection improves survival in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy without lymph node invasion.

Felix Preisser1,2, Marco Bandini2,3, Michele Marchioni2,4, Sebastiano Nazzani2,5, Zhe Tian2, Raisa S Pompe1,2, Nicola Fossati3, Alberto Briganti3, Fred Saad2, Shahrokh F Shariat6, Hans Heinzer1, Hartwig Huland1, Markus Graefen1, Derya Tilki1,7, Pierre I Karakiewicz2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) extent on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients without lymph node invasion (LNI) treated with radical prostatectomy (RP).
METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End results (SEER) database (2004-2014), we identified patients with D'Amico intermediate- or high-risk characteristics who underwent RP with PLND, without evidence of LNI. First, multivariable logistic regression models tested for predictors of more extensive PLND, defined as removed lymph node count (NRN) ≥75th percentile. Second, Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models tested the effect of NRN ≥75th percentile on CSM. Finally, survival analyses were repeated using continuously coded NRN.
RESULTS: In 28 147 RP and PLND patients without LNI, 67.3% versus 32.7% exhibited D'Amico intermediate- or high-risk characteristics. The median NRN was 6 (IQR 3-10), the 75th percentile defined patients with NRN ≥11. Patients with NRN ≥11 had higher rate of cT2/3 stage (29.8 vs 26.1%), GS ≥8 (25.7 vs 22.4%), and respectively more frequently exhibited D'Amico high-risk characteristics (34.6 vs 32.1%). In multivariable logistic regression models predicting the probability of more extensive PLND (NRN ≥11), higher biopsy GS, higher cT stage, higher PSA, more recent year of diagnosis, and younger age at diagnosis represented independent predictors. At 72 months after RP, CSM-free rates were 99.5 versus 98.1% for NRN ≥11 and NRN ≤10, respectively and resulted in a HR of 0.50 (P = 0.01), after adjustment for all covariates. Similarly, continuously coded NRN achieved independent predictor status (HR: 0.955, P = 0.01), where each additional removed lymph node reduced CSM risk by 4.5%.
CONCLUSION: More extensive PLND at RP provides improved staging information and consequently is associated with lower CSM in D'Amico intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients without evidence of LNI. Hence, more extensive PLND should be recommended in such individuals.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  SEER registry; cancer-specific survival; lymph node dissection; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29460290     DOI: 10.1002/pros.23491

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate        ISSN: 0270-4137            Impact factor:   4.104


  9 in total

Review 1.  Sentinel node evaluation in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ramkishen Narayanan; Timothy G Wilson
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 5.150

2.  Significance of examined lymph-node count in accurate staging and long-term survival in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a population-based study.

Authors:  Cheng Chen; Jie Shen; Zhaoyu Xing; Changchuan Jiang; Linkun Hu; Li Cui; Dong Xue; Xiaozhou He; Renfang Xu
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Recommendations on robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a Brazilian experts' consensus.

Authors:  Eliney Ferreira Faria; Carlos Vaz Melo Maciel; André Berger; Anuar Mitre; Breno Dauster; Celso Heitor Freitas; Clovis Fraga; Daher Chade; Marcos Dall'Oglio; Francisco Carvalho; Franz Campos; Gustavo Franco Carvalhal; Gustavo Caserta Lemos; Gustavo Guimarães; Hamilton Zampolli; Joao Ricardo Alves; Joao Pádua Manzano; Marco Antônio Fortes; Marcos Flavio Holanda Rocha; Mauricio Rubinstein; Murilo Luz; Pedro Romanelli; Rafael Coelho; Raphael Rocha; Roberto Dias Machado; Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis; Stenio Zequi; Romulo Guida; Valdair Muglia; Marcos Tobias-Machado
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-01-11

4.  Diagnostic Value, Oncologic Outcomes, and Safety Profile of Image-Guided Surgery Technologies During Robot-Assisted Lymph Node Dissection with Sentinel Node Biopsy for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Elio Mazzone; Paolo Dell'Oglio; Nikos Grivas; Esther Wit; Maarten Donswijk; Alberto Briganti; Fijs Van Leeuwen; Henk van der Poel
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Elective pelvic irradiation in prostate cancer patients with biochemical failure following radical prostatectomy: A propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Changhoon Song; Sang Jun Byun; Young Seok Kim; Hanjong Ahn; Seok-Soo Byun; Choung-Soo Kim; Sang Eun Lee; Jae-Sung Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Embryological Development and Topographic Anatomy of Pelvic Compartments-Surgical Relevance for Pelvic Lymphonodectomy.

Authors:  Andreas Bayer; Tillmann Heinze; Ibrahim Alkatout; Daniar Osmonov; Sigmar Stelzner; Thilo Wedel
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Identifying the Candidates Who Will Benefit From Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection at Radical Prostatectomy Among Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Guanjie Yang; Jun Xie; Yadong Guo; Jing Yuan; Ruiliang Wang; Changcheng Guo; Bo Peng; Xudong Yao; Bin Yang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Diagnostic significance of reassessment of prostate biopsy specimens by experienced urological pathologists at a high-volume institution.

Authors:  Yoichiro Okubo; Yayoi Yamamoto; Shinya Sato; Emi Yoshioka; Masaki Suzuki; Kota Washimi; Kimito Osaka; Takahisa Suzuki; Tomoyuki Yokose; Takeshi Kishida; Yohei Miyagi
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.535

Review 9.  Pelvic lymph node dissection in high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Luciano Haiquel; Xavier Cathelineau; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Petr Macek; Fernando Secin
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.