Literature DB >> 29802773

Effects of pathological upstaging or upgrading on metastasis and cancer-specific mortality in men with clinical low-risk prostate cancer.

Evan Kovac1, Emily A Vertosick2, Daniel D Sjoberg2, Andrew J Vickers2, Andrew J Stephenson1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine if the presence of adverse pathological features in patients eligible for active surveillance (AS) are prognostic of poor oncological outcomes, independent of pretreatment risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at two institutions (Cleveland Clinic Foundation and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center) between 1987 and 2008, and who had subsequent follow-up. Rates of biochemical recurrence, metastasis and death from prostate cancer were compared amongst patients with adverse pathological features (Gleason score ≥7, ≥pT3, or lymph node invasion) based on D'Amico clinical risk (low vs intermediate/high). We also compared survival outcomes between patients with and without pathological upgrading/upstaging amongst D'Amico low-risk patients. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association between clinical risk, pathological reclassification, and oncological outcomes.
RESULTS: We identified 16 341 patients who underwent RP, of whom 6 371 were clinically low-risk. Adverse outcomes in men with adverse pathological features were significantly lower in those with low clinical risk, with an ~50% and ~70% reduction in the risk of metastasis and death, respectively. Only pathological upgrading/upstaging to Gleason score ≥8, seminal vesicle invasion, and lymph node invasion from clinical low-risk disease, were associated with adverse outcomes. However, these types of reclassification were rare.
CONCLUSION: Clinical low-risk patients with pathological upgrading/upstaging have substantially lower rates of important oncological outcomes compared to those with higher pretreatment risk and not substantially different than low-risk patients without pathological upgrading/upstaging. These results call into question the use of this endpoint to counsel patients about the merits and risks of AS.
© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; clinical risk; pathological upgrading; pathological upstaging; radical prostatectomy; survival outcomes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29802773      PMCID: PMC6737926          DOI: 10.1111/bju.14418

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  8 in total

1.  Active surveillance before radiotherapy: Outcome and predictive factors for multiple biopsies before treatment.

Authors:  Alexandre Alcaidinho; Guila Delouya; Jean-Paul Bahary; Fred Saad; Daniel Taussky
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Local Extent of Prostate Cancer at MRI versus Prostatectomy Histopathology: Associations with Long-term Oncologic Outcomes.

Authors:  Andreas G Wibmer; Ines Nikolovski; Joshua Chaim; Yulia Lakhman; Robert A Lefkowitz; Evis Sala; Sigrid V Carlsson; Samson W Fine; Michael W Kattan; Hedvig Hricak; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  The Impact of Prostate Cancer Upgrading and Upstaging on Biochemical Recurrence and Cancer-Specific Survival.

Authors:  Arnas Bakavičius; Mingailė Drevinskaitė; Kristina Daniūnaitė; Marija Barisienė; Sonata Jarmalaitė; Feliksas Jankevičius
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 2.430

Review 4.  Old men with prostate cancer have higher risk of Gleason score upgrading and pathological upstaging after initial diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaochuan Wang; Yu Zhang; Zhengguo Ji; Peiqian Yang; Ye Tian
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  Predicting Gleason sum upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy pathology: a new nomogram and its internal validation.

Authors:  Xiaochuan Wang; Yu Zhang; Fengbo Zhang; Zhengguo Ji; Peiqian Yang; Ye Tian
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.264

6.  No significant difference in intermediate key outcomes in men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer managed by active surveillance.

Authors:  Karolina Cyll; Sven Löffeler; Birgitte Carlsen; Karin Skogstad; May Lisbeth Plathan; Martin Landquist; Erik Skaaheim Haug
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 4.996

7.  PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

Authors:  Alex Z Wang; Luke P O’Conno; Nitin K Yerram; Lori Long; Johnathan Zeng; Sherif Mehralivand; Stephanie A Harmon; Amir H Lebastchi; Michael Ahdoot; Patrick T Gomella; Sandeep Gurram; Peter L Choyke; Maria J Merino; Joanna H Shih; Bradford J Wood; Baris Turkbey; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Urinary DNA methylation biomarkers for prediction of prostate cancer upgrading and upstaging.

Authors:  Arnas Bakavicius; Kristina Daniunaite; Kristina Zukauskaite; Marija Barisiene; Sonata Jarmalaite; Feliksas Jankevicius
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 6.551

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.