Literature DB >> 31553506

Impact of positive surgical margin length and Gleason grade at the margin on biochemical recurrence in patients with organ-confined prostate cancer.

Felix Preisser1,2, Gilberto Coxilha1, Alexander Heinze1, Su Oh1, Felix K-H Chun2, Guido Sauter3, Raisa S Pompe4, Hartwig Huland1, Markus Graefen1, Derya Tilki1,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Positive surgical margins (PSMs) represent a poor prognostic factor at radical prostatectomy (RP). To investigate the impact of PSM, its length, the focality, and the PSM Gleason, on biochemical recurrence (BCR) in organ-confined RP patients.
METHODS: Within a high-volume center database, we identified patients who harbored organ-confined (pathologic stage T2 disease) prostate cancer (PCa) at RP (2010-2016). Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models were used to test the effect of the PSM on the BCR risk.
RESULTS: Overall, 8770 patients were identified. Of those, 6.6% (n = 579) harbored PSM. BCR-free survival at 72 months after RP was 77.7% vs 89.0% for patients with vs without PSM (P < .001). BCR-free survival rates at 72 months were 77.4% vs 73.6% (P = .1) for unifocal vs multifocal PSM, 77.2% vs 71.8% (P = .03) for Gleason pattern 3 vs ≥4 at the margin and 88.4% vs 66.3% (P < .001) for <3 vs ≥3 mm length of margin. In multivariable Cox models PSM was an independent predictor for BCR (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.40, P < .001). However, in subgroups with PSM, only ≥3 mm PSM represented an independent predictor (HR = 1.93, P = .04), while focality and Gleason at the margin were no significant predictors.
CONCLUSION: PSM represents an independent predictor for BCR in organ-confined PCa at RP. Moreover, Gleason ≥4 at the margin and ≥3 mm PSM length were associated with worse BCR-free survival. Closer surveillance of patients with organ-confined PCa at RP and PSM can help to identify those who qualify for early salvage radiotherapy.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PSM; biochemical recurrence; positive surgical margin; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31553506     DOI: 10.1002/pros.23908

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


  12 in total

1.  Neoadjuvant Chemohormonal Therapy in Prostate Cancer Before Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Qingyu Ge; Hewei Xu; Dezhou Yue; Zongyao Fan; Zhengsen Chen; Jie Xu; Yiduo Zhou; Sicong Zhang; Jun Xue; Baixin Shen; Zhongqing Wei
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 5.738

2.  Tumor Biological Feature and Its Association with Positive Surgical Margins and Apical Margins after Radical Prostatectomy in Non-Metastasis Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Shuo Wang; Peng Du; Yudong Cao; Xiao Yang; Yong Yang
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Intraoperative assessment and reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens to guide nerve-sparing surgery in prostate cancer patients (NeuroSAFE).

Authors:  Margaretha A van der Slot; Michael A den Bakker; Sjoerd Klaver; Mike Kliffen; Martijn B Busstra; John B W Rietbergen; Melanie Gan; Karen E Hamoen; Leo M Budel; Natascha N T Goemaere; Chris H Bangma; Jozien Helleman; Monique J Roobol; Geert J L H van Leenders
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 4.  Radical or Not-So-Radical Prostatectomy: Do Surgical Margins Matter?

Authors:  Ioanna Maria Grypari; Vasiliki Zolota; Vasiliki Tzelepi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 6.639

5.  Impact of Gleason score of the tumor at the positive surgical margin as a prognostic factor.

Authors:  Hirofumi Kurose; Kosuke Ueda; Naoyuki Ogasawara; Katsuaki Chikui; Makoto Nakiri; Kiyoaki Nishihara; Mitsunori Matsuo; Shigetaka Suekane; Hironori Kusano; Jun Akiba; Hirohisa Yano; Tsukasa Igawa
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-02-10

6.  Impact of Dose Escalation on the Efficacy of Salvage Radiotherapy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer-A Risk-Adjusted, Matched-Pair Analysis.

Authors:  Dirk Böhmer; Alessandra Siegmann; Sophia Scharl; Christian Ruf; Thomas Wiegel; Manuel Krafcsik; Reinhard Thamm
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  NeuroSAFE PROOF: study protocol for a single-blinded, IDEAL stage 3, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of NeuroSAFE robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Eoin Dinneen; Jack Grierson; Ricardo Almeida-Magana; Rosie Clow; Aiman Haider; Clare Allen; Daniel Heffernan-Ho; Alex Freeman; Tim Briggs; Senthil Nathan; Susan Mallett; Chris Brew-Graves; Nicola Muirhead; Norman R Williams; Elena Pizzo; Raj Persad; Jon Aning; Lyndsey Johnson; Jon Oxley; Neil Oakley; Susan Morgan; Fawzia Tahir; Imran Ahmad; Lorenzo Dutto; Jonathan M Salmond; Anand Kelkar; John Kelly; Greg Shaw
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 2.728

8.  Clinical utility of subclassifying positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Shawn Dason; Emily A Vertosick; Kazuma Udo; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers; Hikmat Al-Ahmadie; Ying-Bei Chen; Anuradha Gopalan; S Joseph Sirintrapun; Satish K Tickoo; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Victor E Reuter; Samson W Fine
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2021-07-11       Impact factor: 5.969

9.  Impact of positive surgical margin location and perineural invasion on biochemical recurrence in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Zhenpeng Lian; Hongtuan Zhang; Zhaowei He; Shenfei Ma; Xiaoming Wang; Ranlu Liu
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 2.754

10.  Transvesical Versus Posterior Approach to Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Retrospective Comparison With a 12-Month Follow-Up.

Authors:  Wen Deng; Cheng Zhang; Hao Jiang; Yulei Li; Ke Zhu; Xiaoqiang Liu; Luyao Chen; Weipeng Liu; Ju Guo; Xiaochen Zhou; Bin Fu; Gongxian Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.