Literature DB >> 31915914

Percent tumor volume vs American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system subclassification for predicting biochemical recurrence in patients with pathologic T2 prostate cancer.

Se Young Choi1, Byung Hoon Chi1, Bumjin Lim2, Yoon Soo Kyung2, Dalsan You2, In Gab Jeong2, Cheryn Song2, Jun Hyuk Hong2, Hanjong Ahn2, Choung-Soo Kim3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Here, we re-checked the American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition subclassification and confirmed the possibility of percent tumor volume as a prognostic factor for biochemical recurrence in the 8th edition subclassification.
METHODS: A total of 1073 patients with pathologic T2 stage disease who underwent radical prostatectomy were included. Exclusion criteria were neoadjuvant therapy and pathologic T3 and N1 disease. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox hazard regression was used to predict biochemical recurrence.
RESULTS: According to the 7th edition subclassification, 141 patients (13.1%) had T2a, 43 (4.0%) had T2b, and 889 (82.9%) had T2c disease. The 7th edition subclassification did not differ significantly on Kaplan-Meier analysis (p = 0.502). Mean percent tumor volume was 8.7 ± 8.0% (interquartile range, 5-10%). Percent tumor volume was positively correlated with initial prostate-specific antigen, grade group, surgical margin, and T2 subclassification (all p < 0.001). The 7th edition subclassification was not a significant factor, whereas percent tumor volume was (hazard ratio, 1.023; 95% confidence interval, 1.005-1.041; p = 0.0128) on multivariate analysis. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, percent tumor volume (> 7.5% vs ≤ 7.5%) differed significantly for biochemical recurrence-free survival (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The 7th edition pathologic T2 subclassification had poor prognostic value for biochemical recurrence in our cohort. Elimination of the 8th edition subclassification was suitable. Percent tumor volume classified biochemical recurrence prognosis in pathologic T2 stage. Therefore, percent tumor volume can be a candidate factor for the next T2 subclassification.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biochemical recurrence; Localized; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy; Staging; Tumor volume

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31915914     DOI: 10.1007/s00432-019-03085-w

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


  28 in total

1.  Do tumor volume, percent tumor volume predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yang Meng; He Li; Peng Xu; Jia Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-12-15

2.  Percentage of high-grade tumour volume does not meaningfully improve prediction of early biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy compared with Gleason score.

Authors:  Jens Hansen; Marco Bianchi; Maxine Sun; Michael Rink; Fabio Castiglione; Firas Abdollah; Thomas Steuber; Sascha A Ahyai; Stefan Steurer; Cosima Göbel; Massimo Freschi; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Margit Fisch; Markus Graefen; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Alberto Briganti; Felix K-H Chun
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Preoperative serum prostate specific antigen levels between 2 and 22 ng./ml. correlate poorly with post-radical prostatectomy cancer morphology: prostate specific antigen cure rates appear constant between 2 and 9 ng./ml.

Authors:  Thomas A Stamey; Iain M Johnstone; John E McNeal; Arthur Y Lu; Cheryl M Yemoto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Prostate cancer - major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.

Authors:  Mark K Buyyounouski; Peter L Choyke; Jesse K McKenney; Oliver Sartor; Howard M Sandler; Mahul B Amin; Michael W Kattan; Daniel W Lin
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Index tumor volume on MRI as a predictor of clinical and pathologic outcomes following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Dordaneh Sugano; Abhinav Sidana; Amit L Jain; Brian Calio; Sonia Gaur; Mahir Maruf; Maria Merino; Peter Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications.

Authors:  E T Ruijter; C A van de Kaa; J A Schalken; F M Debruyne; D J Ruiter
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 7.996

7.  Clonal progression of prostate cancers from Gleason grade 3 to grade 4.

Authors:  Adam G Sowalsky; Huihui Ye; Glenn J Bubley; Steven P Balk
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  Modification of the pT2 substage classification in prostate adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Mark Ettel; Max Kong; Peng Lee; Ming Zhou; Jonathan Melamed; Fang-Ming Deng
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2016-05-29       Impact factor: 3.466

9.  Distant invasive breast cancer recurrence risk in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive T1a and T1b node-negative localized breast cancer diagnosed from 2000 to 2006: a cohort from an integrated health care delivery system.

Authors:  Louis Fehrenbacher; Angela M Capra; Charles P Quesenberry; Regan Fulton; Parveen Shiraz; Laurel A Habel
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  M Ohori; T M Wheeler; M W Kattan; Y Goto; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  1 in total

1.  Can Tumour Volume Percentage in Radical Prostatectomy Predict Cancer Biochemical Recurrence? Determining a Cut-off Point and Composite Risk Factors Approach.

Authors:  Ahmad Alenezi; Mohamed Ismail; Christopher Eden
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2021-06-29
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.