Literature DB >> 9146618

Has there been a recent shift in the pathological features and prognosis of patients treated with radical prostatectomy?

S Soh1, M W Kattan, S Berkman, T M Wheeler, P T Scardino.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determined if there has been a significant change in pathological stage or prognosis of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy between 1983 and 1995. During this period the methods of detection of prostate cancer changed to include, in recent years, a large proportion of nonpalpable cancers detected by prostate specific antigen (PSA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The method of diagnosis, pathological features and prognosis (PSA detected progression-free probability) of 754 consecutive patients treated by 1 surgeon for clinical stages T1 to 3NXMO prostate cancer from 1983 to 1995 were analyzed by year of diagnosis.
RESULTS: There was a marked increase in the annual number of radical prostatectomies performed with time. The proportion of cancers initially detected by transurethral resection decreased markedly after 1989. Beginning in 1990 nonpalpable cancers detected by PSA increased substantially to 52% by 1995. However, there was no significant change in preoperative serum PSA, tumor volume or pathological stage during the study period. The proportion of patients with well differentiated cancer decreased somewhat, while those with moderate to poorly differentiated (Gleason sum 7) cancers increased significantly after 1991. There was no increase with time in the proportion of patients with a small (less than 0.5 cm.3), well or moderately differentiated (Gleason grades 1 to 3) cancer confined to the prostate (an indolent or clinically unimportant cancer) but fewer patients in recent years had an advanced cancer (established extraprostatic extension with a positive surgical margin, seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node metastases). The actuarial probability of progression after surgery was similar for patients treated from 1983 to 1987, 1988 to 1991 and 1992 to 1995.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite marked changes in the number of patients treated each year and the method by which cancers were first detected, we found no change in pathological stage or prognosis (progression rate) for patients treated with radical prostatectomy between 1983 and 1995. Despite concerns that the increased detection of prostate cancer could lead to many more patients being treated unnecessarily for small, indolent cancers, we found no increase in the proportion of such cancers with time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9146618

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  10 in total

1.  PET/CT imaging of recurrent prostate cancer.

Authors:  B Scher; M Seitz
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Significance of the percentage of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer as a predictor of disease extension in radical prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men.

Authors:  Iori Sakai; Ken-ichi Harada; Isao Hara; Hiroshi Eto; Hideaki Miyake
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel and CG1940/CG8711 followed by radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jacqueline Vuky; John M Corman; Christopher Porter; Semra Olgac; Evan Auerbach; Kathryn Dahl
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-06-05

4.  Shift of tumor features in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy since the beginning of the PSA era.

Authors:  Herbert Augustin; Marco Auprich; Philipp Stummvoll; Katja Lipsky; Karl Pummer; Peter Petritsch
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 1.704

5.  Restricted water diffusibility as measured by diffusion-weighted MR imaging and choline uptake in (11)C-choline PET/CT are correlated in pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ambros J Beer; Matthias Eiber; Michael Souvatzoglou; Konstantin Holzapfel; Carl Ganter; Gregor Weirich; Tobias Maurer; Hubert Kübler; Hans-Juergen Wester; Jochen Gaa; Bernd J Krause
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 6.  [Relevance of radiological imaging for lymph node surgery of urological tumors].

Authors:  J Stattaus; M Forsting
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  The independent value of tumour volume in a contemporary cohort of men treated with radical prostatectomy for clinically localized disease.

Authors:  Sima P Porten; Matthew R Cooperberg; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 8.  Epigenetic alterations in human prostate cancers.

Authors:  William G Nelson; Angelo M De Marzo; Srinivasan Yegnasubramanian
Journal:  Endocrinology       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 4.736

9.  Nomogram to predict insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in Korean men: a multi-center study.

Authors:  Jae Seung Chung; Han Yong Choi; Hae-Ryoung Song; Seok-Soo Byun; Seong Il Seo; Cheryn Song; Jin Seon Cho; Sang Eun Lee; Hanjong Ahn; Eun Sik Lee; Tae-Kon Hwang; Wun-Jae Kim; Moon Kee Chung; Tae Young Jung; Ho Song Yu; Young Deuk Choi
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.759

10.  The long-term outcomes after radical prostatectomy of patients with pathologic Gleason 8-10 disease.

Authors:  Dan Lewinshtein; Brandon Teng; Ashley Valencia; Robert Gibbons; Christopher R Porter
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2011-09-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.