BACKGROUND: Various criteria for patients with prostate cancer have been reported to be of prognostic value, and we have reported that estimates of volume-weighted mean nuclear volume (MNV), developed by Gundersen and Jensen based on a stereological technique, accurately predict the prognosis of prostate cancer. However, all of these studies were conducted on cases in a single institution, and it has remained unclear whether MNV calculations obtained at one institution apply to cases at another institution. In attempting to solve this problem, we made a prognostic index (P.I.) based on data from one hospital, and tested whether these data could be used to predict the prognosis of patients at another hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, multivariate prognostic study of 195 patients with prostate cancer, diagnosed at Kyoto University Hospital and treated conservatively, indicated that clinical stage, Gleason score, and MNV were all significantly correlated with the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer. From the relative strengths of these prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis, the following P.I. was constructed: P.I. = Clinical stage x 1.8040 + Gleason score x 1.5245 + MNV x 2.3162 (the constants correspond to the risk ratio estimated by Cox analysis). The P.I. was calculated for 104 patients with prostate cancer diagnosed at Shizuoka City Hospital and treated conservatively for analysis of disease-specific survival. RESULTS: The prognostic index ranged from 3.841-16.142. Using the median value of 12.5 as a cutoff point, a clear separation of cases with poor and favorable prognosis was achieved (P < 0.0001, observation period: 1-167 months). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that estimates of MNV can be evaluated at multiple institutions with the use of P.I. calculation. Furthermore, combining estimates of MNV with Gleason score and clinical stage predicts most powerfully disease outcome of patients with prostate cancer.
BACKGROUND: Various criteria for patients with prostate cancer have been reported to be of prognostic value, and we have reported that estimates of volume-weighted mean nuclear volume (MNV), developed by Gundersen and Jensen based on a stereological technique, accurately predict the prognosis of prostate cancer. However, all of these studies were conducted on cases in a single institution, and it has remained unclear whether MNV calculations obtained at one institution apply to cases at another institution. In attempting to solve this problem, we made a prognostic index (P.I.) based on data from one hospital, and tested whether these data could be used to predict the prognosis of patients at another hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, multivariate prognostic study of 195 patients with prostate cancer, diagnosed at Kyoto University Hospital and treated conservatively, indicated that clinical stage, Gleason score, and MNV were all significantly correlated with the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer. From the relative strengths of these prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis, the following P.I. was constructed: P.I. = Clinical stage x 1.8040 + Gleason score x 1.5245 + MNV x 2.3162 (the constants correspond to the risk ratio estimated by Cox analysis). The P.I. was calculated for 104 patients with prostate cancer diagnosed at Shizuoka City Hospital and treated conservatively for analysis of disease-specific survival. RESULTS: The prognostic index ranged from 3.841-16.142. Using the median value of 12.5 as a cutoff point, a clear separation of cases with poor and favorable prognosis was achieved (P < 0.0001, observation period: 1-167 months). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that estimates of MNV can be evaluated at multiple institutions with the use of P.I. calculation. Furthermore, combining estimates of MNV with Gleason score and clinical stage predicts most powerfully disease outcome of patients with prostate cancer.