Literature DB >> 9850175

Cancer volume of lymph node metastasis predicts progression in prostate cancer.

L Cheng1, E J Bergstralh, J C Cheville, J Slezak, F A Corica, H Zincke, M L Blute, D G Bostwick.   

Abstract

Clinical outcome is variable in prostate cancer patients with regional lymph node metastasis. We studied 269 patients who had regional lymph node metastasis at the time of radical retropubic prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy at the Mayo Clinic between January 1987 and December 1992. Two hundred fifty-three (94%) patients received androgen deprivation therapy within 90 days of radical prostatectomy. Patients ranged in age from 47 to 79 years (median, 67 years). Median follow-up was 6.1 years (range, 0.3-10.5 years). Nodal cancer volume (size) was measured by the grid-counting method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the impact of numerous clinical and pathologic findings on systemic progression-free survival. Systemic progression was defined as the presence of distant metastasis documented by biopsies or radiographic examinations (abdominal computerized tomography, plain radiographs, or bone scan). Five-year progression-free survival was 90%. In predicting systemic progression using Cox multivariate analysis, only nodal cancer volume added significantly to the model containing the primary cancer variables (Gleason score, cancer volume, and DNA ploidy). The relative hazard rate for a doubling in nodal cancer volume was 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 2.0; p < 0.0001). Spearman rank analysis showed a correlation between nodal cancer volume and Gleason score of the primary cancer, the number of positive nodes, the aggregate length of metastases, and the largest nodal cancer diameter (correlation efficient = 0.37, 0.63, 0.96, and 0.95, respectively). Our data indicate that nodal cancer volume was the most significant nodal determinant of progression to distant metastasis in lymph node-positive prostate cancer patients. We recommend that the diameter of the largest metastasis be evaluated in patients with metastases, because this is a more powerful predictor of patient outcome than current methods, which recommend mere counting of the number of positive nodes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9850175     DOI: 10.1097/00000478-199812000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  13 in total

Review 1.  What is the pathologist saying? Interpretation of the prostate pathology report.

Authors:  Omar Hameed
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  [Diagnostics of radical prostatectomy specimens. Results of the 2009 consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology].

Authors:  G Kristiansen; J R Srigley; B Delahunt; L Egevad
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.011

3.  Histological step sectioning of pelvic lymph nodes increases the number of identified lymph node metastases.

Authors:  Birte Engvad; Mads H Poulsen; Pia W Staun; Steen Walter; Niels Marcussen
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 4.064

4.  Integrating chemohormonal therapy and surgery in known or suspected lymph node metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  A J Zurita; L L Pisters; X Wang; P Troncoso; P Dieringer; J F Ward; J W Davis; C A Pettaway; C J Logothetis; L C Pagliaro
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 5.554

5.  A Phase I Dosing Study of Ferumoxytol for MR Lymphography at 3 T in Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Harsh K Agarwal; Joanna Shih; Marcelino Bernardo; Yolanda L McKinney; Dagane Daar; Gary L Griffiths; Sandeep Sankineni; Linda Johnson; Kinzya B Grant; Juanita Weaver; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Mukesh Harisinghani; Paula Jacobs; William Dahut; Maria J Merino; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Defining the radiobiology of prostate cancer progression: An important question in translational prostate cancer research.

Authors:  Srinivas Vourganti; Jeffrey Donaldson; Linda Johnson; Baris Turkbey; Gennady Bratslavsky; Leszek Kotula
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2014-05-30

7.  Detection of Lymph Node Metastases with SERRS Nanoparticles.

Authors:  Massimiliano Spaliviero; Stefan Harmsen; Ruimin Huang; Matthew A Wall; Chrysafis Andreou; James A Eastham; Karim A Touijer; Peter T Scardino; Moritz F Kircher
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.488

8.  Pathological features of lymph node metastasis for predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sigrid V Carlsson; Laura J Tafe; Daher C Chade; Daniel D Sjoberg; Niccolo Passoni; Shahrokh F Shariat; James Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Samson W Fine; Karim A Touijer
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  The tumor microenvironment in prostate cancer: elucidating molecular pathways for therapy development.

Authors:  Paul G Corn
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 3.989

10.  Stratifying prostate cancer patients by relative lymph node involvement: population- and modeling-based study.

Authors:  Jan T Poleszczuk; Peter A Johnstone; Heiko Enderling
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.