nach oben

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

14.10.2019 | Original Article – Clinical Oncology

Postoperative biochemical recurrence of pathologically localized high-grade prostate cancer in adjuvant treatment-naïve patients

verfasst von: Ji Eun Heo, Jee Soo Park, Jong Soo Lee, Jongchan Kim, Won Sik Jang, Nam Hoon Cho, Koon Ho Rha, Young Deuk Choi, Sung Joon Hong, Won Sik Ham

Erschienen in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate biochemical recurrence (BCR) risk in men with localized prostate cancer (PC) of pathological Gleason score (pGS) 8–10. Although such patients have low BCR-free survival (BCRFS) following radical prostatectomy (RP), they are not recommended for adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) as per current guidelines.

Methods

Among an adjuvant treatment-naïve cohort between 1995 and 2015, 1272 men were identified and categorized into group 1 [pGS7 (3 + 4) and pT3; n = 654], group 2 [pGS7 (4 + 3) and pT3; n = 408], and group 3 (pGS 8–10 and pT2; n = 210). The BCR risk of group 3 was compared with that of groups 1 and 2 who are the candidates for ART.

Results

At a median follow-up of 60 months (interquartile range: 39–86), 432 men experienced BCR. BCRFS was lower in group 3 than in groups 1 and 2 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.021, respectively). In multivariate analysis, this association persisted and surgical margin (SM) was found to be a significant BCR predictor. Although statistically not significant, BCRFS was lower in group 3 with positive SM (PSM) than in group 2 with PSM (p = 0.101). BCRFS was significantly worse in group 3 with negative SM (NSM) than in group 1 with PSM (p = 0.038), while it was better in group 2 with PSM (p = 0.297).

Conclusion

Localized high-grade PC with PSM showed lower BCRFS and that with NSM showed better BCRFS without statistical significance than locally advanced GS 7 PC with PSM that are eligible for ART.

American Joint Committee on C, Amin MB (2017) AJCC cancer staging manual. Springer, New York

Bolla M et al (2012) Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 380:2018–2027. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61253-7 CrossRefPubMed

Chang SS, Cookson MS (2006) Impact of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Urology 68:249–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.03.053 CrossRefPubMed

Cookson MS et al (2007) Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol 177:540–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.097 CrossRefPubMed

Cooperberg MR, Hilton JF, Carroll PR (2011) The CAPRA-S score: a straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 117:5039–5046CrossRef

Cornford P et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 71:630–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.002 CrossRefPubMed

D’Amico AV et al (1998) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280:969–974CrossRef

de la Taille A, Flam TA, Thiounn N, Pontvert D, Saighi D, Zerbib M, Debre B (2002) Predictive factors of radiation therapy for patients with prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 90:887–892CrossRef

Eisenberg MS, Karnes RJ, Kaushik D, Rangel L, Bergstralh EJ, Boorjian SA (2013) Risk stratification of patients with extraprostatic extension and negative lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy: identifying optimal candidates for adjuvant therapy. J Urol 190:1735–1741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.053 CrossRefPubMed

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Grading C (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 40:244–252PubMed

Fischer S et al (2016) Do all men with pathological Gleason score 8-10 prostate cancer have poor outcomes? Results from the SEARCH database. BJU Int 118:250–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13319 CrossRefPubMed

Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (2003) Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169:517–523. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000045749.90353.c7 CrossRefPubMed

Jang WS, Kim LH, Yoon CY, Rha KH, Choi YD, Hong SJ, Ham WS (2016) Effect of preoperative risk group stratification on oncologic outcomes of patients with adverse pathologic findings at radical prostatectomy. PLoS One 11:e0164497. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164497 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kamat AM, Babaian K, Cheung MR, Naya Y, Huang SH, Kuban D, Babaian RJ (2003) Identification of factors predicting response to adjuvant radiation therapy in patients with positive margins after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 170:1860–1863. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000092503.45951.c2 CrossRefPubMed

Kim SP et al (2013) Variation in treatment recommendations of adjuvant radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer by physician specialty. Urology 82:807–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.04.060 CrossRefPubMed

Lau WK, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Slezak JM, Zincke H (2002) Radical prostatectomy for pathological Gleason 8 or greater prostate cancer: influence of concomitant pathological variables. J Urol 167:117–122CrossRef

Menon M et al (2010) Biochemical recurrence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of 1384 patients with a median 5-year follow-up. Eur Urol 58:838–846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.09.010 CrossRefPubMed

Mian BM, Troncoso P, Okihara K, Bhadkamkar V, Johnston D, Reyes AO, Babaian RJ (2002) Outcome of patients with Gleason score 8 or higher prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy alone. J Urol. 167:1675–1680CrossRef

Mohler JL et al (2016) Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 14:19–30CrossRef

Pisansky TM, Thompson IM, Valicenti RK, D’Amico AV, Selvarajah S (2019) Adjuvant and Salvage Radiotherapy after Prostatectomy: ASTRO/AUA Guideline Amendment 2018–2019. J Urol 202:533–538. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000000295 CrossRefPubMed

Pound CR, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (1997) Prostate-specific antigen after anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Patterns of recurrence and cancer control. Urol Clin North Am 24:395–406CrossRef

Showalter TN et al (2012) Physician beliefs and practices for adjuvant and salvage radiation therapy after prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82:e233–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.04.003 CrossRefPubMed

Suardi N et al (2012) Long-term biochemical recurrence rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of a single-center series of patients with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Urology 79:133–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.08.045 CrossRefPubMed

Swanson GP, Riggs M, Hermans M (2007) Pathologic findings at radical prostatectomy: risk factors for failure and death. Urol Oncol 25:110–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2006.06.003 CrossRefPubMed

Thompson IM et al (2004) Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level < or = 4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med 350:2239–2246. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa031918 CrossRefPubMed

Thompson IM et al (2013) Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: AUA/ASTRO Guideline. J Urol 190:441–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.032 CrossRefPubMed

Van der Kwast TH et al (2007) Identification of patients with prostate cancer who benefit from immediate postoperative radiotherapy: EORTC 22911. J Clin Oncol 25:4178–4186. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.10.4067 CrossRefPubMed

Van Poppel H, Goethuys H, Callewaert P, Vanuytsel L, Van de Voorde W, Baert L (2000) Radical prostatectomy can provide a cure for well-selected clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 38:372–379. https://doi.org/10.1159/000020311 CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Postoperative biochemical recurrence of pathologically localized high-grade prostate cancer in adjuvant treatment-naïve patients
verfasst von: Ji Eun Heo
Jee Soo Park
Jong Soo Lee
Jongchan Kim
Won Sik Jang
Nam Hoon Cho
Koon Ho Rha
Young Deuk Choi
Sung Joon Hong
Won Sik Ham
Publikationsdatum: 14.10.2019
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology
Print ISSN: 0171-5216
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1335
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-019-03049-0

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Postoperative biochemical recurrence of pathologically localized high-grade prostate cancer in adjuvant treatment-naïve patients

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Alphablocker schützt vor Miktionsproblemen nach der Biopsie

Antikörper-Wirkstoff-Konjugat hält solide Tumoren in Schach

Mammakarzinom: Senken Statine das krebsbedingte Sterberisiko?

Labor, CT-Anthropometrie zeigen Risiko für Pankreaskrebs

Update Onkologie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Alphablocker schützt vor Miktionsproblemen nach der Biopsie

Antikörper-Wirkstoff-Konjugat hält solide Tumoren in Schach

Mammakarzinom: Senken Statine das krebsbedingte Sterberisiko?

Labor, CT-Anthropometrie zeigen Risiko für Pankreaskrebs

Update Onkologie