High percent tumor volume predicts biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in pathological stage T3a prostate cancer with a negative surgical margin

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 484-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalsan You ◽  
In Gab Jeong ◽  
Cheryn Song ◽  
Yong Mee Cho ◽  
Jun Hyuk Hong ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyeong Dong Yuk ◽  
Seok-Soo Byun ◽  
Sung Kyu Hong ◽  
Hakmin Lee

Abstract We evaluated the contribution of tumor volume (TV) to localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients’ prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 2,394 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized PCa. The effect of TV volume on prostate cancer patients' prognosis was analyzed through Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional analysis. The mean prostate volume for all patients was 36.5 ± 15.4 cc, and the mean TV was 5.9 ± 8.3 cc. A significant positive relationship was observed between the classification by risk group in D’ Amico risk classification and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group. (P < 0.001). The high TV showed significantly worse pathologic outcomes than the low TV in terms of high rates of extra-capsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and positive surgical margin (P < 0.05). The patients with high TV had significantly shorter biochemical recurrence-free survivals than those with low TV (P < 0.001). Finally, based on multivariate Cox-proportional analyses, TV was revealed to be an independent predictor of postoperative biochemical recurrence as both categorical (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13–1.78, P = 0.003] and continuous variables (HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.04–1.05, P < 0.001). TV was revealed to be an independent prognostic factor in the postoperative biochemical recurrence. Patients with a high number of positive core and longer tumor length were significantly related to higher TV.


2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (6) ◽  
pp. 890-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
F A Guliev

Aim. To study the role of postoperative parameters in predicting the probability of development of biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer with low pre-operative risk of its progression. Methods. 95 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy, were included in the study, the average age being 59.5±0.7 (44-76) years. The average levels of total and free prostate-specific antigen were 5.8±0.2 (1.71-9.9) and 1.03±0.07 (0.2-3.6) ng/ml respectively. Biochemical recurrence was defined as the level of prostate-specific antigen higher than 0.2 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy. Results. 8 (8.4%) patients during the follow-up period were diagnosed with biochemical recurrence. The average period to biochemical recurrence development was 45.8±6.7 (24-84) months. Pathomorphological examination revealed presence of tumor cells at surgical margin in 18 (18.9%) cases. Biochemical recurrence was diagnosed in 5 out of 77 (6.5%) patients with negative surgical margins and in 3 out of 18 (1.7%) patients with positive surgical margins. In our study, no correlation between the state of surgical margin and biochemical recurrence development was revealed (χ2=1.958; р=0.162). In the study group postoperative Gleason score was not prognostically significant as well (р=0.294). The average tumor volume in resected material was 11.8±1.0% (1-55%) of prostate volume (мм3). Extraprostatic extension was diagnosed in 10 (10.5%) cases. Results of univariate dispersion analysis of postoperative parameters revealed prognostic significance of tumor volume in removed specimen (р=0.007) and extracapsular extension (р=0.027). Conclusion. In our study we determined that tumor volume and extracapsular extention are independent risk factors for biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients with low pre-operative risk of disease progression.


2010 ◽  
Vol 184 (4) ◽  
pp. 1341-1346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Budäus ◽  
Hendrik Isbarn ◽  
Christian Eichelberg ◽  
Giovanni Lughezzani ◽  
Maxine Sun ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryn Song ◽  
Taejin Kang ◽  
Sangjun Yoo ◽  
In Gab Jeong ◽  
Jae Y. Ro ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Numbereye Numbere ◽  
Yuki Teramoto ◽  
Pratik M. S. Gurung ◽  
Takuro Goto ◽  
Zhiming Yang ◽  
...  

Context.— Seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) by prostate cancer (pT3b disease) has been considered as a key prognostic factor. Objective.— To assess the clinical impact of T3a lesions (ie, extraprostatic extension other than bladder neck invasion [BNI] or SVI [EPE], microscopic bladder neck invasion [mBNI]) in pT3b disease. Design.— We compared radical prostatectomy findings and long-term oncologic outcomes in 248 patients with pT3b disease, with versus without EPE/mBNI. Results.— Extraprostatic extension/mBNI was found in 219 (88.3%)/48 (19.4%) cases, respectively. Extraprostatic extension was significantly associated with higher preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, higher rates of positive surgical margin (pSM) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and larger tumor volume. Similarly, mBNI was significantly associated with higher PSA level, higher rates of Grade Group(s) 4-5 or 5, pSM, LVI, and pN1, and larger tumor volume. Significant differences in all of these clinicopathologic features (except lymph node metastasis) between EPE−/mBNI+ or EPE+/mBNI− and EPE+/mBNI+ cases were also observed. Outcome analysis revealed that patients with EPE (P &lt; .001) or mBNI (P &lt; .001) had a significantly higher risk of disease progression than respective controls. Notably, there were significant differences in progression-free survival between EPE−/mBNI+ or EPE+/mBNI− cases and EPE−/mBNI− (P = .001) or EPE+/mBNI+ (P &lt; .001) cases. In multivariate analysis, EPE (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.53, P = .009) and mBNI (HR = 2.33, P = .003), as well as EPE−/mBNI+ or EPE+/mBNI− (HR = 11.7, P = .01) and EPE+/mBNI+ (HR = 25.9, P = .002) (versus EPE−/mBNI−), showed significance for progression. Conclusions.— From these significant findings, we propose a novel pT3b subclassification: pT3b1 (SVI alone without EPE or mBNI), pT3b2 (SVI with either EPE or mBNI), and pT3b3 (SVI with both EPE and mBNI).


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 178-184
Author(s):  
Serdar Celik ◽  
Anıl Eker ◽  
İbrahim Halil Bozkurt ◽  
Deniz Bolat ◽  
İsmail Basmacı ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document