Survival in surgically treated, nodal positive prostate cancer patients is predicted by histopathological characteristics of the primary tumor and its lymph node metastases
- 14 November 2008
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in The Prostate
- Vol. 69 (4), 352-362
- https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.20889
Abstract
BACKGROUND Histopathological risk factors for survival stratification of surgically treated nodal positive prostate cancer patients are poorly defined as reflected by only one category for nodal metastases. METHODS We evaluated biochemical recurrence‐free survival (RFS), disease‐specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS) in 102 nodal positive, hormone treatment‐naïve prostate cancer patients (median age: 65 years, range: 45–75 years; median follow‐up 7.7 years, range: 1.0–15.9 years) who underwent radical prostatectomy and standardized extended lymphadenectomy. RESULTS A significant stratification was possible, with the Gleason score of the primary and virtually all nodal parameters favoring patients with better differentiated primaries and metastases, lower nodal tumor burden, and without extranodal extension of metastases. In multivariate analyses, diameter of the largest metastasis (≤10 mm vs. >10 mm) was the strongest independent predictor for RFS (P < 0.001), DSS (P < 0.001), and OS (P < 0.001) with a more than quadrupled relative risk of cancer related deaths for patients with larger metastases (Hazard ratio: 4.2, Confidence interval: 2.0–8.9; 5‐year RFS/DSS/OS: 18%/57%/54%). The highest 5‐year survival rates were seen in patients with micrometastases only (RFS/DSS/OS: 47%/94%/94%). CONCLUSION The TNM classification's current allocation of only one category for nodal metastases in prostate cancers is unsatisfactory since subgroups with significantly different prognoses can be identified. The diameter of the patient's largest metastasis (≤10 mm vs. >10 mm) should be used for substaging because of its independent prognostic value. The substage “micrometastasis only” is also useful in nodal positive prostate cancer since it designates the subgroup with the most favorable outcome. Prostate 69:352–362, 2009.Keywords
This publication has 35 references indexed in Scilit:
- EZH2, Ki‐67 and MCM7 are prognostic markers in prostatectomy treated patientsInternational Journal of Cancer, 2007
- Long-Term Outcome After Radical Prostatectomy for Patients With Lymph Node Positive Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Specific Antigen EraJournal of Urology, 2007
- Preoperative PSA Velocity Is an Independent Prognostic Factor for Relapse After Radical ProstatectomyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2005
- Lymph Node Positive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Data After Radical ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, 2004
- IMPACT OF SEPARATE VERSUS EN BLOC PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION ON THE NUMBER OF LYMPH NODES RETRIEVED IN CYSTECTOMY SPECIMENSJournal of Urology, 2001
- Extranodal Extension in Lymph Node–Positive Prostate CancerLaboratory Investigation, 2000
- Immediate Hormonal Therapy Compared with Observation after Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Men with Node-Positive Prostate CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Prediction of Progression Following Radical ProstatectomyThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology, 1996
- Prognostic significance of antigenic heterogeneity, gleason grade, and ploidy of lymph node metastases in patients with prostate cancerThe Prostate, 1992