Factors predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy among patients with clinical T3 prostate cancer. (19th June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Otsuka, Masafumi; Kamasako, Tomohiko; Uemura, Toshihiro; Takeshita, Nobushige; Shinozaki, Tetsuo; Kobayashi, Masayuki; Komaru, Atsushi; Fukasawa, Satoshi
• Is Part Of: Japanese journal of clinical oncology. Volume 48:Number 8(2018)
• Page Start: 760
• Page End: 764
• Publication Date: 2018-06-19
• Subjects: prostate cancer -- robot-assisted radical prostatectomy -- cT3 -- positive biopsy; Oncology -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Periodicals; 616.994005
• DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyy091
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0368-2811

Abstract

Abstract : Among patients with cT3 prostate cancer, the percentage of positive biopsy cores and the biopsy Gleason score should be considered to select treatment. Abstract: Background: The effectiveness of cancer control is unclear after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinical T3 prostate cancer. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1409 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between April 2007 and December 2014, including 210 patients with cT3 prostate cancer. Nine patients who received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and three patients who were lost to follow-up were excluded from the analysis. Clinical staging was performed by an experienced radiologist using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging findings. We analyzed the predictors of biochemical recurrence using Cox proportional hazard analyses. Results: A total of 113 patients (57%) underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy and 85 patients (43%) underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. The median follow-up period was 36 months. Downstaging occurred for 60 patients (30%), positive surgical margins were identified in 117 patients (59%), and biochemical recurrence was observed for 89 patients (45%). In the multivariate analyses, the independent preoperative predictors of biochemical recurrence were ≥50% proportion of positive biopsy cores [hazard ratio (HR): 2.858, P < 0.0001] and a biopsy Gleason score of ≥8 (HR: 1.800, P = 0.0093). The independent post-operative predictors of biochemical recurrence were positive surgical margins (HR: 2.490, P = 0.0018) and seminal vesicle invasion (HR: 2.750, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Among patients with cT3 prostate cancer, the percentage of positive biopsy cores and the biopsy Gleason score should be considered to select treatment. Compared with radical retropubic prostatectomy, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy may be a feasible treatment option in this setting.