First danish single-institution experience with radical prostatectomy: impact of surgical margins on biochemical outcome

Tumor Location and a Tumor Volume over 2.8 cc Predict the Prognosis for Japanese Localized Prostate Cancer

(1) Objective: Our study investigated the prognostic value of tumor volume and location in prostate cancer patients who received radical prostatectomy (RP). (2) Methods: The prognostic significance of tumor volume and location, together with other clinical factors, was studied using 557 patients who received RP. (3) Results: The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve identified the optimal cutoff value of tumor volume as 2.8 cc for predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR). Cox regression analysis revealed that a tumor in the posterior area (p = 0.031), peripheral zone (p = 0.0472), and tumor volume ≥ 2.8 cc (p < 0.0001) were predictive factors in univariate analysis. After multivariate analysis, tumor volume ≥ 2.8 cc (p = 0.0225) was an independent predictive factor for BCR. Among them, a novel risk model was established using tumor volume and location in the posterior area and peripheral zone. The progression-free survival (PFS) of patients who met the three criteria (unfavorable group) was significantly worse than other groups (p ≤ 0.001). Furthermore, multivariate analysis showed that the unfavorable risk was an independent prognostic factor for BCR. The prognostic significance of our risk model was observed in low- to intermediate-risk patients, although it was not observed in high-risk patients. (4) Conclusion: Tumor volume (≥2.8 cc) and localization (posterior/peripheral zone) may be a novel prognostic factor in patients undergoing RP.

Disease-specific outcomes of radical prostatectomies in Northern Norway; a case for the impact of perineural infiltration and postoperative PSA-doubling time

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common male malignancy and a mayor cause of mortality in the western world. The impact of clinicopathological variables on disease related outcomes have mainly been reported from a few large US series, most of them not reporting on perineural infiltration. We therefore wanted to investigate relevant cancer outcomes in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy in two Norwegian health regions with an emphasis on the impact of perineural infiltration (PNI) and prostate specific antigen- doubling time (PSA-DT).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 535 prostatectomy patients at three hospitals between 1995 and 2005 estimating biochemical failure- (BFFS), clinical failure- (CFFS) and prostate cancer death-free survival (PCDFS) with the Kaplan-Meier method. We investigated clinicopathological factors influencing risk of events using cox proportional hazard regression.

Results

After a median follow-up of 89 months, 170 patients (32%) experienced biochemical failure (BF), 36 (7%) experienced clinical failure and 15 (3%) had died of prostate cancer. pT-Stage (p = 0.001), preoperative PSA (p = 0.047), Gleason Score (p = 0.032), non-apical positive surgical margins (PSM) (p = 0.003) and apical PSM (p = 0.031) were all independently associated to BFFS. Gleason score (p = 0.019), PNI (p = 0.012) and non-apical PSM (p = 0.002) were all independently associated to CFFS while only PNI (P = 0.047) and subgroups of Gleason score were independently associated to PCDFS. After BF, patients with a shorter PSA-DT had independent and significant worse event-free survivals than patients with PSA-DT > 15 months (PSA-DT = 3-9 months, CFFS HR = 6.44, p < 0.001, PCDFS HR = 13.7, p = 0.020; PSA-DT < 3 months, CFFS HR = 11.2, p < 0.001, PCDFS HR = 27.5, p = 0.006).

Conclusions

After prostatectomy, CFFS and PCDFS are variable, but both are strongly associated to Gleason score and PNI. In patients with BF, PSA-DT was most strongly associated to CF and PCD. Our study adds weight to the importance of PSA-DT and re-launches PNI as a strong prognosticator for clinically relevant endpoints.

[Prostate cancer surgical margin: review by the CCAFU (Oncology Committee of the French Association of Urology)]

OBJECTIVE

Literature showed the impact of surgical margin status on prognosis after radical prostatectomy (mostly on biochemical survival). Margin status is an easy self-evaluation of surgical practice to assess. The aim of this paper was to define what a positive surgical margin (PSM) is and how to prevent the occurrence, to precise the impact on survival and how to treat.

METHOD

A literature analysis with Pubmed has been performed to 2012, furthermore conclusions of the main congresses with selection committee and review publication have also been studied.

RESULTS

PSM is defined as "tumor cells touching the ink on the specimen edge". The most frequent reported incidence is between 15 to 20%. Margin status remains one of the major criteria to determine the need of adjuvant radiotherapy after surgery. Quality of life is not or only lightly modified by radiotherapy with the current techniques. Adjuvant radiotherapy improves biological survival but is synonymous with overtreatment in many times. Salvage radiotherapy has to be quickly performed after Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) relapse (PSA<1 ng/mL even<0.5 ng/mL).

CONCLUSION

This literature review did not allow to suggest superiority of one surgical technique over another. In the same way, the kind of dissection i.e. bladder neck or neurovascular bundle preservation does no clearly modify PSM rate. However, it seems logical to "customize" dissection according to prostate cancer characteristics (D'Amico criteria for instance) guided with multiparametric MRI. Intrafascial dissection has to be applied only to low risk. Lastly, the debate between adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy is always ongoing.

Risk of biochemical recurrence and positive surgical margins in patients with pT2 prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To investigate risk factors associated with positive surgical margins (PSM) and biochemical recurrence (BR) in organ confined tumors (pT2) after radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2011, 1,649 patients underwent RP at our institution. The study includes the 1,133 consecutive patients with pT2 tumors at final histopathology. Logistic regression analysis was used for risk of PSM. Risk of BR, defined as the first PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/ml, was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 3.6 years (range: 0.5-15.5 years). In logistic regression, NS surgery was independently associated with an increased risk of pT2 PSM (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.3-2.0, P = 0.01) relative to non-NS surgery. NS surgery was not independently associated with BR but the interaction of PSM and NS surgery trended (P = 0.08) to increase the risk of BR compared to PSM and non-NS surgery.

CONCLUSION

Several factors influence the risk of pT2 PSMs in radical prostatectomy. In our cohort pT2 PSM is associated with NS surgery and trend to increase risk of BR compared to non-NS surgery. The optimal selection of candidates for NS surgery is still not clear.

Does a surgeon's annual radical prostatectomy volume predict the risk of positive surgical margins and urinary incontinence at one-year follow-up? Findings from a prospective national study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the prevalence of positive surgical margins (PSM) and urinary incontinence (UI) in relation to surgeons' annual radical prostatectomy (RP) volume.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This national study prospectively assessed 521 preoperatively continent patients with prostate cancer (PCa), scheduled for RP by surgeons with high (>50), medium (20-50) or low annual volume (<20) at 14 urological departments in Norway. Patients responded to UI questions from the Expanded Composite prostate cancer index (EPIC-50) before and 1 year after RP. UI was defined as "use of pad(s)" and/or "a moderate or severe urinary leakage problem (ULP)". Preoperative prediction of PSMs and UI was explored in multivariate regression analyses with the following independent variables: surgeons' annual RP volume, type of hospital (university versus community), patient's health, sociodemographic features and PCa characteristics.

RESULTS

Based on histopathological reports, the overall PSM rate was 26%, with differences between the high- (18%), medium- (28%) and low-volume (44%) groups. Increasing PSM rates were predicted by surgeons belonging to the low- and medium-volume categories, prostate-specific antigen> 10 µg/l, Gleason score >7, patient age >65 years and <12 years of education. At 1-year follow-up 40% reported UI, without significant differences between the volume groups. Only 46% of those who used pad(s) experienced ULP. UI was predicted by clinical category ≥T2 and community type of hospital, but not by surgeons' annual RP volume. CONCLUSIONS. Preoperative counselling should take into account the relationship between surgeon's annual RP volume and PSM rate and the current knowledge about UI and ULP.