Oncological outcomes of pathologically organ-confined, lymph node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.


Journal

Urologic oncology
ISSN: 1873-2496
Titre abrégé: Urol Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9805460

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2021
Historique:
received: 29 05 2020
revised: 20 09 2020
accepted: 13 10 2020
pubmed: 25 10 2020
medline: 15 12 2021
entrez: 24 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of lymph-node involvement on oncological outcomes in patients with pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer (pT2 CaP) after radical prostatectomy (RP). We retrospectively analyzed 9,631 pT2 CaP patients who underwent RP at a single institution between 1998 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression models (CRMs) assessed biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and metastasis-free survival (MFS) according to N-stage. In subgroup analyses of N1 patients, Kaplan-Meier plots and CRMs were stratified according to adjuvant treatment. Of 9,631 pT2 staged patients, 241 (2.5%) harbored lymph-node metastases after RP (pN1). The median follow-up was 60.8 months. No pT2 N1-staged patient died due to CaP. The 5-year BCR-free survival rates were 54.7 vs. 88.4% in pT2 N1 vs. pT2 N0 patients, respectively (P < 0.001). The 5-year MFS rates were 92.5 vs. 98.9% in pT2 N1 vs. pT2 N0 patients, respectively (P < 0.001). Within pT2 N1 patients, presence of ≥3 positive lymph nodes was an independent risk factor for BCR (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4, P < 0.001) and for metastatic progression (HR 1.7, P = 0.04). Finally, 3-year BCR-free survival was improved in pT2 N1 patients treated with adjuvant radiation therapy (87.1% vs. 63.7% for patients who received other treatment options [P < 0.001]). Patients with pathologically organ-confined but lymph node-positive CaP exhibited favorable oncological outcomes after RP. Presence of ≥3 positive LNs predicted higher rates of BCR and metastatic progression. In consequence, in pT2 N1 patients treated with RP with ≥3 positive LNs, adjuvant treatment may be considered.9.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of lymph-node involvement on oncological outcomes in patients with pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer (pT2 CaP) after radical prostatectomy (RP).
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed 9,631 pT2 CaP patients who underwent RP at a single institution between 1998 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression models (CRMs) assessed biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and metastasis-free survival (MFS) according to N-stage. In subgroup analyses of N1 patients, Kaplan-Meier plots and CRMs were stratified according to adjuvant treatment.
RESULTS
Of 9,631 pT2 staged patients, 241 (2.5%) harbored lymph-node metastases after RP (pN1). The median follow-up was 60.8 months. No pT2 N1-staged patient died due to CaP. The 5-year BCR-free survival rates were 54.7 vs. 88.4% in pT2 N1 vs. pT2 N0 patients, respectively (P < 0.001). The 5-year MFS rates were 92.5 vs. 98.9% in pT2 N1 vs. pT2 N0 patients, respectively (P < 0.001). Within pT2 N1 patients, presence of ≥3 positive lymph nodes was an independent risk factor for BCR (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4, P < 0.001) and for metastatic progression (HR 1.7, P = 0.04). Finally, 3-year BCR-free survival was improved in pT2 N1 patients treated with adjuvant radiation therapy (87.1% vs. 63.7% for patients who received other treatment options [P < 0.001]).
CONCLUSION
Patients with pathologically organ-confined but lymph node-positive CaP exhibited favorable oncological outcomes after RP. Presence of ≥3 positive LNs predicted higher rates of BCR and metastatic progression. In consequence, in pT2 N1 patients treated with RP with ≥3 positive LNs, adjuvant treatment may be considered.9.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33097398
pii: S1078-1439(20)30482-8
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.10.010
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

234.e1-234.e7

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Lara Franziska Stolzenbach (LF)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Electronic address: fstolzenbach@icloud.com.

Sophie Knipper (S)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Philipp Mandel (P)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Luigi Ascalone (L)

Department of Urology, Hospital Romolo, Rocca di Neto (KR), Italy.

Marina Deuker (M)

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Zhe Tian (Z)

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Hans Heinzer (H)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Derya Tilki (D)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Tobias Maurer (T)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Markus Graefen (M)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Pierre I Karakiewicz (PI)

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Thomas Steuber (T)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH