Assessment of PSIM (Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers) Score in Predicting Pathologic Features at Robotic Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Who Met the Inclusion Criteria for Active Surveillance.
active surveillance
lymphocyte to monocyte ratio
neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio
platelet to lymphocyte ratio
prognosis
prostate cancer
Journal
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-4418
Titre abrégé: Diagnostics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101658402
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Feb 2021
20 Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
07
02
2021
revised:
18
02
2021
accepted:
19
02
2021
entrez:
6
3
2021
pubmed:
7
3
2021
medline:
7
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
circulating levels of lymphocytes, platelets and neutrophils have been identified as factors related to unfavorable clinical outcome for many solid tumors. The aim of this cohort study is to evaluate and validate the use of the Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers (PSIM) score in predicting and improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. we reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. We performed a head-to-head comparison between the histological findings of specimens after radical prostatectomy (RP) and prostate biopsies. The PSIM score was calculated on the basis of positivity according to cutoffs (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) 2.0, platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) 118 and monocyte-to-lymphocyte-ratio (MLR) 5.0), with 1 point assigned for each value exceeding the specified threshold and then summed, yielding a final score ranging from 0 to 3. median NLR was 2.07, median PLR was 114.83, median MLR was 3.69. we found a significantly increase in the rate of pathological International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥ 2 with the increase of PSIM. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and PSIM, the latter was found the sole independent prognostic variable influencing probability of adverse pathology.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
circulating levels of lymphocytes, platelets and neutrophils have been identified as factors related to unfavorable clinical outcome for many solid tumors. The aim of this cohort study is to evaluate and validate the use of the Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers (PSIM) score in predicting and improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance.
METHODS
METHODS
we reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. We performed a head-to-head comparison between the histological findings of specimens after radical prostatectomy (RP) and prostate biopsies. The PSIM score was calculated on the basis of positivity according to cutoffs (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) 2.0, platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) 118 and monocyte-to-lymphocyte-ratio (MLR) 5.0), with 1 point assigned for each value exceeding the specified threshold and then summed, yielding a final score ranging from 0 to 3.
RESULTS
RESULTS
median NLR was 2.07, median PLR was 114.83, median MLR was 3.69.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
we found a significantly increase in the rate of pathological International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥ 2 with the increase of PSIM. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and PSIM, the latter was found the sole independent prognostic variable influencing probability of adverse pathology.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33672650
pii: diagnostics11020355
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11020355
pmc: PMC7924196
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 May 29;106(6):dju124
pubmed: 24875653
Sci Rep. 2017 Nov 13;7(1):15387
pubmed: 29133845
Int J Cancer. 2015 Dec 15;137(12):2795-802
pubmed: 25557753
BMC Genomics. 2013 Oct 08;14:690
pubmed: 24103217
Nat Rev Urol. 2017 May;14(5):312-322
pubmed: 28290462
BMC Cancer. 2017 Aug 22;17(1):557
pubmed: 28830378
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1415-1424
pubmed: 27626136
Curr Opin Urol. 2012 May;22(3):216-21
pubmed: 22453333
Ann Oncol. 2015 Apr;26(4):743-749
pubmed: 25515657
Tumour Biol. 2016 Aug;37(8):10067-74
pubmed: 26819209
Curr Med Chem. 2016;23(7):650-66
pubmed: 26785997
Cancer. 2008 Aug 15;113(4):701-9
pubmed: 18553365
J Surg Oncol. 2014 Jun;109(8):830-5
pubmed: 24610744
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Oct;94(41):e1473
pubmed: 26469891
Urol Oncol. 2020 May;38(5):401-409
pubmed: 31870724
Cell. 2011 Mar 4;144(5):646-74
pubmed: 21376230
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Nov 25;100(24):14205-10
pubmed: 14612570
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 19;367(3):203-13
pubmed: 22808955
Eur Urol. 2009 Jun;55(6):1321-30
pubmed: 19286302
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 Jun 18;95(12):868-78
pubmed: 12813170
Eur Urol Oncol. 2018 Oct;1(5):403-410
pubmed: 31158079
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Mar 18;101(6):374-83
pubmed: 19276453
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Oct 20;33(30):3379-85
pubmed: 26324359
JAMA. 1998 Sep 16;280(11):969-74
pubmed: 9749478
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Oct;15(5):e755-e764
pubmed: 28420564
Urol Int. 2019;102(1):43-50
pubmed: 30408799
Sci Rep. 2017 May 4;7(1):1494
pubmed: 28473700
Oncotarget. 2017 Apr 27;8(45):79279-79288
pubmed: 29108306
Urology. 2015 Jul;86(1):10-5
pubmed: 26048432
Urology. 2014 Jul;84(1):132-7
pubmed: 24785987
JAMA. 1994 Feb 2;271(5):368-74
pubmed: 7506797
Can Urol Assoc J. 2015 Nov-Dec;9(11-12):E761-5
pubmed: 26600880
Urol Oncol. 2016 Nov;34(11):483.e17-483.e24
pubmed: 27646875
Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):428-35
pubmed: 26166626
World J Urol. 2014 Aug;32(4):951-8
pubmed: 24817183
PLoS One. 2013 Jun 24;8(6):e66855
pubmed: 23826159
Eur Urol. 2018 Apr;73(4):572-582
pubmed: 29129398
Br J Cancer. 2004 Jun 14;90(12):2312-6
pubmed: 15150588
Mod Pathol. 2011 Jan;24(1):16-25
pubmed: 20818340