Cargando…

Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection

AIM: To determine the impact of the extent of lymph node invasion (LNI) on long-term oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined the data of 1,249 high-risk, non-metastatic PCa patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moris, Lisa, Van den Broeck, Thomas, Tosco, Lorenzo, Van Baelen, Anthony, Gontero, Paolo, Karnes, Robert Jeffrey, Everaerts, Wouter, Albersen, Maarten, Bastian, Patrick J., Chlosta, Piotr, Claessens, Frank, Chun, Felix K., Graefen, Markus, Gratzke, Christian, Kneitz, Burkhard, Marchioro, Giansilvio, Salas, Rafael Sanchez, Tombal, Bertrand, Van Der Poel, Henk, Walz, Jochen Christoph, De Meerleer, Gert, Bossi, Alberto, Haustermans, Karin, Montorsi, Francesco, Van Poppel, Hendrik, Spahn, Martin, Briganti, Alberto, Joniau, Steven
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5159485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28018903
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2016.00065
_version_ 1782481779859390464
author Moris, Lisa
Van den Broeck, Thomas
Tosco, Lorenzo
Van Baelen, Anthony
Gontero, Paolo
Karnes, Robert Jeffrey
Everaerts, Wouter
Albersen, Maarten
Bastian, Patrick J.
Chlosta, Piotr
Claessens, Frank
Chun, Felix K.
Graefen, Markus
Gratzke, Christian
Kneitz, Burkhard
Marchioro, Giansilvio
Salas, Rafael Sanchez
Tombal, Bertrand
Van Der Poel, Henk
Walz, Jochen Christoph
De Meerleer, Gert
Bossi, Alberto
Haustermans, Karin
Montorsi, Francesco
Van Poppel, Hendrik
Spahn, Martin
Briganti, Alberto
Joniau, Steven
author_facet Moris, Lisa
Van den Broeck, Thomas
Tosco, Lorenzo
Van Baelen, Anthony
Gontero, Paolo
Karnes, Robert Jeffrey
Everaerts, Wouter
Albersen, Maarten
Bastian, Patrick J.
Chlosta, Piotr
Claessens, Frank
Chun, Felix K.
Graefen, Markus
Gratzke, Christian
Kneitz, Burkhard
Marchioro, Giansilvio
Salas, Rafael Sanchez
Tombal, Bertrand
Van Der Poel, Henk
Walz, Jochen Christoph
De Meerleer, Gert
Bossi, Alberto
Haustermans, Karin
Montorsi, Francesco
Van Poppel, Hendrik
Spahn, Martin
Briganti, Alberto
Joniau, Steven
author_sort Moris, Lisa
collection PubMed
description AIM: To determine the impact of the extent of lymph node invasion (LNI) on long-term oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined the data of 1,249 high-risk, non-metastatic PCa patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) between 1989 and 2011 at eight different tertiary institutions. We fitted univariate and multivariate Cox models to assess independent predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). The number of positive lymph node (LN) was dichotomized according to the most informative cutoff predicting CSS. Kaplan–Meier curves assessed CSS and OS rates. Only patients with at least 10 LNs removed at PLND were included. This cutoff was chosen as a surrogate for a well performed PNLD. RESULTS: Mean age was 65 years (median: 66, IQR 60–70). Positive surgical margins were present in 53.7% (n = 671). Final Gleason score (GS) was 2–6 in 12.7% (n = 158), 7 in 52% (n = 649), and 8–10 in 35.4% (n = 442). The median number of LNs removed during PLND was 15 (IQR 12–17). Of all patients, 1,128 (90.3%) had 0–3 positive LNs, while 126 (9.7%) had ≥4 positive LNs. Patients with 0–3 positive LNs had significantly better CSS outcome at 10-year follow-up compared to patients with ≥4 positive LNs (87 vs. 50%; p < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained for OS, with a 72 vs. 37% (p < 0.0001) survival at 10 years for patients with 0–3 vs. ≥4 positive LNs, respectively. At multivariate analysis, final GS of 8–10, salvage ADT therapy, and ≥4 (vs. <4) positive LNs were predictors of worse CSS and OS. Pathological stage pT4 was an additional predictor of worse CSS. CONCLUSION: Four or more positive LNs, pathological stage pT4, and final GS of 8–10 represent independent predictors for worse CSS in patients with high-risk PCa. Primary tumor biology remains a strong driver of tumor progression and patients having ≥4 positive LNs could be considered an enriched patient group in which novel treatment strategies should be studied.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5159485
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51594852016-12-23 Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Moris, Lisa Van den Broeck, Thomas Tosco, Lorenzo Van Baelen, Anthony Gontero, Paolo Karnes, Robert Jeffrey Everaerts, Wouter Albersen, Maarten Bastian, Patrick J. Chlosta, Piotr Claessens, Frank Chun, Felix K. Graefen, Markus Gratzke, Christian Kneitz, Burkhard Marchioro, Giansilvio Salas, Rafael Sanchez Tombal, Bertrand Van Der Poel, Henk Walz, Jochen Christoph De Meerleer, Gert Bossi, Alberto Haustermans, Karin Montorsi, Francesco Van Poppel, Hendrik Spahn, Martin Briganti, Alberto Joniau, Steven Front Surg Surgery AIM: To determine the impact of the extent of lymph node invasion (LNI) on long-term oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined the data of 1,249 high-risk, non-metastatic PCa patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) between 1989 and 2011 at eight different tertiary institutions. We fitted univariate and multivariate Cox models to assess independent predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). The number of positive lymph node (LN) was dichotomized according to the most informative cutoff predicting CSS. Kaplan–Meier curves assessed CSS and OS rates. Only patients with at least 10 LNs removed at PLND were included. This cutoff was chosen as a surrogate for a well performed PNLD. RESULTS: Mean age was 65 years (median: 66, IQR 60–70). Positive surgical margins were present in 53.7% (n = 671). Final Gleason score (GS) was 2–6 in 12.7% (n = 158), 7 in 52% (n = 649), and 8–10 in 35.4% (n = 442). The median number of LNs removed during PLND was 15 (IQR 12–17). Of all patients, 1,128 (90.3%) had 0–3 positive LNs, while 126 (9.7%) had ≥4 positive LNs. Patients with 0–3 positive LNs had significantly better CSS outcome at 10-year follow-up compared to patients with ≥4 positive LNs (87 vs. 50%; p < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained for OS, with a 72 vs. 37% (p < 0.0001) survival at 10 years for patients with 0–3 vs. ≥4 positive LNs, respectively. At multivariate analysis, final GS of 8–10, salvage ADT therapy, and ≥4 (vs. <4) positive LNs were predictors of worse CSS and OS. Pathological stage pT4 was an additional predictor of worse CSS. CONCLUSION: Four or more positive LNs, pathological stage pT4, and final GS of 8–10 represent independent predictors for worse CSS in patients with high-risk PCa. Primary tumor biology remains a strong driver of tumor progression and patients having ≥4 positive LNs could be considered an enriched patient group in which novel treatment strategies should be studied. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5159485/ /pubmed/28018903 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2016.00065 Text en Copyright © 2016 Moris, Van den Broeck, Tosco, Van Baelen, Gontero, Karnes, Everaerts, Albersen, Bastian, Chlosta, Claessens, Chun, Graefen, Gratzke, Kneitz, Marchioro, Salas, Tombal, Van Der Poel, Walz, De Meerleer, Bossi, Haustermans, Montorsi, Van Poppel, Spahn, Briganti and Joniau. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Moris, Lisa
Van den Broeck, Thomas
Tosco, Lorenzo
Van Baelen, Anthony
Gontero, Paolo
Karnes, Robert Jeffrey
Everaerts, Wouter
Albersen, Maarten
Bastian, Patrick J.
Chlosta, Piotr
Claessens, Frank
Chun, Felix K.
Graefen, Markus
Gratzke, Christian
Kneitz, Burkhard
Marchioro, Giansilvio
Salas, Rafael Sanchez
Tombal, Bertrand
Van Der Poel, Henk
Walz, Jochen Christoph
De Meerleer, Gert
Bossi, Alberto
Haustermans, Karin
Montorsi, Francesco
Van Poppel, Hendrik
Spahn, Martin
Briganti, Alberto
Joniau, Steven
Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title_full Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title_fullStr Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title_short Impact of Lymph Node Burden on Survival of High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
title_sort impact of lymph node burden on survival of high-risk prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5159485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28018903
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2016.00065
work_keys_str_mv AT morislisa impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT vandenbroeckthomas impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT toscolorenzo impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT vanbaelenanthony impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT gonteropaolo impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT karnesrobertjeffrey impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT everaertswouter impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT albersenmaarten impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT bastianpatrickj impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT chlostapiotr impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT claessensfrank impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT chunfelixk impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT graefenmarkus impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT gratzkechristian impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT kneitzburkhard impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT marchiorogiansilvio impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT salasrafaelsanchez impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT tombalbertrand impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT vanderpoelhenk impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT walzjochenchristoph impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT demeerleergert impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT bossialberto impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT haustermanskarin impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT montorsifrancesco impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT vanpoppelhendrik impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT spahnmartin impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT brigantialberto impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection
AT joniausteven impactoflymphnodeburdenonsurvivalofhighriskprostatecancerpatientsfollowingradicalprostatectomyandpelviclymphnodedissection