What is the prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer?: Commentary

Nature Clinical Practice Urology

Volumn 3, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 418-419

  Loeb, Stacy ^a   Catalona, William J ^b  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIANDROGEN;

CANCER GROWTH; CANCER INVASION; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTINUING EDUCATION; FOLLOW UP; GLEASON SCORE; HEMOSTASIS; HUMAN; IATROGENIC DISEASE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHORT SURVEY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TUMOR CELL; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

EID: 33747185591     PISSN: 17434270     EISSN: 17434289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncpuro0549     Document Type: Short Survey

References (6)

1. Eastham JA et al. (2003) Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 170: 2292-2295
2. Han M et al. (2004) An evaluation of the decreasing incidence of positive surgical margins in a large retropubic prostatectomy series. J Urol 171: 23-26
3. Guillonneau B et al. (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases a Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169: 1261-1266
4. Hull GW et al. (2002) Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 167: 528-534
5. Vis AN et al. (2006) The actual value of the surgical margin status as a predictor of disease progression in men with early prostate cancer. Eur Urol [doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.11.030]
6. Epstein JI et al. (1996) Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 20: 286-292