Percentage of Positive Biopsy Cores Can Improve the Ability to Predict Lymph Node Invasion in Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy and Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection

European Urology

Volumn 51, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1573-1581

  Briganti, Alberto ^a   Karakiewicz, Pierre I ^b   Chun, Felix K H ^b,c   Gallina, Andrea ^a,b   Salonia, Andrea ^a   Zanni, Giuseppe ^a   Valiquette, Luc ^b   Graefen, Markus ^c   Huland, Hartwig ^c   Rigatti, Patrizio ^a   Montorsi, Francesco ^a  

^a VITA SALUTE SAN RAFFAELE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Lymph node invasion; Nomogram; Pelvic lymphadenectomy; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER PATIENT; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE SEVERITY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOMOGRAM; PELVIS LYMPHADENECTOMY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; SAMPLING;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 34247353790     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.01.108     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aus G., Abbou C.C., Bolla M., et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 48 (2005) 546-551
2. Cagiannos I., Karakiewicz P., Eastham J.A., et al. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 170 (2003) 1798-1803
3. Partin A.W., Kattan M.W., Subong E.N., et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 277 (1997) 1445-1451
4. Blute M.L., Bergstralh E.J., Partin A.W., et al. Validation of Partin tables for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 164 (2000) 1591-1595
5. Graefen M., Augustin H., Karakiewicz P.I., et al. Can predictive models for prostate cancer patients derived in the United States of America be utilized in European patients? A validation study of the Partin tables. Eur Urol 43 (2003) 6-10
6. Penson D.F., Grossfeld G.D., Li Y.P., et al. How well does the Partin nomogram predict pathological stage after radical prostatectomy in a community based population? Results of the cancer of the prostate strategic urological research endeavor. J Urol 167 (2002) 1653-1657
7. DiMarco D.S., Zincke H., Sebo T.J., et al. The extent of lymphadenectomy for pTXNO prostate cancer does not affect prostate cancer outcome in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 173 (2005) 1121-1125
8. Burkhard F.C., Schumacher M., Thalmann G.N., et al. Is pelvic lymphadenectomy really necessary in patients with a serum prostate-specific antigen level of <10 ng/ml undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer?. BJU Int 95 (2005) 275-278
9. Bader P., Burkhard F.C., Markwalder R., et al. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer?. J Urol 168 (2002) 514-518
10. Heidenreich A., Varga Z., and Von Knobloch R. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167 (2002) 1681-1686
11. Allaf M.E., Palapattu G.S., Trock B.J., et al. Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 172 (2004) 1840-1844
12. Stone N.N., Stock R., and Unger P. Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: comparison of the extended and modified technique. J Urol 158 (1997) 1891-1894
13. McLaughlin A.P., Saltzstein S.L., McCullough D.L., et al. Prostatic carcinoma: incidence and location of unsuspected lymphatic metastases. J Urol 115 (1976) 89-94
14. Bochner B.H., Herr H.W., and Reuter V.E. Impact of separate versus en bloc pelvic lymph node dissection on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in cystectomy specimens. J Urol 166 (2001) 2295-2296
15. Schumacher M.C., Burkhard F.C., Thalmann G.N., et al. Is pelvic lymph node dissection necessary in patients with a serum PSA < 10 ng/ml undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer?. Eur Urol 50 (2006) 272-279
16. Briganti A., Chun F.K., Salonia A., et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and an extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Eur Urol 49 (2006) 1019-1026
17. Kattan M.W. Judging new markers by their ability to improve predictive accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 95 (2003) 634-635
18. Kattan M.W., Shariat S.F., Andrews B., et al. The addition of interleukin-6 soluble receptor and transforming growth factor beta1 improves a preoperative nomogram for predicting biochemical progression in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 21 (2003) 3573-3579
19. Conrad S., Graefen M., Pichlmeier U., et al. Systematic sextant biopsies improve preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 159 (1998) 2023-2029
20. Haese A., Epstein J.I., Huland H., et al. Validation of a biopsy-based pathologic algorithm for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 95 (2002) 1016-1021
21. Freedland S.J., Aronson W.J., Terris M.K., et al., The SEARCH Database Study Group. Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: results from SEARCH database. J Urol 169 (2003) 2136-2141
22. Graefen M., Ohori M., Karakiewicz P.I., et al. Assessment of the enhancement in predictive accuracy provided by systematic biopsy in predicting outcome for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 171 (2004) 200-203