Predicting the Risk of Pelvic Node Involvement Among Men With Prostate Cancer in the Contemporary Era

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

Volumn 74, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 104-109

  Nguyen, Paul L ^a   Chen, Ming Hui ^b   Hoffman, Karen E ^a   Katz, Matthew S ^c   D'Amico, Anthony V ^d  

^a HARVARD RADIATION ONCOLOGY PROGRAM   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^c Saints Medical Center   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Pelvic lymph nodes; Prediction model; Prostate cancer; Roach formula

Indexed keywords

ACCURATE PREDICTIONS; EXPECTED RISKS; GLEASON SCORES; LYMPH NODES; PELVIC LYMPH NODES; PELVIC NODES; POSITIVE LYMPH NODES; PREDICTION MODEL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGENS; ROACH FORMULA; VALIDATION DATUM;

PEELING;

BODY FLUIDS;

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PELVIS LYMPH NODE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROACH SCORE; SCORING SYSTEM;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PELVIS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEER PROGRAM;

EID: 64049113567     PISSN: 03603016     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.07.053     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Roach III M., Marquez C., Yuo H.S., et al. Predicting the risk of lymph node involvement using the pre-treatment prostate specific antigen and Gleason score in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 28 (1994) 33-37
2. Partin A.W., Yoo J., Carter H.B., et al. The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 150 (1993) 110-114
3. Cooperberg M.R., Moul J.W., and Carroll P.R. The changing face of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 23 (2005) 8146-8151
4. SEER Website. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/about/. Accessed February 15, 2008.
5. *Stat Database: Incidence - SEER 17 Regs Limited-Use, Nov 2006 Sub (1969-2004 varying) - Linked to County Attributes - Total U.S., 1969-2004 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2007, based on the Nov 2006 submission. Available at: www.seer.cancer.gov. Accessed February 15, 2008.
6. Smith E.B., Frierson Jr. H.F., Mills S.E., et al. Gleason scores of prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens over the past 10 years: Is there evidence for systematic upgrading?. Cancer 94 (2002) 2282-2287
7. Ghani K.R., Grigor K., Tulloch D.N., et al. Trends in reporting Gleason score 1991 to 2001: Changes in the pathologist's practice. Eur Urol 47 (2005) 196-201
8. Albertsen P.C., Hanley J.A., Barrows G.H., et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (2005) 1248-1253
9. Freedland S.J., Kane C.J., Amling C.L., et al. Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: Risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 69 (2007) 495-499
10. Chun F.K., Briganti A., Shariat S.F., et al. Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: Predictive nomogram and internal validation. BJU Int 98 (2006) 329-334
11. King C.R., McNeal J.E., Gill H., et al. Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: Implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59 (2004) 386-391
12. Mian B.M., Lehr D.J., Moore C.K., et al. Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores. Urology 67 (2006) 379-383
13. Shah J.B., McKiernan J.M., Elkin E.P., et al. Prostate biopsy patterns in the CaPSURE database: Evolution with time and impact on outcome after prostatectomy. J Urol 179 (2008) 136-140
14. San Francisco I.F., DeWolf W.C., Rosen S., et al. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 169 (2003) 136-140
15. Soloway M.S., Pareek K., Sharifi R., et al. Neoadjuvant androgen ablation before radical prostatectomy in cT2bNxMo prostate cancer: 5-Year results. J Urol 167 (2002) 112-116
16. Clark T., Parekh D.J., Cookson M.S., et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169 (2003) 145-147 discussion, 147-148
17. 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 discussion, 518
18. 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
19. Briganti A., Chun F.K., Salonia A., et al. Critical assessment of ideal nodal yield at pelvic lymphadenectomy to accurately diagnose prostate cancer nodal metastasis in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 69 (2007) 147-151