Influence of focal and diffuse extraprostatic extension and positive surgical margins on biochemical progression following radical prostatectomy

International Braz J Urol

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 175-184

  Billis, Athanase ^a   Meirelles, Luciana L ^a   Freitas, Leandro L L ^a   Magna, Luis A ^a   Reis, Leonardo O ^a   Ferreira, Ubirajara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Extraprostatic extension; Positive surgical margins; Prostatic neoplasms; Radical prostatectomy; Treatment outcome

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD; HUMAN; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; ORGAN SIZE; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SEMINAL VESICLE; TUMOR INVASION; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

AGED; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; ORGAN SIZE; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SEMINAL VESICLES;

EID: 84865369875     PISSN: 16775538     EISSN: 16776119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-55382012000200005     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Epstein JI, Carmichael MJ, Pizov G, Walsh PC: Influence of capsular penetration on progression following radical prostatectomy: a study of 196 cases with long-term followup. J Urol. 1993; 150: 135-41.
2. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC: Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer. 1993; 71: 3582-93.
3. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H, Cohen R: Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol. 1995; 153: 1565-9. Erratum in: J Urol. 1995; 154: 538.
4. Wheeler TM, Dillioglugil O, Kattan MW, Arakawa A, Soh S, Suyama K, et al.: Clinical and pathological significance of the level and extent of capsular invasion in clinical stage T1-2 prostate cancer. Hum Pathol. 1998; 29: 856-62.
5. Babaian RJ, Troncoso P, Bhadkamkar VA, Johnston DA: Analysis of clinicopathologic factors predicting outcome after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2001; 91: 1414-22.
6. Sung MT, Lin H, Koch MO, Davidson DD, Cheng L: Radial distance of extraprostatic extension measured by ocular micrometer is an independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen recurrence: A new proposal for the substaging of pT3a prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31: 311-8.
7. Shikanov S, Song J, Royce C, Al-Ahmadie H, Zorn K, Steinberg G, et al.: Length of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of biochemical recurrence. J Urol. 2009; 182: 139-44.
8. van Oort IM, Bruins HM, Kiemeney LA, Knipscheer BC, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA: The length of positive surgical margins correlates with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Histopathology. 2010; 56: 464-71.
9. Resnick MJ, Canter DJ, Guzzo TJ, Magerfleisch L, Tomaszewski JE, Brucker BM, et al.: Defining pathological variables to predict biochemical failure in patients with positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy: implications for adjuvant radiotherapy. BJU Int. 2010; 105: 1377-80.
10. Cao D, Humphrey PA, Gao F, Tao Y, Kibel AS: Ability of linear length of positive margin in radical prostatectomy specimens to predict biochemical recurrence. Urology. 2011; 77: 1409-14.
11. Magi-Galluzzi C, Evans AJ, Delahunt B, Epstein JI, Griffiths DF, van der Kwast TH, et al.: International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease. Mod Pathol. 2011; 24: 26-38.
12. Tan PH, Cheng L, Srigley JR, Griffiths D, Humphrey PA, van der Kwast TH, et al.: International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 5: surgical margins. Mod Pathol. 2011; 24: 48-57.
13. Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, D'Amico AV, Dmochowski RR, et al.: Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007; 177: 540-5.
14. Billis A, Magna LA, Ferreira U: Correlation between tumor extent in radical prostatectomies and preoperative PSA, histological grade, surgical margins, and extraprostatic extension: application of a new practical method for tumor extent evaluation. Int Braz J Urol. 2003; 29: 113-9; discussion 120.
15. International Union Against Cancer (UICC). TNM Classification of malignant tumours, 7th ed, Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz M, Wittekind Ch (eds). Geneva:Wiley-Blackwell. 2009; pp. 243-8.
16. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS: Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology. 1996; 48: 80-90.
17. Emerson RE, Koch MO, Jones TD, Daggy JK, Juliar BE, Cheng L: The influence of extent of surgical margin positivity on prostate specific antigen recurrence. J Clin Pathol. 2005; 58: 1028-32.
18. Vis AN, Schröder FH, van der Kwast TH: The actual value of the surgical margin status as a predictor of disease progression in men with early prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2006; 50: 258-65.
19. Johansson JE, Andrën O, Andersson SO, Dickman PW, Holmberg L, Magnuson A, et al.: Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 2004; 291: 2713-9.
20. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT: A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998; 90: 766-71.