Phase 3 study of adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait and see in pT3 Prostate cancer: Impact of pathology review on Analysis

European Urology

Volumn 64, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 193-198

  Bottke, Dirk ^a   Golz, Reinhard ^b   Störkel, Stephan ^b   Hinke, Axel ^c   Siegmann, Alessandra ^d   Hertle, Lothar ^e   Miller, Kurt ^d   Hinkelbein, Wolfgang ^d   Wiegel, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ULM   (Germany)

^b HELIOS KLINIKUM WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

^c WiSP GmbH   (Germany)

^d CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Adjuvant radiotherapy; Interobserver variation; Pathology review; Prostatectomy; Quality assurance

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ARTICLE; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SEMINAL VESICLE;

ADJUVANT RADIOTHERAPY; INTEROBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY REVIEW; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY ASSURANCE;

ADENOCARCINOMA; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; GERMANY; HUMANS; KALLIKREINS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84879952269     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.029     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. D. Bottke, D. Bartkowiak, and M. Schrader Radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: immediate or early delayed? Strahlenther Onkol 188 2012 1096 1101
2. A. Siegmann, D. Bottke, and J. Faehndrich Dose escalation for patients with decreasing PSA during radiotherapy for elevated PSA after radical prostatectomy improves biochemical progression-free survival: results of a retrospective study Strahlenther Onkol 187 2011 467 472
3. F. Wenz, T. Martin, and D. Böhmer The German S3 guideline prostate cancer: aspects for the radiation oncologist Strahlenther Onkol 86 2010 531 534
4. M. Bolla, H. van Poppel, and B. Tombal Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911) Lancet 380 2012 2018 2027
5. I.M. Thompson, C.M. Tangen, and J. Paradelo Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial J Urol 181 2009 956 962
6. T. Wiegel, D. Bottke, and U. Steiner Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 J Clin Oncol 27 2009 2924 2930
7. R. Montironi, T. van der Kwast, and L. Boccon-Gibod Handling and pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens Eur Urol 44 2003 626 636
8. J.I. Epstein, M. Amin, and L. Boccon-Gibod Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 216 2005 34 63
9. C.A. Lawton, K. Winter, and K. Murray Updated results of the phase III Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trial 85-31 evaluating the potential benefit of androgen suppression following standard radiation therapy for unfavorable prognosis carcinoma of the prostate Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 49 2001 937 946
10. T.H. van der Kwast, L. Collette, and H. Van Poppel Impact of pathology review of stage and margin status of radical prostatectomy specimens (EORTC trial 22911) Virchows Arch 449 2006 428 434
11. T.H. Van der Kwast, and M. Bolla Identification of patients with prostate cancer who benefit from immediate postoperative radiotherapy: EORTC 22911 J Clin Oncol 25 2007 4178 4186
12. P. Hermanek, and L.H. Sobin TNM classification of malignant tumours ed. 4 1992 Springer Berlin, Germany
13. D.F. Gleason Histological grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma M. Tannenbaum, Urologic pathology: the prostate 1977 Lea & Feibiger Philadelphia, PA 171 198
14. J. Cohen A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales Educ Psychol Meas 20 1960 37 46
15. E.L. Kaplan, and P. Meier Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations J Am Stat Assoc 53 1958 457 481
16. W.C. Allsbrook Jr., K.A. Mangold, and M.H. Johnson Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists Hum Pathol 32 2001 74 80
17. W.C. Allsbrook Jr., K.A. Mangold, and M.H. Johnson Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: general pathologist Hum Pathol 32 2001 81 88
18. A. Glaessgen, H. Hamberg, and C.G. Pihl Interobserver reproducibility of modified Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens Virchows Arch 445 2004 17 21
19. A. Glaessgen, H. Hamberg, and C.G. Pihl Interobserver reproducibility of percent Gleason grade 4/5 in prostate biopsies J Urol 171 2004 664 667
20. T. Oyama, W.C. Allsbrook Jr., and K. Kurokawa A comparison of interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in Japan and the United States Arch Pathol Lab Med 129 2005 1004 1010
21. S. Ekici, A. Ayhan, and I. Erkan The role of the pathologist in the evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens Scand J Urol Nephrol 37 2003 387 391
22. A.J. Evans, P.C. Henry, and T.H. Van der Kwast Interobserver variability between expert urologic pathologists for extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens Am J Surg Pathol 32 2008 1503 1512
23. K. Kuroiwa, T. Shiraishi, and O. Ogawa Discrepancy between local and central pathological review of radical prostatectomy specimens J Urol 183 2010 952 957
24. G.J. Netto, M. Eisenberger, and J.I. Epstein Interobserver variability in histologic evaluation of radical prostatectomy between central and local pathologists: findings of TAX 3501 multinational clinical trial Urology 77 2011 1155 1157
25. A.J. Stephenson, D.P. Wood, and M.W. Kattan Location, extent and number of PSMs do not improve accuracy of predicting prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy J Urol 182 2009 1357 1363
26. J.I. Epstein, and J. Sauvageot Do close but negative margins in radical prostatectomy specimens increase the risk of postoperative progression? J Urol 157 1997 241 243