4.5 Article

Surgical margin status and its impact on prostate cancer prognosis after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 11, Pages 1803-1815

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2333-4

Keywords

Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Positive surgical margin; Prognosis; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and purpose Positive surgical margins (PSMs) correlate with adverse outcomes in numerous solid tumours. However, the prognostic value of PSMs in prostate cancer (PCa) patients who underwent radical prostatectomy remains unclear. Herein, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the association between PSMs and the prognostic value for biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) in PCa patients. Materials and methods According to the PRISMA statement, online databases PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched to identify relevant studies published prior to February 2018. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated to evaluate the relationship between PSMs and PCa. Results Ultimately, 32 cohort studies that met the eligibility criteria and involved 141,222 patients (51-65,633 per study) were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that PSMs were significantly predictive of poorer BRFS (HR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.28-1.48, p < 0.001), CSS (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.16-1.90, p = 0.001) and OS (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20, p = 0.014). In addition, PSMs were significantly associated with higher risk of CSM (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.16-1.30, p < 0.001) and OM (HR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16, p = 0.009) in patients with PCa. Conclusions Our study suggests that the presence of a histopathologic PSM is associated with the clinical outcomes BRFS, CSS, OS, CSM and OM in patients with PCa, and PSMs could serve as a poor prognostic factor for patients with PCa.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available