4.2 Article

Prognostic value of surgical margin status for biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy

期刊

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 38, 期 1, 页码 31-35

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hym135

关键词

prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; surgical margin; recurrence

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: We evaluated the preoperative parameters to predict a positive surgical margin (SM) at radical prostatectomy for patients with prostate cancer. In addition, the prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence were determined in patients with positive SMs. Methods: We retrospectively analysed 238 patients with prostate cancer who underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection from May 1985 to July 2005 in our hospital. Biochemical recurrence was defined as an increase of undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) to 0.2 ng/ml or greater. Results: Of the 238, 82 patients (34.4%) had positive SMs. On multivariate analysis, preoperative PSA (>= 10 ng/ml), clinical T stage (>= T2a) and the positive core rate (>= 35%) were parameters that could predict a positive SM. During the median follow-up of 31.2 months, 48 patients (20.2%) developed biochemical recurrence. The 5-year biochemical progression-free survival rates were 81.7% and 62.6% in patients with negative and positive SMs, respectively (P < 0.001). In the Cox proportional hazards model, preoperative PSA of >= 20 ng/ml and a pathological T stage of pT3a/pT3b were significant risk factors for biochemical recurrence in patients with positive SMs. Conclusions: SM status at radical prostatectomy depends on preoperative PSA, clinical stage and the positive core rate. Patients with a positive SM had a higher risk for biochemical recurrence than those with a negative one. Patients with a positive margin had a higher risk for biochemical recurrence if they exhibited preoperative PSA of >= 20 ng/ml and/or pathological T stage of pT3a/pT3b.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据