4.7 Article

Preoperative PSA velocity is an independent prognostic factor for relapse after radical prostatectomy

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 25, 页码 6157-6162

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.2336

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity (PSAV), or the rate of PSA rise before diagnosis, predicts for risk of cancer death after radical prostatectomy (RP). We evaluated the relative merit of established preoperative factors, including biopsy indices and preoperative PSAV, for their impact on relapse after RP. Patients and Methods The outcomes of 202 men who underwent RP were reviewed. Biopsies were characterized for grade, percentage positive cores, and total linear tumor length. Surgical specimens were characterized for cancer volume, relative percentage by grade, extracapsular extension, and margin status. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed with respect to relapse-free survival after RP. Results Thirty-one patients relapsed after RP (defined as PSA >= 0.2 ng/mL), with a median time to failure of 16 months. Median follow-up was 48 months. Kaplan-Meier relapse-free survival at 5 years was 89%, compared with 73% for PSAV <= 2 v > 2 ng/mL/year (P = .003). On multivariate analysis, only the biopsy Gleason sum (P < .008; relative risk, > 4.8) and the preoperative PSAV (P < .04; relative risk, 3.0 to 4.7) remained significant. Patients with a PSAV of > 2 ng/mL/year were more likely to be pT3 (P = .007), have positive margins (P = .01), have tumors > 1 mL (P = .05), and possess > 10% grade 4/5 tumors (P = .04). Conclusion The preoperative PSAV is a significant independent clinical factor predicting for relapse after RP and also predicts for larger, more aggressive, and more locally advanced tumors. Its inclusion will be useful in risk stratification, evaluation for alternatives to surgery, and patient selection for neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapies as part of randomized clinical trials.

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

4.7
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