Comprehensive Analysis of Perioperative Factors Influencing the Risk of Biochemical Recurrence in Patients with Radical Prostatectomy
Urology Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 03 (2024),
11 May 2024
,
Page 162-168
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v20i.7835
Abstract
Purpose: To analyze the perioperative factors that influence the risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with localized PCa undergoing radical prostatectomy
Materials and Methods: A total of 457 patients, operated by 2 surgeons in our high-volume oncological center were included in the initial database. Patients who underwent RP for clinically localized PCa in our clinic from 2016 to 2021 were included in the study. Perioperative data were retrospectively reviewed for this study. Follow-up data including post-operative PSA and adjuvant treatment was prospectively gathered by contacting the patients or from the follow-up consultation. Final database was composed of 366 patients who underwent open or 3D laparoscopic RP. Statistical analysis was performed to emphasize the most powerful parameters that influence the BCR.
Results: Accounting for multivariable analysis, 4 parameters were statistically significant: initial PSA (iPSA), Gleason score, vascular involvement and positive surgical margins. For the group of patients with no positive margins, 3 parameters were statistically significant: iPSA above 10,98 ng/mL (AUC=0,71); lymph node involvement and Gleason score. Multivariable Cox regression showed that positive margins and iPSA had a significant impact on the time to BCR. Patients that received adjuvant therapy were excluded from the study. Out of the whole cohort, 27,3% of patients presented BCR.
Conclusion: Perioperative factors need to be carefully analyzed and a detailed follow-up needs to be conducted in order to assess the risk of biochemical recurrence, resulting in the optimal time for adjuvant treatment implementation.
- prostate, cancer, prostatectomy, biochemical, recurrence
How to Cite
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May 4;71(3):209–49.
Nkengurutse G, Tian F, Jiang S, Wang Q, Wang Y, Sun W. Preoperative Predictors of Biochemical Recurrence-Free Survival in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Following Radical Prostatectomy. Front Oncol. 2020;10:1761.
Basiri A, Eshrati B, Zarehoroki A, Golshan S, Shakhssalim N, Khoshdel A, et al. Incidence, Gleason Score and Ethnicity Pattern of Prostate Cancer in the Multi-ethnicity Country of Iran During 2008-2010. Urol J. 2020 May 4;17(6):602–6.
Cassell A, Yunusa B, Jalloh M, Mbodji MM, Diallo A, Ndoye M, et al. A Review of Localized Prostate Cancer: An African Perspective. World J Oncol. 2019;10(4–5):162–8.
Chu LW, Ritchey J, Devesa SS, Quraishi SM, Zhang H, Hsing AW. Prostate Cancer Incidence Rates in Africa. Prostate Cancer. 2011;2011:1–6.
Kang JK, Chung JW, Chun SY, Ha YS, Choi SH, Lee JN, et al. Oncological and functional outcomes following robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy at a single institution: a minimum 5-year follow-up. Yeungnam Univ J Med. 2018 Dec;35(2):171–8.
Jambor I, Falagario U, Ratnani P, Perez IM, Demir K, Merisaari H, et al. Prediction of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients who underwent prostatectomy using routine clinical prostate multiparametric MRI and decipher genomic score. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2020 Apr;51(4):1075–85.
Anandadas CN, Clarke NW, Davidson SE, O’Reilly PH, Logue JP, Gilmore L, et al. Early prostate cancer--which treatment do men prefer and why? BJU Int. 2011 Jun;107(11):1762–8.
Tourinho-Barbosa R, Srougi V, Nunes-Silva I, Baghdadi M, Rembeyo G, Eiffel SS, et al. Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: what does it mean? International braz j urol. 2018 Feb;44(1):14–21.
Celik S, Eker A, Bozkurt İH, Bolat D, Basmacı İ, Şefik E, et al. Factors affecting biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy in patients with positive and negative surgical margin. Prostate Int. 2020 Dec;8(4):178–84.
Asimakopoulos AD, Annino F, Mugnier C, Lopez L, Hoepffner JL, Gaston R, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy: analysis of midterm pathologic and oncologic outcomes: A historical series from a high-volume center. Surg Endosc. 2021 Dec;35(12):6731–45.
Artibani W, Porcaro AB, De Marco V, Cerruto MA, Siracusano S. Management of Biochemical Recurrence after Primary Curative Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Review. Urol Int. 2018;100(3):251–62.
McCormick BZ, Mahmoud AM, Williams SB, Davis JW. Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: Current status of its use as a treatment endpoint and early management strategies. Indian J Urol. 2019;35(1):6–17.
Yang X, Shi Y, Lin Y, Tian Y. Efficacy of radical prostatectomy on prostate cancer patients and analysis of risk factors for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J BUON. 2020;25(6):2623–8.
Porcaro AB, Tafuri A, Sebben M, Amigoni N, Processali T, Pirozzi M, et al. High surgeon volume and positive surgical margins can predict the risk of biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Ther Adv Urol. 2019;11:1756287219878283.
Kupski T, Małek M, Mor I. The association of a risk group with positive margin in the intraoperative and final pathology examination after robotic radical prostatectomy. Cent European J Urol. 2021;74(4):491–5.
Zhang L, Wu B, Zha Z, Zhao H, Jiang Y, Yuan J. Positive surgical margin is associated with biochemical recurrence risk following radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis from high-quality retrospective cohort studies. World J Surg Oncol. 2018 Jul;16(1):124.
Rodrigues I, Ferreira C, Gonçalves J, Carvalho L, Oliveira J, Castro C, et al. Pathological stage, surgical margin and lymphovascular invasion as prognostic factors after salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy relapsed prostate cancer - outcomes and optimization strategies. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2021;26(4):535–44.
Kawase M, Ebara S, Tatenuma T, Sasaki T, Ikehata Y, Nakayama A, et al. The Impact of Gleason Grade 3 as a Predictive Factor for Biochemical Recurrence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study in Japan (The MSUG94 Group). Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Jul;58(8).
Mori K, Sharma V, Comperat EM, Sato S, Laukhtina E, Schuettfort VM, et al. Differential prognostic impact of different Gleason patterns in grade group 4 in radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021 May;47(5):1172–8.
Jiang W, Zhang L, Wu B, Zha Z, Zhao H, Jun Y, et al. The impact of lymphovascular invasion in patients with prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy and its association with their clinicopathological features: An updated PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine. 2018 Dec;97(49):e13537.
Jamil M, Rakic N, Sood A, Keeley J, Modonutti D, Novara G, et al. Impact of Lymphovascular Invasion on Overall Survival in Patients With Prostate Cancer Following Radical Prostatectomy: Stage-per-Stage Analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2021 Oct;19(5):e319–25.
Ramos N, Macedo A, Rosa J, Carvalho M. Perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsy: Prognostic value on radical prostatectomy and active surveillance. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020 Dec;92(4).
Kraus RD, Barsky A, Ji L, Garcia Santos PM, Cheng N, Groshen S, et al. The Perineural Invasion Paradox: Is Perineural Invasion an Independent Prognostic Indicator of Biochemical Recurrence Risk in Patients With pT2N0R0 Prostate Cancer? A Multi-Institutional Study. Adv Radiat Oncol. 2019;4(1):96–102.
Peng LC, Narang AK, Gergis C, Radwan NA, Han P, Marciscano AE, et al. Effects of perineural invasion on biochemical recurrence and prostate cancer-specific survival in patients treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy. Urol Oncol. 2018 Jun;36(6):309.e7-309.e14.
Zhang LJ, Wu B, Zha ZL, Qu W, Zhao H, Yuan J, et al. Perineural invasion as an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Urol. 2018 Feb;18(1):5.
Peng C, Zhang J, Hou J. Performance characteristics of prostate-specific antigen density and biopsy primary Gleason score to predict biochemical failure in patients with intermediate prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy. Cancer Manag Res. 2019;11:1133–9.
EAU Guidelines. Edn presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam. 2022;(978-94-92671-16–5).
- Abstract Viewed: 207 times
- 7835/pdf Downloaded: 54 times