Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Oncologic Outcomes of Lymph Node Dissection at Salvage Radical Prostatectomy

F. Preisser, RB. Incesu, P. Rajwa, M. Chlosta, M. Ahmed, AL. Abreu, G. Cacciamani, L. Ribeiro, A. Kretschmer, T. Westhofen, JA. Smith, M. Graefen, G. Calleris, Y. Raskin, P. Gontero, S. Joniau, R. Sanchez-Salas, SF. Shariat, I. Gill, RJ. Karnes,...

. 2023 ; 15 (12) : . [pub] 20230609

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc23009557

BACKGROUND: Lymph node invasion (LNI) represents a poor prognostic factor after primary radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). However, the impact of LNI on oncologic outcomes in salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of lymph node dissection (LND) and pathological lymph node status (pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1) on long-term oncologic outcomes of SRP patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent SRP for recurrent PCa between 2000 and 2021 were identified from 12 high-volume centers. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models were used. Endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: Of 853 SRP patients, 87% (n = 727) underwent LND, and 21% (n = 151) harbored LNI. The median follow-up was 27 months. The mean number of removed lymph nodes was 13 in the LND cohort. At 72 months after SRP, BCR-free survival was 54% vs. 47% vs. 7.2% for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1 (p < 0.001), respectively. At 120 months after SRP, OS rates were 89% vs. 81% vs. 41% (p < 0.001), and CSS rates were 94% vs. 96% vs. 82% (p = 0.02) for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, pN1 status was independently associated with BCR (HR: 1.77, p < 0.001) and death (HR: 2.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In SRP patients, LNI represents an independent poor prognostic factor. However, the oncologic benefit of LND in SRP remains debatable. These findings underline the need for a cautious LND indication in SRP patients as well as strict postoperative monitoring of SRP patients with LNI.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc23009557
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20230721095540.0
007      
ta
008      
230707s2023 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/cancers15123123 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)37370733
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Preisser, Felix $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany $1 https://orcid.org/0000000273829632
245    10
$a Oncologic Outcomes of Lymph Node Dissection at Salvage Radical Prostatectomy / $c F. Preisser, RB. Incesu, P. Rajwa, M. Chlosta, M. Ahmed, AL. Abreu, G. Cacciamani, L. Ribeiro, A. Kretschmer, T. Westhofen, JA. Smith, M. Graefen, G. Calleris, Y. Raskin, P. Gontero, S. Joniau, R. Sanchez-Salas, SF. Shariat, I. Gill, RJ. Karnes, P. Cathcart, H. Van Der Poel, G. Marra, D. Tilki
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Lymph node invasion (LNI) represents a poor prognostic factor after primary radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). However, the impact of LNI on oncologic outcomes in salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of lymph node dissection (LND) and pathological lymph node status (pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1) on long-term oncologic outcomes of SRP patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent SRP for recurrent PCa between 2000 and 2021 were identified from 12 high-volume centers. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regression models were used. Endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: Of 853 SRP patients, 87% (n = 727) underwent LND, and 21% (n = 151) harbored LNI. The median follow-up was 27 months. The mean number of removed lymph nodes was 13 in the LND cohort. At 72 months after SRP, BCR-free survival was 54% vs. 47% vs. 7.2% for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1 (p < 0.001), respectively. At 120 months after SRP, OS rates were 89% vs. 81% vs. 41% (p < 0.001), and CSS rates were 94% vs. 96% vs. 82% (p = 0.02) for patients with pNX vs. pN0 vs. pN1, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, pN1 status was independently associated with BCR (HR: 1.77, p < 0.001) and death (HR: 2.89, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In SRP patients, LNI represents an independent poor prognostic factor. However, the oncologic benefit of LND in SRP remains debatable. These findings underline the need for a cautious LND indication in SRP patients as well as strict postoperative monitoring of SRP patients with LNI.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Incesu, Reha-Baris $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Rajwa, Pawel $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, 40-055 Zabrze, Poland
700    1_
$a Chlosta, Marcin $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
700    1_
$a Ahmed, Mohamed $u Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55902, USA $1 https://orcid.org/0000000200542710
700    1_
$a Abreu, Andre Luis $u Keck Medical Center of USC, USC Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
700    1_
$a Cacciamani, Giovanni $u Keck Medical Center of USC, USC Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA $1 https://orcid.org/0000000288925539
700    1_
$a Ribeiro, Luis $u Urology Centre, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, UK
700    1_
$a Kretschmer, Alexander $u Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, 80539 Munich, Germany $1 https://orcid.org/0000000265114354
700    1_
$a Westhofen, Thilo $u Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, 80539 Munich, Germany
700    1_
$a Smith, Joseph A $u Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
700    1_
$a Graefen, Markus $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Calleris, Giorgio $u Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy $1 https://orcid.org/0000000338311632
700    1_
$a Raskin, Yannic $u Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
700    1_
$a Gontero, Paolo $u Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy
700    1_
$a Joniau, Steven $u Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium $1 https://orcid.org/0000000331959890
700    1_
$a Sanchez-Salas, Rafael $u Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, 75270 Paris, France
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, 116 36 Prague, Czech Republic $u Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman 19628, Jordan $u Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 10075, USA $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX 75390, USA
700    1_
$a Gill, Inderbir $u Keck Medical Center of USC, USC Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
700    1_
$a Karnes, Robert Jeffrey $u Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55902, USA
700    1_
$a Cathcart, Paul $u Urology Centre, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, UK
700    1_
$a Van Der Poel, Henk $u Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 Amsterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Marra, Giancarlo $u Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy
700    1_
$a Tilki, Derya $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20251 Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey $1 https://orcid.org/0000000170331380
773    0_
$w MED00173178 $t Cancers $x 2072-6694 $g Roč. 15, č. 12 (2023)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37370733 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20230707 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20230721095533 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1958412 $s 1195821
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2023 $b 15 $c 12 $e 20230609 $i 2072-6694 $m Cancers $n Cancers $x MED00173178
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20230707

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace