Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

Chad Ritch, Chaochen You, Alexandra T. May, S. Duke Herrell, Peter E. Clark, David F. Penson, Sam S. Chang, Michael S. Cookson, Joseph A. Smith, Daniel A. Barocas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective To compare biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and predictors of BCR in intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Materials and Methods We conducted a retrospective study on 1336 men with D'Amico IR or HR prostate cancer who underwent RALP or ORP between 2003 and 2009. Exclusion criteria were use of neoadjuvant therapy, <6 months of follow-up, and insufficient clinicopathologic data. We compared demographic, clinical, and pathologic variables between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare the 5-year BCR-free survival between groups. Multivariate models were developed to determine whether surgical approach influences BCR. Results A total of 979 IR and HR patients (237 ORP and 742 RALP patients) met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was shorter for RALP (43 vs 63 months; P <.001). ORP patients had a higher median prostate-specific antigen level (7.9 vs 6.7 ng/mL; P <.002), significantly more Gleason sum 8-10 tumors, and more adverse pathologic features overall. There was no difference in positive surgical margins between groups. Pathologic features including extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, lymph node involvement, pathologic Gleason sum, and positive surgical margin were significant independent predictors of BCR in multivariate analysis. Surgical approach (RALP vs ORP) did not predict BCR when controlling for other known predictors of BCR. Conclusion Among IR and HR prostate cancer patients, the oncologic outcomes are similar between RALP and ORP. Not surprisingly, adverse pathologic features are harbingers of BCR.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1309-1315
Number of pages7
JournalUrology
Volume83
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Robotics
Prostatectomy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Recurrence
Survival
Neoadjuvant Therapy
Seminal Vesicles
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Multivariate Analysis
Retrospective Studies
Lymph Nodes
Demography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. / Ritch, Chad; You, Chaochen; May, Alexandra T.; Herrell, S. Duke; Clark, Peter E.; Penson, David F.; Chang, Sam S.; Cookson, Michael S.; Smith, Joseph A.; Barocas, Daniel A.

In: Urology, Vol. 83, No. 6, 2014, p. 1309-1315.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ritch, C, You, C, May, AT, Herrell, SD, Clark, PE, Penson, DF, Chang, SS, Cookson, MS, Smith, JA & Barocas, DA 2014, 'Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer', Urology, vol. 83, no. 6, pp. 1309-1315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023
Ritch, Chad ; You, Chaochen ; May, Alexandra T. ; Herrell, S. Duke ; Clark, Peter E. ; Penson, David F. ; Chang, Sam S. ; Cookson, Michael S. ; Smith, Joseph A. ; Barocas, Daniel A. / Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. In: Urology. 2014 ; Vol. 83, No. 6. pp. 1309-1315.
@article{26689111e2a3421eadeed8ea19617549,
title = "Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer",
abstract = "Objective To compare biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and predictors of BCR in intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Materials and Methods We conducted a retrospective study on 1336 men with D'Amico IR or HR prostate cancer who underwent RALP or ORP between 2003 and 2009. Exclusion criteria were use of neoadjuvant therapy, <6 months of follow-up, and insufficient clinicopathologic data. We compared demographic, clinical, and pathologic variables between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare the 5-year BCR-free survival between groups. Multivariate models were developed to determine whether surgical approach influences BCR. Results A total of 979 IR and HR patients (237 ORP and 742 RALP patients) met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was shorter for RALP (43 vs 63 months; P <.001). ORP patients had a higher median prostate-specific antigen level (7.9 vs 6.7 ng/mL; P <.002), significantly more Gleason sum 8-10 tumors, and more adverse pathologic features overall. There was no difference in positive surgical margins between groups. Pathologic features including extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, lymph node involvement, pathologic Gleason sum, and positive surgical margin were significant independent predictors of BCR in multivariate analysis. Surgical approach (RALP vs ORP) did not predict BCR when controlling for other known predictors of BCR. Conclusion Among IR and HR prostate cancer patients, the oncologic outcomes are similar between RALP and ORP. Not surprisingly, adverse pathologic features are harbingers of BCR.",
author = "Chad Ritch and Chaochen You and May, {Alexandra T.} and Herrell, {S. Duke} and Clark, {Peter E.} and Penson, {David F.} and Chang, {Sam S.} and Cookson, {Michael S.} and Smith, {Joseph A.} and Barocas, {Daniel A.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "83",
pages = "1309--1315",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

AU - Ritch, Chad

AU - You, Chaochen

AU - May, Alexandra T.

AU - Herrell, S. Duke

AU - Clark, Peter E.

AU - Penson, David F.

AU - Chang, Sam S.

AU - Cookson, Michael S.

AU - Smith, Joseph A.

AU - Barocas, Daniel A.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Objective To compare biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and predictors of BCR in intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Materials and Methods We conducted a retrospective study on 1336 men with D'Amico IR or HR prostate cancer who underwent RALP or ORP between 2003 and 2009. Exclusion criteria were use of neoadjuvant therapy, <6 months of follow-up, and insufficient clinicopathologic data. We compared demographic, clinical, and pathologic variables between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare the 5-year BCR-free survival between groups. Multivariate models were developed to determine whether surgical approach influences BCR. Results A total of 979 IR and HR patients (237 ORP and 742 RALP patients) met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was shorter for RALP (43 vs 63 months; P <.001). ORP patients had a higher median prostate-specific antigen level (7.9 vs 6.7 ng/mL; P <.002), significantly more Gleason sum 8-10 tumors, and more adverse pathologic features overall. There was no difference in positive surgical margins between groups. Pathologic features including extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, lymph node involvement, pathologic Gleason sum, and positive surgical margin were significant independent predictors of BCR in multivariate analysis. Surgical approach (RALP vs ORP) did not predict BCR when controlling for other known predictors of BCR. Conclusion Among IR and HR prostate cancer patients, the oncologic outcomes are similar between RALP and ORP. Not surprisingly, adverse pathologic features are harbingers of BCR.

AB - Objective To compare biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival and predictors of BCR in intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Materials and Methods We conducted a retrospective study on 1336 men with D'Amico IR or HR prostate cancer who underwent RALP or ORP between 2003 and 2009. Exclusion criteria were use of neoadjuvant therapy, <6 months of follow-up, and insufficient clinicopathologic data. We compared demographic, clinical, and pathologic variables between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare the 5-year BCR-free survival between groups. Multivariate models were developed to determine whether surgical approach influences BCR. Results A total of 979 IR and HR patients (237 ORP and 742 RALP patients) met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was shorter for RALP (43 vs 63 months; P <.001). ORP patients had a higher median prostate-specific antigen level (7.9 vs 6.7 ng/mL; P <.002), significantly more Gleason sum 8-10 tumors, and more adverse pathologic features overall. There was no difference in positive surgical margins between groups. Pathologic features including extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement, lymph node involvement, pathologic Gleason sum, and positive surgical margin were significant independent predictors of BCR in multivariate analysis. Surgical approach (RALP vs ORP) did not predict BCR when controlling for other known predictors of BCR. Conclusion Among IR and HR prostate cancer patients, the oncologic outcomes are similar between RALP and ORP. Not surprisingly, adverse pathologic features are harbingers of BCR.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901585412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901585412&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023

M3 - Article

C2 - 24746665

AN - SCOPUS:84901585412

VL - 83

SP - 1309

EP - 1315

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 6

ER -