Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy

Viacheslav Iremashvili, Liset Pelaez, Murugesan Manoharan, Kristell Acosta, Daniel L. Rosenberg, Mark S. Soloway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The clinical and prognostic significance of unifocal prostatic carcinoma is not clearly understood. In the current study, we sought to characterize the clinical and pathologic characteristics of unifocal and multifocal prostate cancers and to investigate the effects of tumor focality on biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Methods Our analysis included 1,444 radical prostatectomy patients with available information concerning the number and location of tumor foci in the specimen. Each patient was assigned to one of three groups depending on whether they had unifocal, multifocal, or extensive cancer. Clinical and pathological features as well as biochemical outcomes were compared between the groups. Results Two hundred and seventy-two mens in the study cohort (18.8%) had unifocal cancer. The rates of unifocal cancer did not differ significantly between the three studied time intervals (17.3% in 1992-1998, 20.5% in 1999-2004, and 17.8% in 2005-2011). The number of positive biopsy cores was slightly lower in the unifocal group, while the overall amount of biopsy tissue containing cancer was similar in both groups. The patients in the multifocal group had higher pathologic Gleason scores, increased incidence of positive surgical margin, and larger tumors. The rate of clinically significant Gleason score upgrade was significantly higher in the multifocal group compared to the unifocal group (35.7% vs. 21.7%, respectively, P < 0.001). The biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy did not differ between patients with unifocal and multifocal cancers both on univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions Tumor focality is not an independent prognostic factor of biochemical outcome in radical prostatectomy patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)762-768
Number of pages7
JournalProstate
Volume72
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2012

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Grading
Biopsy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Cohort Studies
Multivariate Analysis
Carcinoma
Incidence

Keywords

  • biochemical recurrence
  • focality
  • prostate cancer
  • prostatectomy
  • solitary tumor

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Iremashvili, V., Pelaez, L., Manoharan, M., Acosta, K., Rosenberg, D. L., & Soloway, M. S. (2012). Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Prostate, 72(7), 762-768. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.21481

Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. / Iremashvili, Viacheslav; Pelaez, Liset; Manoharan, Murugesan; Acosta, Kristell; Rosenberg, Daniel L.; Soloway, Mark S.

In: Prostate, Vol. 72, No. 7, 01.05.2012, p. 762-768.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Iremashvili, V, Pelaez, L, Manoharan, M, Acosta, K, Rosenberg, DL & Soloway, MS 2012, 'Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy', Prostate, vol. 72, no. 7, pp. 762-768. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.21481
Iremashvili V, Pelaez L, Manoharan M, Acosta K, Rosenberg DL, Soloway MS. Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Prostate. 2012 May 1;72(7):762-768. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.21481
Iremashvili, Viacheslav ; Pelaez, Liset ; Manoharan, Murugesan ; Acosta, Kristell ; Rosenberg, Daniel L. ; Soloway, Mark S. / Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. In: Prostate. 2012 ; Vol. 72, No. 7. pp. 762-768.
@article{5cce18aa6e0b49b6839e7ac61053b455,
title = "Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy",
abstract = "Background The clinical and prognostic significance of unifocal prostatic carcinoma is not clearly understood. In the current study, we sought to characterize the clinical and pathologic characteristics of unifocal and multifocal prostate cancers and to investigate the effects of tumor focality on biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Methods Our analysis included 1,444 radical prostatectomy patients with available information concerning the number and location of tumor foci in the specimen. Each patient was assigned to one of three groups depending on whether they had unifocal, multifocal, or extensive cancer. Clinical and pathological features as well as biochemical outcomes were compared between the groups. Results Two hundred and seventy-two mens in the study cohort (18.8{\%}) had unifocal cancer. The rates of unifocal cancer did not differ significantly between the three studied time intervals (17.3{\%} in 1992-1998, 20.5{\%} in 1999-2004, and 17.8{\%} in 2005-2011). The number of positive biopsy cores was slightly lower in the unifocal group, while the overall amount of biopsy tissue containing cancer was similar in both groups. The patients in the multifocal group had higher pathologic Gleason scores, increased incidence of positive surgical margin, and larger tumors. The rate of clinically significant Gleason score upgrade was significantly higher in the multifocal group compared to the unifocal group (35.7{\%} vs. 21.7{\%}, respectively, P < 0.001). The biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy did not differ between patients with unifocal and multifocal cancers both on univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions Tumor focality is not an independent prognostic factor of biochemical outcome in radical prostatectomy patients.",
keywords = "biochemical recurrence, focality, prostate cancer, prostatectomy, solitary tumor",
author = "Viacheslav Iremashvili and Liset Pelaez and Murugesan Manoharan and Kristell Acosta and Rosenberg, {Daniel L.} and Soloway, {Mark S.}",
year = "2012",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/pros.21481",
language = "English",
volume = "72",
pages = "762--768",
journal = "Prostate",
issn = "0270-4137",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tumor focality is not associated with biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy

AU - Iremashvili, Viacheslav

AU - Pelaez, Liset

AU - Manoharan, Murugesan

AU - Acosta, Kristell

AU - Rosenberg, Daniel L.

AU - Soloway, Mark S.

PY - 2012/5/1

Y1 - 2012/5/1

N2 - Background The clinical and prognostic significance of unifocal prostatic carcinoma is not clearly understood. In the current study, we sought to characterize the clinical and pathologic characteristics of unifocal and multifocal prostate cancers and to investigate the effects of tumor focality on biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Methods Our analysis included 1,444 radical prostatectomy patients with available information concerning the number and location of tumor foci in the specimen. Each patient was assigned to one of three groups depending on whether they had unifocal, multifocal, or extensive cancer. Clinical and pathological features as well as biochemical outcomes were compared between the groups. Results Two hundred and seventy-two mens in the study cohort (18.8%) had unifocal cancer. The rates of unifocal cancer did not differ significantly between the three studied time intervals (17.3% in 1992-1998, 20.5% in 1999-2004, and 17.8% in 2005-2011). The number of positive biopsy cores was slightly lower in the unifocal group, while the overall amount of biopsy tissue containing cancer was similar in both groups. The patients in the multifocal group had higher pathologic Gleason scores, increased incidence of positive surgical margin, and larger tumors. The rate of clinically significant Gleason score upgrade was significantly higher in the multifocal group compared to the unifocal group (35.7% vs. 21.7%, respectively, P < 0.001). The biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy did not differ between patients with unifocal and multifocal cancers both on univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions Tumor focality is not an independent prognostic factor of biochemical outcome in radical prostatectomy patients.

AB - Background The clinical and prognostic significance of unifocal prostatic carcinoma is not clearly understood. In the current study, we sought to characterize the clinical and pathologic characteristics of unifocal and multifocal prostate cancers and to investigate the effects of tumor focality on biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Methods Our analysis included 1,444 radical prostatectomy patients with available information concerning the number and location of tumor foci in the specimen. Each patient was assigned to one of three groups depending on whether they had unifocal, multifocal, or extensive cancer. Clinical and pathological features as well as biochemical outcomes were compared between the groups. Results Two hundred and seventy-two mens in the study cohort (18.8%) had unifocal cancer. The rates of unifocal cancer did not differ significantly between the three studied time intervals (17.3% in 1992-1998, 20.5% in 1999-2004, and 17.8% in 2005-2011). The number of positive biopsy cores was slightly lower in the unifocal group, while the overall amount of biopsy tissue containing cancer was similar in both groups. The patients in the multifocal group had higher pathologic Gleason scores, increased incidence of positive surgical margin, and larger tumors. The rate of clinically significant Gleason score upgrade was significantly higher in the multifocal group compared to the unifocal group (35.7% vs. 21.7%, respectively, P < 0.001). The biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy did not differ between patients with unifocal and multifocal cancers both on univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions Tumor focality is not an independent prognostic factor of biochemical outcome in radical prostatectomy patients.

KW - biochemical recurrence

KW - focality

KW - prostate cancer

KW - prostatectomy

KW - solitary tumor

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860321757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860321757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/pros.21481

DO - 10.1002/pros.21481

M3 - Article

VL - 72

SP - 762

EP - 768

JO - Prostate

JF - Prostate

SN - 0270-4137

IS - 7

ER -