盆腔淋巴结清扫与前列腺癌根治术患者生存率的关系

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Isaac E. Kim Jr. , Aaron H. Wang , George S. Corpuz , Preston C. Sprenkle , Michael S. Leapman , Joseph M. Brito , Joseph Renzulli , Isaac Yi Kim
{"title":"盆腔淋巴结清扫与前列腺癌根治术患者生存率的关系","authors":"Isaac E. Kim Jr. ,&nbsp;Aaron H. Wang ,&nbsp;George S. Corpuz ,&nbsp;Preston C. Sprenkle ,&nbsp;Michael S. Leapman ,&nbsp;Joseph M. Brito ,&nbsp;Joseph Renzulli ,&nbsp;Isaac Yi Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.prnil.2024.01.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Although the clinical benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remain uncertain, major guidelines recommend PLND based on risk profile. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the association between PLND and survival among patients undergoing RP stratified by Gleason grade group (GG) with the aim of allowing patients and physicians to make more informed care decisions about the potential risks and benefits of PLND.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>From the SEER-17 database, we examined overall (OS) and prostate cancer-specific (PCSS) survival of prostate cancer patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2015 stratified by GG. We applied propensity score matching to balance pre-operative characteristics including race, age, PSA, household income, and housing status (urban/rural) between patients who did and did not undergo PLND for each GG. Statistical analyses included log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We extracted a matched cohort from 80,287 patients with GG1-5 who underwent RP. The median PSA value was 6.0 ng/mL, and the median age was 62-years-old. 49,453 patients underwent PLND (61.60%), while 30,834 (38.40%) did not. There was no difference in OS and PCSS between patients who received PLND and those who did not for all Gleason GG (OS–GG1: <em>P</em> = 0.20, GG2: <em>P</em> = 0.34, GG3: <em>P</em> &gt; 0.05, GG4: <em>P</em> = 0.55, GG5: <em>P</em> = 0.47; PCSS–GG1: <em>P</em> = 0.11, GG2: <em>P</em> = 0.96, GG3: <em>P</em> = 0.81, GG4: <em>P</em> = 0.22, GG5: <em>P</em> = 0.14).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this observational study, PLND at the time of RP was not associated with improved OS or PCSS among patients with cGS of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 4 + 4, 4 + 5, and 5 + 4. These findings suggest that until definitive clinical trials are completed, prostate cancer patients who have elected RP should be appropriately counseled on the potential risks and lack of proven survival benefit of PLND.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20845,"journal":{"name":"Prostate International","volume":"12 2","pages":"Pages 70-78"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000023/pdfft?md5=0ca840c0e08106ea2975754f1f3bfaba&pid=1-s2.0-S2287888224000023-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association between pelvic lymph node dissection and survival among patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy\",\"authors\":\"Isaac E. Kim Jr. ,&nbsp;Aaron H. Wang ,&nbsp;George S. Corpuz ,&nbsp;Preston C. Sprenkle ,&nbsp;Michael S. Leapman ,&nbsp;Joseph M. Brito ,&nbsp;Joseph Renzulli ,&nbsp;Isaac Yi Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prnil.2024.01.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Although the clinical benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remain uncertain, major guidelines recommend PLND based on risk profile. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the association between PLND and survival among patients undergoing RP stratified by Gleason grade group (GG) with the aim of allowing patients and physicians to make more informed care decisions about the potential risks and benefits of PLND.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>From the SEER-17 database, we examined overall (OS) and prostate cancer-specific (PCSS) survival of prostate cancer patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2015 stratified by GG. We applied propensity score matching to balance pre-operative characteristics including race, age, PSA, household income, and housing status (urban/rural) between patients who did and did not undergo PLND for each GG. Statistical analyses included log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We extracted a matched cohort from 80,287 patients with GG1-5 who underwent RP. The median PSA value was 6.0 ng/mL, and the median age was 62-years-old. 49,453 patients underwent PLND (61.60%), while 30,834 (38.40%) did not. There was no difference in OS and PCSS between patients who received PLND and those who did not for all Gleason GG (OS–GG1: <em>P</em> = 0.20, GG2: <em>P</em> = 0.34, GG3: <em>P</em> &gt; 0.05, GG4: <em>P</em> = 0.55, GG5: <em>P</em> = 0.47; PCSS–GG1: <em>P</em> = 0.11, GG2: <em>P</em> = 0.96, GG3: <em>P</em> = 0.81, GG4: <em>P</em> = 0.22, GG5: <em>P</em> = 0.14).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this observational study, PLND at the time of RP was not associated with improved OS or PCSS among patients with cGS of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 4 + 4, 4 + 5, and 5 + 4. These findings suggest that until definitive clinical trials are completed, prostate cancer patients who have elected RP should be appropriately counseled on the potential risks and lack of proven survival benefit of PLND.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prostate International\",\"volume\":\"12 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 70-78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000023/pdfft?md5=0ca840c0e08106ea2975754f1f3bfaba&pid=1-s2.0-S2287888224000023-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prostate International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000023\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prostate International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言尽管前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术时进行盆腔淋巴结清扫(PLND)的临床益处仍不确定,但主要指南仍建议根据风险情况进行盆腔淋巴结清扫。因此,本研究的目的是研究按格里森分级组(GG)分层的前列腺癌根治术患者盆腔淋巴结清扫术与生存率之间的关系,以便患者和医生就盆腔淋巴结清扫术的潜在风险和益处做出更明智的治疗决策。材料与方法我们从SEER-17数据库中研究了2010年至2015年按GG分层的前列腺癌根治术患者的总生存率(OS)和前列腺癌特异性生存率(PCSS)。我们采用倾向得分匹配法来平衡每个GG中接受和未接受PLND的患者的术前特征,包括种族、年龄、PSA、家庭收入和住房状况(城市/农村)。统计分析包括对数秩检验和 Kaplan-Meier 曲线。PSA中位值为6.0纳克/毫升,中位年龄为62岁。49,453 名患者接受了 PLND(61.60%),30,834 名患者(38.40%)没有接受 PLND。在所有 Gleason GG 中,接受 PLND 和未接受 PLND 的患者在 OS 和 PCSS 方面均无差异(OS-GG1:P = 0.20,GG2:P=0.34,GG3:P> 0.05,GG4:P=0.55,GG5:P=0.47;PCSS-GG1:P=0.11,GG2:P=0.96,GG5:P=0.47:结论在这项观察性研究中,对于 cGS 为 3 + 3、3 + 4、4 + 3、4 + 4、4 + 5 和 5 + 4 的患者,RP 时的 PLND 与 OS 或 PCSS 的改善无关。这些研究结果表明,在明确的临床试验完成之前,应适当向选择 RP 的前列腺癌患者说明 PLND 的潜在风险和缺乏经证实的生存益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association between pelvic lymph node dissection and survival among patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy

Introduction

Although the clinical benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remain uncertain, major guidelines recommend PLND based on risk profile. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the association between PLND and survival among patients undergoing RP stratified by Gleason grade group (GG) with the aim of allowing patients and physicians to make more informed care decisions about the potential risks and benefits of PLND.

Materials and methods

From the SEER-17 database, we examined overall (OS) and prostate cancer-specific (PCSS) survival of prostate cancer patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2015 stratified by GG. We applied propensity score matching to balance pre-operative characteristics including race, age, PSA, household income, and housing status (urban/rural) between patients who did and did not undergo PLND for each GG. Statistical analyses included log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves.

Results

We extracted a matched cohort from 80,287 patients with GG1-5 who underwent RP. The median PSA value was 6.0 ng/mL, and the median age was 62-years-old. 49,453 patients underwent PLND (61.60%), while 30,834 (38.40%) did not. There was no difference in OS and PCSS between patients who received PLND and those who did not for all Gleason GG (OS–GG1: P = 0.20, GG2: P = 0.34, GG3: P > 0.05, GG4: P = 0.55, GG5: P = 0.47; PCSS–GG1: P = 0.11, GG2: P = 0.96, GG3: P = 0.81, GG4: P = 0.22, GG5: P = 0.14).

Conclusions

In this observational study, PLND at the time of RP was not associated with improved OS or PCSS among patients with cGS of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 4 + 4, 4 + 5, and 5 + 4. These findings suggest that until definitive clinical trials are completed, prostate cancer patients who have elected RP should be appropriately counseled on the potential risks and lack of proven survival benefit of PLND.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Prostate International
Prostate International Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
26.70%
发文量
40
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: Prostate International (Prostate Int, PI), the official English-language journal of Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS), is an international peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to basic and clinical studies on prostate cancer, benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatitis, and ...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信