美国SEER登记的国家综合癌症网络中有利、不利的中高危前列腺癌盆腔淋巴结清扫率的差异

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Rocco Simone Flammia, Benedikt Hoeh, Francesco Chierigo, Lukas Hohenhorst, Gabriele Sorce, Zhen Tian, Costantino Leonardo, Markus Graefen, Carlo Terrone, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi, Felix K H Chun, Michele Gallucci, Pierre I Karakiewicz
{"title":"美国SEER登记的国家综合癌症网络中有利、不利的中高危前列腺癌盆腔淋巴结清扫率的差异","authors":"Rocco Simone Flammia,&nbsp;Benedikt Hoeh,&nbsp;Francesco Chierigo,&nbsp;Lukas Hohenhorst,&nbsp;Gabriele Sorce,&nbsp;Zhen Tian,&nbsp;Costantino Leonardo,&nbsp;Markus Graefen,&nbsp;Carlo Terrone,&nbsp;Fred Saad,&nbsp;Shahrokh F Shariat,&nbsp;Alberto Briganti,&nbsp;Francesco Montorsi,&nbsp;Felix K H Chun,&nbsp;Michele Gallucci,&nbsp;Pierre I Karakiewicz","doi":"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in NCCN high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. We tested for PLND nonadherence (no-PLND) rates within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (2010-2015).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We identified all radical prostatectomy patients who fulfilled the NCCN PLND guideline criteria (n = 23,495). Nonadherence rates to PLND were tabulated and further stratified according to NCCN risk subgroups, race/ethnicity, geographic distribution, and year of diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the no-PLND rate was 26%; it was 41%, 25%, and 11% in the NCCN intermediate favorable, intermediate unfavorable, and high-risk prostate cancer patients, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Over time, the no-PLND rates declined in the overall cohort and within each NCCN risk subgroup. Georgia exhibited the highest no-PLND rate (49%), whereas New Jersey exhibited the lowest (15%). Finally, no-PLND race/ethnicity differences were recorded only in the NCCN intermediate unfavorable subgroup, where Asians exhibited the lowest no-PLND rate (20%) versus African Americans (27%) versus Whites (26%) versus Hispanic-Latinos (25%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The lowest no-PLND rates were recorded in the NCCN high-risk patients followed by NCCN intermediate unfavorable and favorable risk in that order. Our findings suggest that unexpectedly elevated differences in no-PLND rates warrant further examination. In all the NCCN risk subgroups, the no-PLND rates decreased over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":39147,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology","volume":"16 4","pages":"191-196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a6/c7/curr-urol-16-191.PMC9875209.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in rates of pelvic lymph node dissection in National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable, unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer across United States SEER registries.\",\"authors\":\"Rocco Simone Flammia,&nbsp;Benedikt Hoeh,&nbsp;Francesco Chierigo,&nbsp;Lukas Hohenhorst,&nbsp;Gabriele Sorce,&nbsp;Zhen Tian,&nbsp;Costantino Leonardo,&nbsp;Markus Graefen,&nbsp;Carlo Terrone,&nbsp;Fred Saad,&nbsp;Shahrokh F Shariat,&nbsp;Alberto Briganti,&nbsp;Francesco Montorsi,&nbsp;Felix K H Chun,&nbsp;Michele Gallucci,&nbsp;Pierre I Karakiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in NCCN high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. We tested for PLND nonadherence (no-PLND) rates within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (2010-2015).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We identified all radical prostatectomy patients who fulfilled the NCCN PLND guideline criteria (n = 23,495). Nonadherence rates to PLND were tabulated and further stratified according to NCCN risk subgroups, race/ethnicity, geographic distribution, and year of diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the no-PLND rate was 26%; it was 41%, 25%, and 11% in the NCCN intermediate favorable, intermediate unfavorable, and high-risk prostate cancer patients, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Over time, the no-PLND rates declined in the overall cohort and within each NCCN risk subgroup. Georgia exhibited the highest no-PLND rate (49%), whereas New Jersey exhibited the lowest (15%). Finally, no-PLND race/ethnicity differences were recorded only in the NCCN intermediate unfavorable subgroup, where Asians exhibited the lowest no-PLND rate (20%) versus African Americans (27%) versus Whites (26%) versus Hispanic-Latinos (25%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The lowest no-PLND rates were recorded in the NCCN high-risk patients followed by NCCN intermediate unfavorable and favorable risk in that order. Our findings suggest that unexpectedly elevated differences in no-PLND rates warrant further examination. In all the NCCN risk subgroups, the no-PLND rates decreased over time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39147,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Urology\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"191-196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a6/c7/curr-urol-16-191.PMC9875209.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000132\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000132","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:国家综合癌症网络(NCCN)指南推荐盆腔淋巴结清扫(PLND)在NCCN高、中危前列腺癌患者。我们在监测流行病学和最终结果(2010-2015)中测试了PLND不依从性(无PLND)率。材料和方法:我们确定了所有符合NCCN PLND指南标准的根治性前列腺切除术患者(n = 23,495)。将PLND不依从率制成表格,并根据NCCN风险亚组、种族/民族、地理分布和诊断年份进一步分层。结果:总体而言,无plnd率为26%;在NCCN中度有利、中度不利和高危前列腺癌患者中分别为41%、25%和11% (p < 0.001)。随着时间的推移,在整个队列和每个NCCN风险亚组中,无plnd发生率下降。乔治亚州的no-PLND率最高(49%),而新泽西州最低(15%)。最后,无plnd的种族/民族差异仅记录在NCCN中间不利亚组中,其中亚洲人表现出最低的无plnd率(20%),而非裔美国人(27%),白人(26%)和西班牙裔拉丁美洲人(25%)。结论:NCCN高危患者无plnd发生率最低,其次为NCCN中度不良风险和良好风险。我们的研究结果表明,非plnd发生率的意外升高值得进一步检查。在所有NCCN风险亚组中,无plnd发生率随时间下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Differences in rates of pelvic lymph node dissection in National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable, unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer across United States SEER registries.

Differences in rates of pelvic lymph node dissection in National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable, unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer across United States SEER registries.

Differences in rates of pelvic lymph node dissection in National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable, unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer across United States SEER registries.

Differences in rates of pelvic lymph node dissection in National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable, unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer across United States SEER registries.

Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in NCCN high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. We tested for PLND nonadherence (no-PLND) rates within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (2010-2015).

Materials and methods: We identified all radical prostatectomy patients who fulfilled the NCCN PLND guideline criteria (n = 23,495). Nonadherence rates to PLND were tabulated and further stratified according to NCCN risk subgroups, race/ethnicity, geographic distribution, and year of diagnosis.

Results: Overall, the no-PLND rate was 26%; it was 41%, 25%, and 11% in the NCCN intermediate favorable, intermediate unfavorable, and high-risk prostate cancer patients, respectively (p < 0.001). Over time, the no-PLND rates declined in the overall cohort and within each NCCN risk subgroup. Georgia exhibited the highest no-PLND rate (49%), whereas New Jersey exhibited the lowest (15%). Finally, no-PLND race/ethnicity differences were recorded only in the NCCN intermediate unfavorable subgroup, where Asians exhibited the lowest no-PLND rate (20%) versus African Americans (27%) versus Whites (26%) versus Hispanic-Latinos (25%).

Conclusions: The lowest no-PLND rates were recorded in the NCCN high-risk patients followed by NCCN intermediate unfavorable and favorable risk in that order. Our findings suggest that unexpectedly elevated differences in no-PLND rates warrant further examination. In all the NCCN risk subgroups, the no-PLND rates decreased over time.

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
Current Urology
Current Urology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
×
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