The Prostate · 2021
Prostate weight and prostate cancer outcomes after radical prostatectomy: Results from the SEARCH cohort study.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barlow Sean Kennedy, Oyekunle Taofik, Janes Jessica L, De Hoedt Amanda M, Aronson William J, Kane Christopher J, Amling Christopher L, Cooperberg Matthew R, Klaassen Zachary W, Terris Martha K, Freedland Stephen J, Csizmadi Ilona
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Smaller prostates have been linked to unfavorable clinical characteristics and poor short-term outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP). We examined the relation between prostate weight at RP and prostate cancer (PC) outcomes post-RP.
METHODS: Men in the SEARCH cohort undergoing RP between 1988 and 2017 (N = 6242) were studied for PC-specific mortality (PCSM) as the primary outcome, and for biochemical recurrence (BCR), castration-resistant PC (CRPC) and metastasis as secondary outcomes. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined for associations between prostate weight and outcomes using Fine-Gray competing risk regression multivariable analyses. Sensitivity analyses were also carried out following exclusion of: (i) men with extreme prostate weights (<20 g and ≥100 g); and (ii) men with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels.
RESULTS: Median values for age, pre-RP PSA and prostate weight were 63 years, 6.6 ng/ml, and 42.0 g, respectively. During a median follow-up of 7.9 years, 153 (3%) died from PC, 2103 (34%) had BCR, 203 (3%) developed CRPC, and 289 (5%) developed metastases. Prostate weight was not associated with PCSM in the main analyses (multivariable HR = 1.43; 95% CI: 0.87-2.34) or in sensitivity analyses. Prostate weight was inversely associated with BCR in the main analyses (multivariable HR = 0.70; 95%CI: 0.61-0.79) which was unchanged in sensitivity analyses. HRs for prostate weight and CRPC and metastasis were elevated but statistical significance was not attained. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent results for prostate weight and short-term vs longer-term outcomes highlight the need to better understand the complex biology leading to prostate size and the relevance of prostate size as a predictor of PC outcomes.
METHODS: Men in the SEARCH cohort undergoing RP between 1988 and 2017 (N = 6242) were studied for PC-specific mortality (PCSM) as the primary outcome, and for biochemical recurrence (BCR), castration-resistant PC (CRPC) and metastasis as secondary outcomes. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined for associations between prostate weight and outcomes using Fine-Gray competing risk regression multivariable analyses. Sensitivity analyses were also carried out following exclusion of: (i) men with extreme prostate weights (<20 g and ≥100 g); and (ii) men with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels.
RESULTS: Median values for age, pre-RP PSA and prostate weight were 63 years, 6.6 ng/ml, and 42.0 g, respectively. During a median follow-up of 7.9 years, 153 (3%) died from PC, 2103 (34%) had BCR, 203 (3%) developed CRPC, and 289 (5%) developed metastases. Prostate weight was not associated with PCSM in the main analyses (multivariable HR = 1.43; 95% CI: 0.87-2.34) or in sensitivity analyses. Prostate weight was inversely associated with BCR in the main analyses (multivariable HR = 0.70; 95%CI: 0.61-0.79) which was unchanged in sensitivity analyses. HRs for prostate weight and CRPC and metastasis were elevated but statistical significance was not attained. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent results for prostate weight and short-term vs longer-term outcomes highlight the need to better understand the complex biology leading to prostate size and the relevance of prostate size as a predictor of PC outcomes.