MP56-07 ONCOLOGICAL OUTCOMES IN HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: COMPARING GLEASON 8 VERSUS 9,10 DISEASE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized III1 Apr 2015MP56-07 ONCOLOGICAL OUTCOMES IN HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: COMPARING GLEASON 8 VERSUS 9,10 DISEASE Weichen Xu, Jie Cai, Gary Lieskovsky, Siamak Daneshmand, and Hooman Djaladat Weichen XuWeichen Xu More articles by this author , Jie CaiJie Cai More articles by this author , Gary LieskovskyGary Lieskovsky More articles by this author , Siamak DaneshmandSiamak Daneshmand More articles by this author , and Hooman DjaladatHooman Djaladat More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.2071AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Gleason score is an important predictor of oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy. However, it remains unclear whether there is a difference in outcomes between a Gleason score (GS) 8 and a GS 9-10 tumor. We compare oncological outcomes after open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients with GS of 8 versus 9-10. METHODS Of 3755 radical prostatectomy patients at USC (1987-2008), 360 patients who had final cancer pathology of GS 8, 9 or 10 and lymph node negative were included in this study. Age, race, and surgical margins were compared between the two groups without any significant differences. Impact of Gleason scores on outcomes was controlled for preoperative PSA, pathological stage, use of adjuvant radiation therapy and use of neoadjuvant/adjuvant hormone deprivation therapy in multivariable analyses. Outcomes of interest were biochemical recurrence free survival (BCRFS), clinical recurrence free survival (CRFS) and overall survival (OS). Kaplan Meier plots, log rank tests and multivariable Cox regression model were used to analyze the data. RESULTS Median age for both groups was 66 years. Median follow-up for GS 8 and GS 9- 10 were 10.0 years and 8.6 years, respectively (p=0.43). Demographic data and multivariable analysis are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Kaplan Meier curves are presented in Figure 1. Outcomes were not significantly different between different tumor patterns within GS 8. CONCLUSIONS Long term follow up after radical prostatectomy reveals significant differences in BCRFS and CRFS but not OS between patients with GS 8 vs. 9-10 prostate cancers. Further studies may examine sub-stratification of GS 8 tumors into a lower risk category than GS 9-10 tumors. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e683 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Weichen Xu More articles by this author Jie Cai More articles by this author Gary Lieskovsky More articles by this author Siamak Daneshmand More articles by this author Hooman Djaladat More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...