You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized (VI)1 Apr 20131349 PREDICTORS OF UPGRADING AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY IN LOW-RISK PROSTATE CANCER: ROLE OF MRI Sang Hoon Song, Sahyun Pak, Sejun Park, Cheryn Song, and Hanjong Ahn Sang Hoon SongSang Hoon Song Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author , Sahyun PakSahyun Pak Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author , Sejun ParkSejun Park Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author , Cheryn SongCheryn Song Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author , and Hanjong AhnHanjong Ahn Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.060AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES We aimed to identify risk factors predicting Gleason sum upgrade after radical prostatectomy (RP) in low risk prostate cancer patients who are candidates for active surveillance, and to evaluate the role of MRI in upgrade prediction. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1,262 patients who underwent twelve-core biopsy, preoperative MRI, and RP in a single center between September 2007 and June 2012. Finally, we included 382 patients with low risk prostate cancer (D'Amico criteria) in the analysis. Predictive factors for Gleason sum upgrading after surgery were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression method. RESULTS The mean age and preoperative PSA was 64.0 ± 7.6 years and 5.0 ± 1.8 ng/ml, respectively. Gleason sum upgrading was found in 212 (55.5%) patients (Table). The lesions of prostate cancer was identifiable on MRI in 249 patients (65.1%); they located in anterior (42.9%) or in posterior (57.0%) of the prostate. In univariate analysis, age, PSA density, number of positive core, percentage tumor volume of a positive core, and the ratio of anteriorly located index cancer on MRI were significantly higher in patients with Gleason sum upgrade. In multivariate analysis, higher age (OR=1.063, 95% CI 1.031-1.095, p<0.001), tumor percent in positive core (OR=1.021, 95% CI 1.004-1.040, p=0.028), and anterior location of cancer on MRI (OR=2.477, 95% CI 1.529-4.013, p<0.001) were remained significant for prediction of Gleason sum upgrade. When selecting patients with insignificant cancer based on Epstein criteria, anterior location of cancer on MRI (OR=4.359, 95% CI 1.172-16.210, p=0.028) was the only significant risk factor for upgrading in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS MRI had a substantial role in predicting Gleason sum upgrade after RP in low risk prostate cancer patients who are candidates for active surveillance. We speculate that tumors in anterior side of the prostate are more difficult to be detected by the contemporary prostate biopsy method so that upgrade of cancer occurs more frequently. Table. Clinicopathologic characteristics according to Gleason sum upgrade Mean ± SD, or n (%) Upgrade (-) (n=170) Upgrade (+) (n=212) P value Age (years) 62.40 ± 7.17 62.36 ± 7.70 <0.001 PSA (ng/ml) 5.03 ± 1.93 5.10 ± 1.72 0.789 PSAD (ng/ml/cc) 0.152 ± 0.089 0.173 ± 0.085 0.025 Prostate volume (cc) 39.14 ± 17.76 35.35 ± 15.89 0.029 Positive biopsy core number 1.94 ± 1.33 2.43 ± 1.75 0.002 Percentage volume of positive core 16.41 ± 11.20 20.74 ± 14.70 0.001 Anterior tumor on MRI <0.001 No 136 (80.0) 129 (60.8) Yes 34 (20.0) 83 (39.2) Index tumor on MRI (coronal view) 0.053 No 71 (41.8) 62 (29.2) Apex 30 (17.6) 36 (17.0) Mid 62 (36.5) 102 (48.1) Base 7 (4.1) 12 (5.7) Index tumor on MRI (transverse view) <0.001 No 71 (41.8) 62 (29.2) Anterior 30 (17.6) 77 (36.3) Posterior 69 (40.6) 73 (34.4) Pathologic tumor volume (%) 5.98 ± 6.64 10.86 ± 8.64 <0.001 Op method 0.102 Retropubic radical prostatectomy 37 (21.8) 62 (29.2) Robot assisted radical prostatectomy 133 (78.2) 150 (70.8) Nerve sparing 0.706 None 7 (7.4) 11 (10.0) Unilateral 4 (4.2) 3 (2.7) Bilateral 84 (88.4) 96 (87.3) Anterior tumor on pathologic mapping 73 (34.3) 140 (65.7) <0.001 pT stage <0.001 2 160 (94.1) 170 (80.2) 3a 9 (5.3) 40 (18.9) 3b 0 (0) 2 (0.9) Pathologic Gleason sum <0.001 6 170 (100) 0 (0) 7 0 (0) 205 (96.7) 8 0 (0) 7 (3.3) Positive resection margin 7 (15.2) 10 (16.9) 1.000 © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e551 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sang Hoon Song Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author Sahyun Pak Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author Sejun Park Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author Cheryn Song Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author Hanjong Ahn Seoul, Korea, Republic of More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract