Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology 7/2020

01-07-2020 | Prostate Cancer | Original Article

Small-volume lymph node involvement and biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection in prostate cancer

Authors: Shuichi Morizane, Masashi Honda, Ryutaro Shimizu, Shogo Teraoka, Ryoma Nishikawa, Panagiota Tsounapi, Yusuke Kimura, Hideto Iwamoto, Katsuya Hikita, Atsushi Takenaka

Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology | Issue 7/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

We investigated prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with extended pelvic lymph node (LN) dissection.

Methods

We included 173 patients who underwent RARP with extended pelvic LN dissection without neoadjuvant therapy at our hospital between October 2010 and April 2018. BCR was defined as prostate serum antigen (PSA) levels ≥ 0.2 ng/mL; BCR-free survival rates were determined using Kaplan–Meier analysis. We used Cox regression analysis to evaluate effects of PSA and pathologic variables on BCR.

Results

Median follow-up was 27.9 (range 6.1–86.9) months. Five-year BCR-free survival was 89.5%. In multivariate analysis, positive LNs (HR 7.117; 95% CI 2.826–17.925; P < 0.001) and Gleason score (GS) ≥ 8 (HR 2.612; 95% CI 1.051–6.489; P = 0.039) were significant predictors of BCR. Patients with 1 or 2 positive LNs (n = 10) had significantly higher BCR-free survival rates than patients with ≥ 3 positive LNs (n = 5). We, therefore, stratified the patients as low-risk (GS < 8 and no positive LNs), intermediate-risk: (either GS ≥ 8 or positive LNs) and high-risk (both GS ≥ 8 and positive LNs). Their 1-year BCR-free survival rates were low-risk: 94.6%, intermediate-risk: 88.5%, and high-risk: 33.3% (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with 1–2 positive LNs and GS < 8 have low risk for BCR; close observation without immediate adjuvant hormonal therapy can be considered for these patients.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:382–404CrossRef Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:382–404CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Srougi V, Bessa J Jr, Baghdadi M et al (2017) Surgical method influences specimen margins and biochemical recurrence during radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol 35:1481–1488CrossRef Srougi V, Bessa J Jr, Baghdadi M et al (2017) Surgical method influences specimen margins and biochemical recurrence during radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol 35:1481–1488CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Fujimura T, Fukuhara H, Taguchi S et al (2017) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy significantly reduced biochemical recurrence compared to retro pubic radical prostatectomy. BMC Cancer 17:454CrossRef Fujimura T, Fukuhara H, Taguchi S et al (2017) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy significantly reduced biochemical recurrence compared to retro pubic radical prostatectomy. BMC Cancer 17:454CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M et al (2014) Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 65:521–531CrossRef Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M et al (2014) Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 65:521–531CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Koo KC, Jung DC, Lee SH et al (2014) Feasibility of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for very-high risk prostate cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes in men aged %3e/=70 years. Prostate Int 2:127–132CrossRef Koo KC, Jung DC, Lee SH et al (2014) Feasibility of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for very-high risk prostate cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes in men aged %3e/=70 years. Prostate Int 2:127–132CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Siddiqui S et al (2007) Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 178:864–870 (discussion 70–71) Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Siddiqui S et al (2007) Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 178:864–870 (discussion 70–71)
7.
go back to reference Masterson TA, Bianco FJ Jr, Vickers AJ et al (2006) The association between total and positive lymph node counts, and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 175:1320–1324 (discussion 4–5) Masterson TA, Bianco FJ Jr, Vickers AJ et al (2006) The association between total and positive lymph node counts, and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 175:1320–1324 (discussion 4–5)
8.
go back to reference Briganti A, Blute ML, Eastham JH et al (2009) Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 55:1251–1265CrossRef Briganti A, Blute ML, Eastham JH et al (2009) Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 55:1251–1265CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Gandaglia G, De Lorenzis E, Novara G et al (2017) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with locally-advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol 71:249–256CrossRef Gandaglia G, De Lorenzis E, Novara G et al (2017) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with locally-advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol 71:249–256CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T et al (2017) The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 72:84–109CrossRef Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T et al (2017) The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 72:84–109CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Preisser F, van den Bergh RCN, Gandaglia G et al (2020) Effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection on oncologic outcomes in patients with D'Amico intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study. J Urol 203:338–343CrossRef Preisser F, van den Bergh RCN, Gandaglia G et al (2020) Effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection on oncologic outcomes in patients with D'Amico intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study. J Urol 203:338–343CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 59:61–71 Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 59:61–71
13.
go back to reference Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71: 618–629 Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71: 618–629
14.
go back to reference Kim DK, Koo KC, Abdel Raheem A et al (2016) Single positive lymph node prostate cancer can be treated surgically without recurrence. PLoS ONE 11:e0152391CrossRef Kim DK, Koo KC, Abdel Raheem A et al (2016) Single positive lymph node prostate cancer can be treated surgically without recurrence. PLoS ONE 11:e0152391CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Briganti A, Karnes JR, Da Pozzo LF et al (2009) Two positive nodes represent a significant cut-off value for cancer specific survival in patients with node positive prostate cancer. A new proposal based on a two-institution experience on 703 consecutive N+ patients treated with radical prostatectomy, extended pelvic lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol 55:261–270 Briganti A, Karnes JR, Da Pozzo LF et al (2009) Two positive nodes represent a significant cut-off value for cancer specific survival in patients with node positive prostate cancer. A new proposal based on a two-institution experience on 703 consecutive N+ patients treated with radical prostatectomy, extended pelvic lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol 55:261–270
16.
go back to reference Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2014) Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol 65:20–25CrossRef Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2014) Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol 65:20–25CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R et al (2003) Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J Urol 169:849–854 Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R et al (2003) Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J Urol 169:849–854
18.
go back to reference Morizane S, Honda M, Fukasawa S et al (2018) Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy and perioperative outcomes of limited versus extended pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional retrospective study in Japan. Int J Clin Oncol 23:568–575CrossRef Morizane S, Honda M, Fukasawa S et al (2018) Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy and perioperative outcomes of limited versus extended pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional retrospective study in Japan. Int J Clin Oncol 23:568–575CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Mohler J, Bahnson RR, Boston B et al (2010) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 8:162–200CrossRef Mohler J, Bahnson RR, Boston B et al (2010) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 8:162–200CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A et al (2014) Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications-a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 65:7–16CrossRef Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A et al (2014) Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications-a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 65:7–16CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Palapattu GS, Allaf ME, Trock BJ et al (2004) Prostate specific antigen progression in men with lymph node metastases following radical prostatectomy: results of long-term followup. J Urol 172:1860–1864CrossRef Palapattu GS, Allaf ME, Trock BJ et al (2004) Prostate specific antigen progression in men with lymph node metastases following radical prostatectomy: results of long-term followup. J Urol 172:1860–1864CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Liesenfeld L, Kron M, Gschwend JE et al (2017) Prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence more than 10 years after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 197:143–148CrossRef Liesenfeld L, Kron M, Gschwend JE et al (2017) Prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence more than 10 years after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 197:143–148CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Badani KK, Reddy BN, Moskowitz EJ et al (2018) Lymph node yield during radical prostatectomy does not impact rate of biochemical recurrence in patients with seminal vesicle invasion and node-negative disease. Urol Oncol 36(310):e1–e6 Badani KK, Reddy BN, Moskowitz EJ et al (2018) Lymph node yield during radical prostatectomy does not impact rate of biochemical recurrence in patients with seminal vesicle invasion and node-negative disease. Urol Oncol 36(310):e1–e6
24.
go back to reference Poelaert F, Joniau S, Roumeguere T et al (2019) Current management of pT3b prostate cancer after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol 2:110–117CrossRef Poelaert F, Joniau S, Roumeguere T et al (2019) Current management of pT3b prostate cancer after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol 2:110–117CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Tosco L, Laenen A, Briganti A et al (2018) The EMPaCT classifier: a validated tool to predict postoperative prostate cancer-related death using competing-risk analysis. Eur Urol Focus 4:369–375CrossRef Tosco L, Laenen A, Briganti A et al (2018) The EMPaCT classifier: a validated tool to predict postoperative prostate cancer-related death using competing-risk analysis. Eur Urol Focus 4:369–375CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J et al (2006) Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol 7:472–479CrossRef Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J et al (2006) Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol 7:472–479CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Seiler R, Studer UE, Tschan K et al (2014) Removal of limited nodal disease in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: long-term results confirm a chance for cure. J Urol 191:1280–1285CrossRef Seiler R, Studer UE, Tschan K et al (2014) Removal of limited nodal disease in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: long-term results confirm a chance for cure. J Urol 191:1280–1285CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Schumacher MC, Burkhard FC, Thalmann GN et al (2008) Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54:344–352CrossRef Schumacher MC, Burkhard FC, Thalmann GN et al (2008) Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54:344–352CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N et al (2015) More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol 67:212–219CrossRef Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N et al (2015) More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol 67:212–219CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Abdollah F, Sun M, Thuret R et al (2012) Lymph node count threshold for optimal pelvic lymph node staging in prostate cancer. Int J Urol 19:645–651CrossRef Abdollah F, Sun M, Thuret R et al (2012) Lymph node count threshold for optimal pelvic lymph node staging in prostate cancer. Int J Urol 19:645–651CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N et al (2008) The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol 53:118–125CrossRef Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N et al (2008) The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol 53:118–125CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Wilczak W, Wittmer C, Clauditz T et al (2018) Marked prognostic impact of minimal lymphatic tumor spread in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 74:376–386CrossRef Wilczak W, Wittmer C, Clauditz T et al (2018) Marked prognostic impact of minimal lymphatic tumor spread in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 74:376–386CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Small-volume lymph node involvement and biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection in prostate cancer
Authors
Shuichi Morizane
Masashi Honda
Ryutaro Shimizu
Shogo Teraoka
Ryoma Nishikawa
Panagiota Tsounapi
Yusuke Kimura
Hideto Iwamoto
Katsuya Hikita
Atsushi Takenaka
Publication date
01-07-2020
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Oncology / Issue 7/2020
Print ISSN: 1341-9625
Electronic ISSN: 1437-7772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-020-01682-1

Other articles of this Issue 7/2020

International Journal of Clinical Oncology 7/2020 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine