Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 6/2024

14-02-2024 | Prostatectomy | Urologic Oncology

Prognostication in Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer with No PSA Persistence After Radical Prostatectomy

Authors: Masaki Shiota, MD, PhD, Dai Takamatsu, MD, PhD, Yoshiyuki Matsui, MD, PhD, Akira Yokomizo, MD, PhD, Shuichi Morizane, MD, PhD, Ryoichi Saito, MD, PhD, Makito Miyake, MD, PhD, Masakazu Tsutsumi, MD, PhD, Yoshiyuki Yamamoto, MD, PhD, Kojiro Tashiro, MD, PhD, Ryotaro Tomida, MD, Shintaro Narita, MD, PhD, Kohei Edamura, MD, PhD, Takahiro Yamaguchi, MD, PhD, Kohei Hashimoto, MD, PhD, Masashi Kato, MD, PhD, Takashi Kasahara, MD, PhD, Takayuki Yoshino, MD, PhD, Shusuke Akamatsu, MD, PhD, Tomoyuki Kaneko, MD, PhD, Akihiro Matsukawa, MD, Ryuji Matsumoto, MD, PhD, Akira Joraku, MD, PhD, Toshihiro Saito, MD, PhD, Takuma Kato, MD, PhD, Manabu Kato, MD, PhD, Hideki Enokida, MD, PhD, Shinichi Sakamoto, MD, PhD, Naoki Terada, MD, PhD, Hidenori Kanno, MD, PhD, Naotaka Nishiyama, MD, PhD, Takahiro Kimura, MD, PhD, Hiroshi Kitamura, MD, PhD, Masatoshi Eto, MD, PhD, the Japanese Urological Oncology Group

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 6/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to create a prognostic model to predict disease recurrence among patients with lymph node involvement but no prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence and to explore its clinical utility.

Methods

The study analyzed patients with lymph node involvement after pelvic lymph node dissection with radical prostatectomy in whom no PSA persistence was observed between 2006 and 2019 at 33 institutions. Prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

Among 231 patients, 127 experienced disease recurrence. The factors prognostic for RFS were PSA level at diagnosis (≥ 20 vs. < 20 ng/mL: hazard ratio [HR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09–2.52; P = 0.017), International Society of Urological Pathology grade group at radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen (group ≥ 4 vs. ≤ 3: HR, 1.63; 95% CI 1.12–2.37; P = 0.010), pathologic T-stage (pT3b/4 vs. pT2/3a: HR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.20–2.42; P = 0.0031), and surgical margin status (positive vs. negative: HR, 1.60; 95% CI 1.13–2.28; P = 0.0086). The prognostic model using four parameters were associated with RFS and metastasis-free survival.

Conclusion

The prognostic model in combination with postoperative PSA value and number of lymph nodes is clinically useful for discussing treatment choice with patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh QD, Coelho RF, Pontes J Jr, Bastos DA, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79:595–604.CrossRefPubMed Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh QD, Coelho RF, Pontes J Jr, Bastos DA, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79:595–604.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, Laudone VP, Ehdaie B, Eastham JA, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:532–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, Laudone VP, Ehdaie B, Eastham JA, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:532–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Blas L, Shiota M, Nagakawa S, Tsukahara S, Matsumoto T, Monji K, et al. Validation of models predicting lymph node involvement probability in patients with prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2022;29:428–34.CrossRefPubMed Blas L, Shiota M, Nagakawa S, Tsukahara S, Matsumoto T, Monji K, et al. Validation of models predicting lymph node involvement probability in patients with prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2022;29:428–34.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Shiota M, Blas L, Eto M. Current status and future perspective on the management of lymph node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Cancers. 2022;14:2696.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shiota M, Blas L, Eto M. Current status and future perspective on the management of lymph node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Cancers. 2022;14:2696.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Bianchi L, Nini A, Bianchi M, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Suardi N, et al. The role of prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy for the prediction of clinical progression and cancer-specific mortality in node-positive prostate cancer patients. Eur Urol. 2016;69:1142–8.CrossRefPubMed Bianchi L, Nini A, Bianchi M, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Suardi N, et al. The role of prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy for the prediction of clinical progression and cancer-specific mortality in node-positive prostate cancer patients. Eur Urol. 2016;69:1142–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Kim JK, Jeong CW, Ku JH, Kim HH, Kwak C. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence 6 weeks after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection as predictive factor of radiographic progression in node-positive prostate cancer patients. J Cancer. 2019;10:2237–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim JK, Jeong CW, Ku JH, Kim HH, Kwak C. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence 6 weeks after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection as predictive factor of radiographic progression in node-positive prostate cancer patients. J Cancer. 2019;10:2237–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Ploussard G, Fossati N, Wiegel T, D’Amico A, Hofman MS, Gillessen S, et al. Management of persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:150–69.CrossRefPubMed Ploussard G, Fossati N, Wiegel T, D’Amico A, Hofman MS, Gillessen S, et al. Management of persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:150–69.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Shiota M, Takamatsu D, Kimura T, Tashiro K, Matsui Y, Tomida R, et al. Radiotherapy plus androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate-specific antigen persistence in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Cancer Sci. 2022;113:2386–96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shiota M, Takamatsu D, Kimura T, Tashiro K, Matsui Y, Tomida R, et al. Radiotherapy plus androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate-specific antigen persistence in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Cancer Sci. 2022;113:2386–96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Kirisawa T, Shiota M, Kimura T, Edamura K, Miyake M, Morizane S, et al. Comparison of therapeutic features and oncologic outcome in patients with pN1 prostate cancer among robot-assisted, laparoscopic, or open radical prostatectomy. Int J Clin Oncol. 2023;28:306–13.CrossRefPubMed Kirisawa T, Shiota M, Kimura T, Edamura K, Miyake M, Morizane S, et al. Comparison of therapeutic features and oncologic outcome in patients with pN1 prostate cancer among robot-assisted, laparoscopic, or open radical prostatectomy. Int J Clin Oncol. 2023;28:306–13.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 7th edn. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 7th edn. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.
13.
go back to reference Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol. 2016;69:428–35.CrossRefPubMed Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol. 2016;69:428–35.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol. 2014;65:20–5.CrossRefPubMed Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol. 2014;65:20–5.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Pierorazio PM, Gorin MA, Ross AE, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Schaeffer EM, et al. Pathological and oncologic outcomes for men with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy: the Johns Hopkins Hospital 30-year experience. Prostate. 2013;73:1673–80.CrossRefPubMed Pierorazio PM, Gorin MA, Ross AE, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Schaeffer EM, et al. Pathological and oncologic outcomes for men with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy: the Johns Hopkins Hospital 30-year experience. Prostate. 2013;73:1673–80.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Abdollah F, Karnes RJ, Suardi N, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, et al. Predicting survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer following multimodal treatment. Eur Urol. 2014;65:554–62.CrossRefPubMed Abdollah F, Karnes RJ, Suardi N, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, et al. Predicting survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer following multimodal treatment. Eur Urol. 2014;65:554–62.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Mandel P, Rosenbaum C, Pompe RS, Steuber T, Salomon G, Chun FK, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes in patients with limited nodal disease undergoing radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection without adjuvant treatment. World J Urol. 2017;35:1833–9.CrossRefPubMed Mandel P, Rosenbaum C, Pompe RS, Steuber T, Salomon G, Chun FK, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes in patients with limited nodal disease undergoing radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection without adjuvant treatment. World J Urol. 2017;35:1833–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Passoni NM, Fajkovic H, Xylinas E, Kluth L, Seitz C, Robinson BD, et al. Prognosis of patients with pelvic lymph node (LN) metastasis after radical prostatectomy: value of extranodal extension and size of the largest LN metastasis. BJU Int. 2014;114:503–10.CrossRefPubMed Passoni NM, Fajkovic H, Xylinas E, Kluth L, Seitz C, Robinson BD, et al. Prognosis of patients with pelvic lymph node (LN) metastasis after radical prostatectomy: value of extranodal extension and size of the largest LN metastasis. BJU Int. 2014;114:503–10.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Moschini M, Sharma V, Zattoni F, Boorjian SA, Frank I, Gettman MT, et al. Risk stratification of pN+ prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy from a large single-institutional series with long-term follow-up. J Urol. 2016;195:1773–8.CrossRefPubMed Moschini M, Sharma V, Zattoni F, Boorjian SA, Frank I, Gettman MT, et al. Risk stratification of pN+ prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy from a large single-institutional series with long-term follow-up. J Urol. 2016;195:1773–8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Mandel P, Kriegmair MC, Bogdan K, Boehm K, Budäus L, Graefen M, et al. Association between lymph node counts and oncological outcomes in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2017;3:248–55.CrossRefPubMed Mandel P, Kriegmair MC, Bogdan K, Boehm K, Budäus L, Graefen M, et al. Association between lymph node counts and oncological outcomes in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2017;3:248–55.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Moschini M, Sharma V, Gandaglia G, Dell’Oglio P, Fossati N, Zaffuto E, et al. Long-term utility of adjuvant hormonal and radiation therapy for patients with seminal vesicle invasion at radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2017;120:69–75.CrossRefPubMed Moschini M, Sharma V, Gandaglia G, Dell’Oglio P, Fossati N, Zaffuto E, et al. Long-term utility of adjuvant hormonal and radiation therapy for patients with seminal vesicle invasion at radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2017;120:69–75.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Tilki D, Preisser F, Tennstedt P, Tober P, Mandel P, Schlomm T, et al. Adjuvant radiation therapy is associated with better oncological outcome compared with salvage radiation therapy in patients with pN1 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2017;119:717–23.CrossRefPubMed Tilki D, Preisser F, Tennstedt P, Tober P, Mandel P, Schlomm T, et al. Adjuvant radiation therapy is associated with better oncological outcome compared with salvage radiation therapy in patients with pN1 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2017;119:717–23.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Abdollah F, Karnes RJ, Suardi N, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, et al. Impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3939–47.CrossRefPubMed Abdollah F, Karnes RJ, Suardi N, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, et al. Impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3939–47.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Marra G, Valerio M, Heidegger I, Tsaur I, Mathieu R, Ceci F, et al. Management of patients with node-positive prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a systematic review. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020;3:565–81.CrossRefPubMed Marra G, Valerio M, Heidegger I, Tsaur I, Mathieu R, Ceci F, et al. Management of patients with node-positive prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a systematic review. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020;3:565–81.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Prognostication in Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer with No PSA Persistence After Radical Prostatectomy
Authors
Masaki Shiota, MD, PhD
Dai Takamatsu, MD, PhD
Yoshiyuki Matsui, MD, PhD
Akira Yokomizo, MD, PhD
Shuichi Morizane, MD, PhD
Ryoichi Saito, MD, PhD
Makito Miyake, MD, PhD
Masakazu Tsutsumi, MD, PhD
Yoshiyuki Yamamoto, MD, PhD
Kojiro Tashiro, MD, PhD
Ryotaro Tomida, MD
Shintaro Narita, MD, PhD
Kohei Edamura, MD, PhD
Takahiro Yamaguchi, MD, PhD
Kohei Hashimoto, MD, PhD
Masashi Kato, MD, PhD
Takashi Kasahara, MD, PhD
Takayuki Yoshino, MD, PhD
Shusuke Akamatsu, MD, PhD
Tomoyuki Kaneko, MD, PhD
Akihiro Matsukawa, MD
Ryuji Matsumoto, MD, PhD
Akira Joraku, MD, PhD
Toshihiro Saito, MD, PhD
Takuma Kato, MD, PhD
Manabu Kato, MD, PhD
Hideki Enokida, MD, PhD
Shinichi Sakamoto, MD, PhD
Naoki Terada, MD, PhD
Hidenori Kanno, MD, PhD
Naotaka Nishiyama, MD, PhD
Takahiro Kimura, MD, PhD
Hiroshi Kitamura, MD, PhD
Masatoshi Eto, MD, PhD
the Japanese Urological Oncology Group
Publication date
14-02-2024
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 6/2024
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-14999-2

Other articles of this Issue 6/2024

Annals of Surgical Oncology 6/2024 Go to the issue