OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the extent of extraprostatic extension (EPE) on biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) after radical prostatectomy (RP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried our RP database from 2004 to 2013. Extent of EPE on RP was divided into 3 groups: no EPE, focal EPE (F-EPE; a few extraprostatic cancer glands on 1-2 slides), and nonfocal EPE (NF-EPE). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models determined the influence of EPE on BCRFS.
RESULTS: A total of 10,750 men underwent RP during the study period. Of these, 7843 men (73.0%) had no EPE, 1258 (11.7%) men had F-EPE, and 1649 men had (15.3%) NF-EPE. Overall BCRFS was worse in men with NF-EPE than those with F-EPE or no EPE. In a multivariate model, F-EPE and NF-EPE were both independently associated with worse BCRFS compared with no EPE (F-EPE: hazard ratio, 2.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.84-3.10; P < .0001; NF-EPE: hazard ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval, 2.89-4.40; P < .0001). When stratified by Gleason score in men without seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node metastases, there was no difference in BCRFS for Gleason score < 6, 3 + 4 = 7, 4 + 3 = 7, and 8 for F-EPE vs no EPE; however, patients with Gleason score of 9-10 with F-EPE had worse BCRFS. Patients with NF-EPE had significantly worse BCRFS for Gleason score < 6, 7, and 8 and a trend for worse BCRFS for Gleason score 9-10 compared with no EPE.
CONCLUSION: Although all men with EPE have higher BCRFS after RP, men with NF-EPE have worse BCRFS than those with F-EPE, supporting the need to substratify pT3a prostate cancer in the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system.
Ball MW, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Are you the author?
Department of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD; Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD; Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD.
Reference: Urology. 2015 Jan;85(1):161-4.