Prostate cancer screening algorithms and preoperative nomograms do not include patients' body mass index (BMI). We evaluated outcomes at radical prostatectomy (RP) adjusted to BMI.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, PSA mass, PSA density (PSAD), and RP findings were analyzed with respect to BMI in 4,926 men who underwent RP between 2005 and 2014.
In total, 1,001 (20.3%) men were normal weight, 2,547 (51.7%) were overweight, and 1,378 (28%) were obese. Median PSA levels (ng/mL) were normal weight, 5.0; overweight, 5.1; and obese, 5.2 (P = .094). Median PSA mass increased with increasing BMI: 15.9 vs 17.4 vs 19.4 μg (P < .001). Median PSAD was not significantly different: 0.11 vs 0.11 vs 0.11 ng/mL/g (P = .084). Median prostate weight increased with increasing BMI: 44 vs 45 vs 49 g (P < .001). Median prostatectomy tumor volume increased with increasing BMI: 3.9 vs 4.7 vs 5.9 cm(3) (P < .001). Overweight and obese patients had a higher Gleason score and more locally advanced cancer (P < .001). Frequency of positive surgical margins increased with higher BMIs (P < .001). Frequency of lymph node metastasis did not differ significantly (P = .088).
While BMI correlates with tumor volume, Gleason score, and extent of disease at RP, there is no routinely measured clinical parameter reflecting this. Only PSA mass highlights this correlation. Thus, BMI and potentially PSA mass should be taken into account in predictive algorithms pertaining to prostate cancer and its surgical treatment.
Clin Pathol. 2015 Aug;144(2):271-7. doi: 10.1309/AJCPQL9MKQ6VDDWL.
Kryvenko ON1, Epstein JI2, Meier FA3, Gupta NS3, Menon M4, Diaz M4.
1From the Departments of Pathology and Urology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL; Department of Pathology
2Departments of Pathology, Urology, and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD; and.
3Department of Pathology and.
4Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.