To evaluate the validity of the Gleason score after neoadjuvant hormonal treatment as predictor of disease-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy.
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.
A total of 2,880 patients with a complete data set and a mean follow-up of 10.
3 years were studied; 425 of them (15%) had a history of hormonal treatment prior to surgery. The cumulative incidence of deaths from prostate cancer was determined by univariate and multivariate competing risk analysis. Cox proportional hazard models for competing risks were used to study combined effects of the variables on prostate cancer-specific mortality.
A higher portion of specimens with a history of neoadjuvant hormonal treatment were assigned Gleason scores of 8-10 (28 vs. 17%, p < 0. 0001). The mortality curves in the Gleason score strata
This study suggests that the prognostic value of the post-radical prostatectomy Gleason score is not meaningfully jeopardized by heterogeneous neoadjuvant hormonal treatment in a routine clinical setting.
Urologia internationalis. 2015 Oct 07 [Epub ahead of print]
Michael Froehner, Stefan Propping, Rainer Koch, Angelika Borkowetz, Dorothea Liebeheim, Marieta Toma, Gustavo B Baretton, Manfred P Wirth
Department of Urology, Medical Statistics, University Hospital x2018;Carl Gustav Carus', Technische Universitx00E4;t Dresden, Dresden, Germany.