Comparison of oncological outcomes between extended and no pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with high- or very high-risk prostate cancer: a multi-institutional study

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Prostate International Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prnil.2024.07.002
{"title":"Comparison of oncological outcomes between extended and no pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with high- or very high-risk prostate cancer: a multi-institutional study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.prnil.2024.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite providing valuable staging and prognostic information, the therapeutic benefit of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) remains uncertain. We sought to assess the effect of extended PLND (ePLND) on the biochemical recurrence (BCR) of patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Net (NCCN) high- or very high-risk prostate cancer treated via robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used a multi-institutional database (six centers) to assess 989 patients who underwent RARP from 2014 to 2022 with or without ePLND, among which 699 patients underwent BCR analysis. We performed 1:1 propensity score matching to account for potential differences between the two groups and compared them in terms of BCR-free survival. Cox's regression models were used to test the effect of ePLND on BCR.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 585 patients underwent ePLND and 404 did not. A median of 19 lymph nodes was removed in the ePLND cohort. After propensity score matching, no significant differences in BCR-free survival were observed between the two cohorts (HR 1.108, 95% CI 0.776–1.582, <em>p</em> = 0.556). Multivariable Cox's regression models adjusted for the preoperative and postoperative tumor characteristics revealed that PLND was not an independent predictor of BCR.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>No significant differences in BCR-free survival were observed between NCCN high- or very high-risk prostate cancer patients who underwent PLND during RARP and those who did not. The therapeutic utility of PLND thus remains unclear.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20845,"journal":{"name":"Prostate International","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000539/pdfft?md5=002f028d717b55fb0893bcf6f2a21686&pid=1-s2.0-S2287888224000539-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prostate International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888224000539","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Despite providing valuable staging and prognostic information, the therapeutic benefit of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) remains uncertain. We sought to assess the effect of extended PLND (ePLND) on the biochemical recurrence (BCR) of patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Net (NCCN) high- or very high-risk prostate cancer treated via robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Methods

We used a multi-institutional database (six centers) to assess 989 patients who underwent RARP from 2014 to 2022 with or without ePLND, among which 699 patients underwent BCR analysis. We performed 1:1 propensity score matching to account for potential differences between the two groups and compared them in terms of BCR-free survival. Cox's regression models were used to test the effect of ePLND on BCR.

Results

A total of 585 patients underwent ePLND and 404 did not. A median of 19 lymph nodes was removed in the ePLND cohort. After propensity score matching, no significant differences in BCR-free survival were observed between the two cohorts (HR 1.108, 95% CI 0.776–1.582, p = 0.556). Multivariable Cox's regression models adjusted for the preoperative and postoperative tumor characteristics revealed that PLND was not an independent predictor of BCR.

Conclusion

No significant differences in BCR-free survival were observed between NCCN high- or very high-risk prostate cancer patients who underwent PLND during RARP and those who did not. The therapeutic utility of PLND thus remains unclear.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高危或极高危前列腺癌患者扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫范围与不进行盆腔淋巴结清扫的肿瘤治疗效果比较:一项多机构研究
背景尽管盆腔淋巴结清扫(PLND)提供了有价值的分期和预后信息,但其治疗效果仍不确定。我们试图评估扩展淋巴结清扫术(ePLND)对通过机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术(RARP)接受治疗的美国国家癌症综合网(NCCN)高危或极高危前列腺癌患者的生化复发(BCR)的影响。我们进行了1:1倾向得分匹配,以考虑两组患者之间的潜在差异,并比较了两组患者的无BCR生存率。我们使用 Cox 回归模型检验了 ePLND 对 BCR 的影响。ePLND 组患者切除的淋巴结中位数为 19 个。经过倾向评分匹配后,两组患者的无 BCR 生存率无明显差异(HR 1.108,95% CI 0.776-1.582,P = 0.556)。结论 在RARP期间接受PLND治疗的NCCN高危或极高危前列腺癌患者与未接受PLND治疗的患者在无BCR生存率方面没有明显差异。因此,PLND的治疗作用仍不明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Prostate International
Prostate International Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
26.70%
发文量
40
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: Prostate International (Prostate Int, PI), the official English-language journal of Asian Pacific Prostate Society (APPS), is an international peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to basic and clinical studies on prostate cancer, benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatitis, and ...
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to “Screening and validation of novel serum panel of microRNA in stratification of prostate cancer” [Prostate Int 11 (2023) 150–158] Current status and therapeutic value of extended pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer Negative magnetic resonance imaging cannot be used to omit an initial prostate biopsy - An ambispective study Utility of transperineal template-guided mapping prostate biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with PI-RADS 1-2 on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging The association between inflammatory bowel disease and risk of prostate cancer: a population-based retrospective study based on Korean National Health Insurance Service database
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1