nach oben

06.09.2024 | Original Article

The Prognostic Role of Lymph Node Dissection for High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Patients: A Population-Based, Retrospective Cohort Study

verfasst von: Jieping Hu, Sheng Huang, Yanyan Hong, Weipeng Liu

Erschienen in: Indian Journal of Surgery

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The role of lymph node dissection in radical prostatectomy in the survival of patients with clinical N0 high-risk localized prostate cancer, has not yet been elucidated. Patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy ± lymph node dissection were identified in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) (2010–2015). Patients were divided into two groups: no lymph node dissection (LNN group) and lymph node dissection (LND group). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier's method and cox multivariate analyses, and subgroup analyses according to the Gleason score were performed. After PSM, there were 12,309 pairs of White patients in the LNN and LND group, age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.076, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.066–1.087, p < 0.001), Gleason score 7 (OR = 0.542, 95% CI 0.432–0.680, p < 0.001), and Gleason score > 7 (OR = 0.531, 95% CI 0.441–0.640, p < 0.001) were associated with overall survival. Subgroup analysis indicated that LND contributed to a limited 2 months better prognosis for patients with a Gleason score > 7 (101.97 VS 99.33 months, p = 0.013), but not for patients with a Gleason score of 7 (103.90 VS 104.16 months, p = 0.24), comparing to these LNN groups. No significant difference was found in subgroup analysis for the Black population when OS and CSS were compared between the no lymph node dissection and lymph node dissection groups. Patients with high-risk prostate cancer should be carefully selected for lymph node dissection. Only some patients can obtain short-term survival benefits, while other patients cannot benefit from lymph node dissection but have the risk of increased complications.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Shiota M, Blas L, Eto M (2022) Current status and future perspective on the management of lymph node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Cancers 14(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14112696

Choo MS, Kim M, Ku JH, Kwak C, Kim HH, Jeong CW (2017) Extended versus standard pelvic lymph node dissection in radical prostatectomy on oncological and functional outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24(7):2047–2054. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5822-6CrossRefPubMed

Iwamura H, Hatakeyama S, Narita T, Ozaki Y, Konishi S, Horiguchi H et al (2022) Significance of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy. Sci Rep 12(1):9675. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13651-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T, van den Bergh RCN, Yuan CY, Briers E et al (2017) The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 72(1):84–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003CrossRefPubMed

Ötleş E, Denton BT, Qu B, Murali A, Merdan S, Auffenberg GB et al (2022) Development and validation of models to predict pathological outcomes of radical prostatectomy in regional and national cohorts. J Urol 207(2):358–366. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000002230CrossRefPubMed

Zheng H, Miao Q, Liu Y, Mirak SA, Hosseiny M, Scalzo F et al (2022) Multiparametric MRI-based radiomics model to predict pelvic lymph node invasion for patients with prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 32(8):5688–5699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08625-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zheng Z, Mao S, Gu Z, Wang R, Guo Y, Zhang W et al (2021) A genomic-clinicopathologic nomogram for the prediction of lymph node invasion in prostate cancer. J Oncol 2021:5554708. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5554708CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ucar T, Gunduz N, Demirci E, Culpan M, Gunel H, Kir G et al (2022) Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and mp-MRI in regard to local staging for prostate cancer with histopathological results: A retrospective study. Prostate. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24420CrossRefPubMed

Schiavina R, Manferrari F, Garofalo M, Bertaccini A, Vagnoni V, Guidi M et al (2011) The extent of pelvic lymph node dissection correlates with the biochemical recurrence rate in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 108(8):1262–1268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.10016.xCrossRefPubMed

10.

Yamashita S, Muraoka S, Wakamiya T (2022) Prognostic impact of lymphatic invasion in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended lymph node dissection: a single-institution prospective cohort study. Cancers 14(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14143466.

11.

Hu J, Yu Y, Liu W (2022) The survival benefit of different lymph node yields in radical prostatectomy for pN1M0 prostate cancer patients: Implications from a population-based study. Front Oncol 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.953069.

12.

Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh QD, Coelho RF, Pontes J Jr, Bastos DA et al (2021) 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 79(5):595–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040CrossRefPubMed

13.

Wang F, Shu X, Pal T, Berlin J, Nguyen SM, Zheng W et al (2022) Racial/ethnic disparities in mortality related to access to care for major cancers in the United States. Cancers 14(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14143390

14.

Małkiewicz B, Kiełb P, Karwacki J, Czerwińska R, Długosz P, Lemiński A et al (2022) Utility of lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: where do we stand? J Clinical Med 11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11092343

15.

Carlsson S, Bottai M, Lantz A, Bjartell A, Hugosson J, Steineck G et al (2022) Lymph swelling after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int 129(6):695–698. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15702CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Badani KK, Reddy BN, Moskowitz EJ, Paulucci DJ, Beksac AT, Martini A et al (2018) Lymph node yield during radical prostatectomy does not impact rate of biochemical recurrence in patients with seminal vesicle invasion and node-negative disease. Urologic Oncol 36(6):310.e1-.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.03.004CrossRef

17.

Seyedin SN, Mitchell DL, Mott SL, Russo JK, Tracy CR, Snow AN et al (2019) Is more always better? an assessment of the impact of lymph node yield on outcome for clinically localized prostate cancer with low/intermediate risk pathology (pT2-3a/pN0) managed with prostatectomy alone. Pathol Oncol Res : POR 25(1):209–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-017-0349-5CrossRefPubMed

18.

Chung JH, Jeong JY, Lee JY, Song W, Kang M, Sung HH et al (2021) Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy according to nadir prostate specific antigen value. PLoS ONE 16(5):e0249709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249709CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Taguchi S, Morikawa T, Shibahara J, Fukuhara H (2021) Prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern in the contemporary era of Gleason grade grouping: A narrative review. Int J Urology : Off J Japanese Urological Assoc 28(6):614–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.14524CrossRef

20.

Lughezzani G, Gallina A, Larcher A, Briganti A, Capitanio U, Suardi N et al (2013) Radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment in patients with specimen-confined high pathological Gleason score prostate cancer. BJU Int 111(5):723–730. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11114.xCrossRefPubMed

21.

Preisser F, Wang N, Abrams-Pompe RS, Chun FK, Graefen M, Huland H et al (2022) Oncologic outcomes of organ-confined Gleason grade group 4-5 prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Urologic Oncol 40(4):1619–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.11.019CrossRef

22.

Heck MM, Retz M, Bandur M, Souchay M, Vitzthum E, Weirich G et al (2018) Molecular Lymph Node Status for Prognostic Stratification of Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy with Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. Clin Cancer Res : An Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res 24(10):2342–2349. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.Ccr-17-3771CrossRef

23.

He J, Albertsen PC, Moore D, Rotter D, Demissie K, Lu-Yao G (2017) Validation of a Contemporary Five-tiered Gleason Grade Grouping Using Population-based Data. Eur Urol 71(5):760–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.11.031CrossRefPubMed

24.

Epstein JI (2022) Is Grade Group 1 (Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6) adenocarcinoma of the prostate really cancer? Curr Opin Urol 32(1):91–95. https://doi.org/10.1097/mou.0000000000000945CrossRefPubMed

25.

Clinckaert A, Devos G, Roussel E, Joniau S (2021) Risk stratification tools in prostate cancer, where do we stand? Transl Androl Urol 10(1):12–18. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1211CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Zhou X, Qiu S, Jin K, Yuan Q, Jin D, Zhang Z et al (2021) Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival Among Patients With Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy Based on the Competing Risk Model: Population-Based Study. Front Surg 8:770169. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.770169CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: The Prognostic Role of Lymph Node Dissection for High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer Patients: A Population-Based, Retrospective Cohort Study
verfasst von: Jieping Hu
Sheng Huang
Yanyan Hong
Weipeng Liu
Publikationsdatum: 06.09.2024
Verlag: Springer India
Erschienen in: Indian Journal of Surgery
Print ISSN: 0972-2068
Elektronische ISSN: 0973-9793
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-024-04153-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Verbände und Cremes gegen Dekubitus: „Wir wissen nicht, was sie bringen!“

17.01.2025
Dekubitus
Nachrichten

Die Datenlage zur Wirksamkeit von Verbänden oder topischen Mitteln zur Prävention von Druckgeschwüren sei schlecht, so die Verfasser einer aktuellen Cochrane-Studie. Letztlich bleibe es unsicher, ob solche Maßnahmen den Betroffenen nutzen oder schaden.

Nackenschmerzen nach Bandscheibenvorfall: Muskeltraining hilft!

15.01.2025
Nackenschmerzen
Nachrichten

Bei hartnäckigen Schmerzen aufgrund einer zervikalen Radikulopathie schlägt ein Team der Universität Istanbul vor, lokale Steroidinjektionen mit einem speziellen Trainingsprogramm zur Stabilisierung der Nackenmuskulatur zu kombinieren.

US-Team empfiehlt Gastropexie nach Hiatushernien-Op.

14.01.2025
Zwerchfellhernie
Nachrichten

Zur Vermeidung von Rezidiven nach Reparatur einer paraösophagealen Hiatushernie sollte einem US-Team zufolge der Magen bei der Op. routinemäßig an der Bauchwand fixiert werden. Das Ergebnis einer randomisierten Studie scheint dafür zu sprechen.

Mit Lidocain kommt der Darm nicht schneller in Schwung

13.01.2025
Kolektomie
Nachrichten

Verzögertes Wiederanspringen der Darmfunktion ist ein Hauptfaktor dafür, wenn Patientinnen und Patienten nach einer Kolonresektion länger als geplant im Krankenhaus bleiben müssen. Ob man diesem Problem mit Lidocain vorbeugen kann, war Thema einer Studie.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen