Fleischmann Achim, Schobinger Sylviane, Schumacher Martin, Thalmann George N, Studer Urs E
Department of Pathology, University of Bern, Switzerland.
Prostate. 2009 Mar 1;69(4):352-62. doi: 10.1002/pros.20889.
Histopathological risk factors for survival stratification of surgically treated nodal positive prostate cancer patients are poorly defined as reflected by only one category for nodal metastases.
We evaluated biochemical recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS) in 102 nodal positive, hormone treatment-naïve prostate cancer patients (median age: 65 years, range: 45-75 years; median follow-up 7.7 years, range: 1.0-15.9 years) who underwent radical prostatectomy and standardized extended lymphadenectomy.
A significant stratification was possible, with the Gleason score of the primary and virtually all nodal parameters favoring patients with better differentiated primaries and metastases, lower nodal tumor burden, and without extranodal extension of metastases. In multivariate analyses, diameter of the largest metastasis (< or =10 mm vs. >10 mm) was the strongest independent predictor for RFS (P < 0.001), DSS (P < 0.001), and OS (P < 0.001) with a more than quadrupled relative risk of cancer related deaths for patients with larger metastases (Hazard ratio: 4.2, Confidence interval: 2.0-8.9; 5-year RFS/DSS/OS: 18%/57%/54%). The highest 5-year survival rates were seen in patients with micrometastases only (RFS/DSS/OS: 47%/94%/94%).
The TNM classification's current allocation of only one category for nodal metastases in prostate cancers is unsatisfactory since subgroups with significantly different prognoses can be identified. The diameter of the patient's largest metastasis (< or =10 mm vs. >10 mm) should be used for substaging because of its independent prognostic value. The substage "micrometastasis only" is also useful in nodal positive prostate cancer since it designates the subgroup with the most favorable outcome.
手术治疗的淋巴结阳性前列腺癌患者生存分层的组织病理学危险因素定义不明确,这一点从淋巴结转移仅分为一类即可看出。
我们评估了102例淋巴结阳性、未接受过激素治疗的前列腺癌患者(中位年龄:65岁,范围:45 - 75岁;中位随访7.7年,范围:1.0 - 15.9年)的无生化复发生存期(RFS)、疾病特异性生存期(DSS)和总生存期(OS),这些患者均接受了根治性前列腺切除术和标准化扩大淋巴结清扫术。
进行显著分层是可行的,原发灶的Gleason评分以及几乎所有淋巴结参数都表明,原发灶和转移灶分化程度更高、淋巴结肿瘤负荷更低且无转移灶结外扩展的患者预后更好。在多变量分析中,最大转移灶直径(≤10 mm与>10 mm)是RFS(P<0.001)、DSS(P<0.001)和OS(P<0.001)最强的独立预测因素,转移灶较大的患者癌症相关死亡的相对风险增加四倍多(风险比:4.2,置信区间:2.0 - 8.9;5年RFS/DSS/OS:18%/57%/54%)。仅存在微转移的患者5年生存率最高(RFS/DSS/OS:47%/94%/94%)。
TNM分类目前对前列腺癌淋巴结转移仅分为一类并不令人满意,因为可以识别出预后显著不同的亚组。鉴于患者最大转移灶直径(≤10 mm与>10 mm)具有独立的预后价值,应将其用于进一步分期。“仅微转移”这一分期在淋巴结阳性前列腺癌中也很有用,因为它指定了预后最有利的亚组。