Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada.
Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada; Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Eur Urol Focus. 2022 May;8(3):710-717. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011. Epub 2021 Apr 28.
Previous cancer-specific mortality (CSM) analyses for different Gleason patterns in Gleason grade group (GGG) 5 cancer were limited by sample size.
To test for differences in CSM according to biopsy GG 5 patterns (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database treated with RP and EBRT (2004-2016) were identified and stratified according to Gleason 4 + 5 versus 5 + 4 versus 5 + 5.
RP or EBRT.
Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models predicting CSM were constructed.
Of 17 263 eligible patients with GG 5 cancer at biopsy (RP: n = 7208; EBRT: n = 10 055), 12 705 had Gleason 4 + 5, 3302 had Gleason 5 + 4, and 1256 had Gleason 5 + 5 disease. Median age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and advanced cT and cN stages significantly differed by Gleason pattern (Gleason 4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5; all p < 0.001). The 10-yr CSM rate was 18.2% for Gleason 4 + 5, 28.0% for Gleason 5 + 4, and 39.1% for Gleason 5 + 5 (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses for the entire cohort adjusted for PSA, age at diagnosis, and cT and cN stage, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.2-fold higher CSM, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5. In addition, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.5-fold, and 1.5- and 2.1-fold higher CSM rates in the RP and EBRT subgroups, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5 (all p < 0.001).
For patients with biopsy GG 5 prostate cancer treated with RP or EBRT, there are important CSM differences by Gleason pattern (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5). Ideally, the individual Gleason pattern should be considered in pretreatment risk stratification.
For patients with grade 5 prostate cancer, we found differences in cancer-specific death rates according to the pattern of abnormal cells in the prostate, called the Gleason score. The highest death rate was found for a Gleason pattern score of 5 + 5, followed by Gleason 5 + 4 and then Gleason 4 + 5. These differences were observed for both patients who were treated with prostate removal and patients who underwent radiotherapy.
以前针对 Gleason 分级组 (GGG) 5 级癌症中不同 Gleason 模式的癌症特异性死亡率 (CSM) 分析受到样本量的限制。
在接受根治性前列腺切除术 (RP) 或外束放射治疗 (EBRT) 的患者中,通过活检 GG 5 模式(4+5 对 5+4 对 5+5)来检验 CSM 差异。
设计、设置和参与者:在 Surveillance,Epidemiology and End Results 数据库中,根据 Gleason 4+5 与 5+4 与 5+5 对接受 RP 和 EBRT(2004-2016)的患者进行识别和分层。
RP 或 EBRT。
构建了预测 CSM 的 Kaplan-Meier 和多变量 Cox 回归模型。
在 17263 名符合活检 GG 5 级癌症标准的患者中(RP:n=7208;EBRT:n=10055),12705 名患者为 Gleason 4+5 模式,3302 名患者为 Gleason 5+4 模式,1256 名患者为 Gleason 5+5 模式。中位年龄、诊断时前列腺特异性抗原 (PSA) 和晚期 cT 和 cN 期按 Gleason 模式显著不同(Gleason 4+5 vs 5+4 vs 5+5;均 p<0.001)。Gleason 4+5、Gleason 5+4 和 Gleason 5+5 的 10 年 CSM 率分别为 18.2%、28.0%和 39.1%(p<0.001)。在整个队列中,对 PSA、诊断时年龄和 cT 和 cN 期进行多变量调整后,Gleason 5+4 和 Gleason 5+5 与 Gleason 4+5 相比,分别与 CSM 增加 1.6 倍和 2.2 倍相关。此外,在 RP 和 EBRT 亚组中,Gleason 5+4 和 Gleason 5+5 分别与 CSM 增加 1.6 倍和 2.5 倍、1.5 倍和 2.1 倍相关,与 Gleason 4+5 相比(均 p<0.001)。
对于接受 RP 或 EBRT 治疗的活检 GG 5 级前列腺癌患者,Gleason 模式(4+5 vs 5+4 vs 5+5)存在重要的 CSM 差异。理想情况下,在术前风险分层中应考虑个体 Gleason 模式。
对于患有 5 级前列腺癌的患者,我们发现根据前列腺中异常细胞的模式(称为 Gleason 评分),癌症特异性死亡率存在差异。Gleason 模式评分 5+5 的死亡率最高,其次是 Gleason 5+4,然后是 Gleason 4+5。这些差异在接受前列腺切除术和接受放疗的患者中均观察到。