Waaler G, Nilssen M O
Department of Surgery, Aust-Agder Central Hospital, Arendal, Norway.
Urol Int. 1994;53(3):130-4. doi: 10.1159/000282653.
Current clinical trials in disseminated prostatic cancer mostly use M0 or M1 to identify two prognostically different groups of patients. Soloway et al. [Cancer 1988;61:195-202] have shown a significant difference in survival depending on the extent of disease (EOD) on bone scan in M1 disease. Seventy-three prostatic cancer patients with bone-scan-proven metastases (T0-4 Nx M1 G1-3) from the Aust-Agder County in Norway with observation time 2-9 years were followed. The impact of T stage, grade, serum acid phosphatase status and EOD on survival was analyzed. EOD was assessed according to Soloway et al. No statistically significant difference could be demonstrated according to T stage or histological grade. A statistically significant difference in survival could be demonstrated both for normal versus elevated serum acid phosphatase and for EOD. EOD I/II had a better prognosis than EOD III/IV. Stratification of patients in EOD categories seems relevant, but the relative importance of the different EOD categories is not yet established.
目前针对播散性前列腺癌的临床试验大多使用M0或M1来识别两组预后不同的患者。索洛韦等人[《癌症》1988年;61:195 - 202]已经表明,在M1期疾病中,根据骨扫描显示的疾病范围(EOD),患者的生存率存在显著差异。对挪威奥斯特-阿格德尔郡73例经骨扫描证实有转移(T0 - 4 Nx M1 G1 - 3)的前列腺癌患者进行了随访,观察时间为2至9年。分析了T分期、分级、血清酸性磷酸酶状态和EOD对生存率的影响。EOD根据索洛韦等人的方法进行评估。根据T分期或组织学分级未显示出统计学上的显著差异。血清酸性磷酸酶正常与升高以及EOD在生存率方面均显示出统计学上的显著差异。EOD I/II的预后优于EOD III/IV。将患者按EOD类别分层似乎是有意义的,但不同EOD类别的相对重要性尚未确定。