Incidence and Predictors of Upgrading and Up Staging among 10,000 Contemporary Patients with Low Risk Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We determined the incidence of pathological upgrading and up staging for contemporary, clinically low risk patients, and identified predictors of having occult, advanced disease to inform the selection of patients for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 10,273 patients in the SEER database diagnosed with clinically low risk disease (cT1c/T2a, prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, Gleason 3 + 3 = 6) in 2010 to 2011 and treated with prostatectomy. The primary outcome was the incidence of upgrading to pathological Gleason score 7-10 or up staging to pathological T3-T4/N1 disease. Multivariable logistic regression of cases with complete biopsy data (5,581) identified significant predictors of upgrading or up staging, which were then used to create a risk stratification table. RESULTS: At prostatectomy 44% of cases were upgraded and 9.7% were up staged. Multivariable analysis of 5,581 patients showed age, prostate specific antigen and percent positive cores (all p < 0.001) but not race were associated with occult, advanced disease. With these variables dichotomized at the median, age older than 60 years (AOR 1.39), prostate specific antigen greater than 5.0 ng/ml (AOR 1.28) and more than 25% positive cores (AOR 1.76) were significantly associated with upgrading (all p < 0.001). Similarly, age older than 60 years (AOR 1.42), prostate specific antigen greater than 5.0 ng/ml (AOR 1.44) and more than 25% positive cores (AOR 2.26) were associated with up staging (all p < 0.001). Overall 60% of 5,581 low risk cases with prostate specific antigen 7.5 to 9.9 ng/ml and more than 25% positive cores were upgraded. This study is limited by possible bias introduced by only using patients selected for prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of clinically low risk patients harbor Gleason 7 or greater, or pT3 or greater disease, and should be risk stratified by prostate specific antigen and percent positive cores for consideration of further testing before deciding on active surveillance.

Perceptions of Active Surveillance and Treatment Recommendations for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Results from a National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists.

BACKGROUND: With the growing concerns about overtreatment in prostate cancer, the extent to which radiation oncologists and urologists perceive active surveillance (AS) as effective and recommend it to patients are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess opinions of radiation oncologists and urologists about their perceptions of AS and treatment recommendations for low-risk prostate cancer. RESEARCH DESIGN: National survey of specialists. PARTICIPANTS: Radiation oncologists and urologists practicing in the United States. MEASURES: A total of 1366 respondents were asked whether AS was effective and whether it was underused nationally, whether their patients were interested in AS, and treatment recommendations for low-risk prostate cancer. Pearson's χ test and multivariate logistic regression were used to test for differences in physician perceptions on AS and treatment recommendations. RESULTS: Overall, 717 (52.5%) of physicians completed the survey with minimal differences between specialties (P=0.92). Although most physicians reported that AS is effective (71.9%) and underused in the United States (80.0%), 71.0% stated that their patients were not interested in AS. For low-risk prostate cancer, more physicians recommended radical prostatectomy (44.9%) or brachytherapy (35.4%); fewer endorsed AS (22.1%). On multivariable analysis, urologists were more likely to recommend surgery [odds ratio (OR): 4.19; P<0.001] and AS (OR: 2.55; P<0.001), but less likely to recommend brachytherapy (OR: 0.13; P<0.001) and external beam radiation therapy (OR: 0.11; P<0.001) compared with radiation oncologists. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Most prostate cancer specialists in the United States believe AS effective and underused for low-risk prostate cancer, yet continue to recommend the primary treatments their specialties deliver.

Predictors of survival in patients with soft tissue surgical margin involvement at radical cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: The presence of positive soft tissue surgical margins (STSM) at radical cystectomy (RC) is rare. Although some patients with STSM experience disease recurrence rapidly, some have long-term local disease control. We sought to describe the oncologic outcomes, identify predictors, and assess the impact of location and multifocality in patients with positive STSMs at RC. METHODS: We retrospectively collected the data of 4,335 patients treated with RC and pelvic lymphadenectomy at 11 academic centers from 1981 to 2008. STSM was defined as the presence of tumor at inked areas of soft tissue on the RC specimen. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models addressed recurrence-free survival and cancer-specific survival after surgery. RESULTS: STSM were identified in 231 patients (5%). Actuarial recurrence-free survival estimates at 2 and 5 years after RC were 26 ± 3 and 21 ± 3%, respectively. Actuarial cancer-specific survival estimates at 2 and 5 years after RC were 33 ± 3 and 25 ± 4%, respectively. Higher body mass index (p = 0.050), higher tumor stage (p = 0.017), presence of grade 3 disease (p = 0.046), lymphovascular invasion (p = 0.003), and lymph node involvement (p = 0.003) were all independently associated with disease recurrence. Furthermore, higher tumor stage (p = 0.015), lymphovascular invasion (p = 0.006), and lymph node involvement (p = 0.006) were independently associated with cancer specific mortality. Location and multifocality of STSM were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients with STSM at RC had poor outcomes, more than one-fifth had durable cancer control. Pathologic features associated with disease recurrence in the general RC population also stratify patients with STSM into differential risk groups.

Approach to the Patient with High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Men classified as having high-risk prostate cancer warrant treatment because durable outcomes can be achieved. Judicious use of imaging and considerations of risk factors are essential when caring for men with high-risk disease. Radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and androgen deprivation therapy all play pivotal roles in the management of men with high-risk disease, and potentially in men with metastatic disease. The optimal combinations of therapeutic regimens are an evolving area of study and future work looking into therapies for men with high-risk disease will remain critical.