Adherence to pelvic lymph node dissection recommendations according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network pelvic lymph node dissection guideline and the D'Amico lymph node invasion risk stratification.

PURPOSE: To assess adherence rates to pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) PLND guideline (2% or higher risk) and D'Amico lymph node invasion (LNI) risk stratification (intermediate/high risk) in contemporary North American patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We relied on 49,358 patients treated with RP and PLND (2010-2013) in SEER database. Adherence rates were quantified and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression analyses tested for independent predictors. RESULTS: According to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification, PLND was recommended in 63.3% and 64.9% of patients, respectively. Corresponding adherence rates were 68.8% and 69.1%. Adherence rates improved from 67.3% to 71.6% and from 67.6% to 72.0%, respectively, over time. In MVA, more advanced clinical stage, higher biopsy Gleason score and higher number of positive biopsy cores predicted PLNDs that were performed below NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. Conversely, lower clinical stage, lower PSA and lower biopsy Gleason score predicted PLND omission in individuals with risk level above NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. MVA results for D'Amico classification were virtually identical. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification for purpose of PLND is suboptimal in SEER population-based patients treated with RP. However, adherence rates have improved over time. Patients, who did not undergo PLND despite elevated LNI risk, had more favorable PCa characteristics than the average. Conversely, patients, who underwent PLND despite low-risk, had worse PCa characteristics than the average.

Comparison of 11 Active Surveillance Protocols in Contemporary European Men Treated With Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare 11 active surveillance (AS) protocols in contemporary European men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyzed were 3498 RP patients, from 2005 to 2016, who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies and fulfilled at least 1 of 11 examined AS entry definitions. We tested proportions of AS eligibility, ineligibility, presence of primary Gleason 4/5, upstage, and combinations thereof at RP, as well as 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS). RESULTS: The most and least stringent criteria were very low risk National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Royal Marsden with 18.8% and 96.1% of AS-eligible patients, respectively. Rates of primary Gleason 4/5 at RP, upstaging, or both features, respectively, ranged from 2.3% to 6.7%, 6.1% to 18.2%, and 7.1% to 21.0% for those 2 AS entry definitions. The range of individuals deemed AS-ineligible between the same 2 AS entry definitions, despite not harboring unfavorable pathology (primary Gleason pattern 4/5, upstage, or both), was 80.3% to 3.7%, 78.3% to 3.4%, and 77.8% to 3.4%, respectively. BFS rates showed narrow variability, with a range of 85.9% to 91.8%. CONCLUSION: Use of stringent AS entry definitions reduces the number of AS-eligible patients, which is related to a select range in individual entry parameters. Moreover, rates of unfavorable pathology at RP as much as tripled between most and least stringent AS entry definitions. However, less stringent AS entry definitions result in the lowest AS-ineligibility rates, in men without unfavorable pathology. BFS rates were virtually invariably high. Clinicians should know differences in key parameters underlying each AS entry definition, associated effect on rates of eligibility, and potential misclassification of individuals.

North American Population-Based Validation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Practice Guideline Recommendation of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Contemporary Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend a pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) if a nomogram predicted risk of lymph node invasion (LNI) is ≥2%. We examined this and other thresholds, including nomogram validation. METHODS: We examined records of 26,713 patients treated with RP and PLND between 2010 and 2013, within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Nomogram thresholds of 2-5% were tested and external validation was performed. RESULTS: LNI was recorded in 4.7% of patients. Nomogram accuracy was 80.4% and maintained minimum accuracy of 75.6% in subgroup analyses, according to age, race, and nodal yield >10. With the NCCN recommended 2% nomogram threshold, PLND could be avoided in 22.3% of patients at the expense of missing 3.0% of individuals with LNI. Alternative thresholds of 3%, 4%, and 5% yielded respective PLND avoidance rates of 60.4%, 71.0%, and 79.8% at the expense of missing 17.8%, 27.2%, and 36.6% of patients with LNI. NCCN cut-off recommendation was best satisfied with a threshold of <2.6%, at which PLND could be avoided in 13,234 patients (49.5%) versus missing 141 patients with LNI (11.2%). CONCLUSION: NCCN LNI nomogram remains accurate in contemporary patients. However, the 2% threshold appears to be too strict, since only 22.3% of PLNDs can be avoided, instead of the stipulated 47.7%. The optimal 2.6% threshold allows a higher rate of PLND avoidance (49.5%), at the cost of 11.2% missed instances of LNI, as recommended by NCCN guidelines. PATIENT SUMMARY. External validation in contemporary SEER prostate cancer patients showed that the NCCN nomogram remains accurate for predicting lymph node invasion and seems to be optimal at an alternative 2.6% threshold, with best ratio of avoided pelvic lymph node dissections (49.5%) and missed LNIs (11.2%), as recommended by NCCN guideline. Prostate 77:542-548, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Suboptimal use of pelvic lymph node dissection: Differences in guideline adherence between robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to assess adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines for pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of either robot-assisted (RARP) or open radical prostatectomy (ORP). METHODS: We relied on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database and focused on localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients who were treated with either RARP or ORP between October 2008 and December 2009. Categorical and multivariable logistic regression analyses targeted two endpoints: 1) probability of guideline-recommended PLND; and 2) probability of no PLND, when not guideline-recommended. RESULTS: Among 5268 PCa patients, adherence to NCCN PLND guideline was 56.9% during RARP and 76.5% during ORP (odds ratio [OR] 0.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3‒0.6). AUA PLND guideline adherence was 68.1% during RARP and 82.4% during ORP (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5‒0.9). When PLND was not recommended, it was more frequently performed during ORP according to either NCCN (OR 3.7, 95% CI 3.5‒3.9) or AUA (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.6‒2.8). According to the NCCN guideline, at recommended PLND in ORP patients, 6.3% harboured lymph node invasion (LNI) (number needed to treat [NNT] 16) vs. 3.2% at RARP (NNT 31). According to the AUA guideline, at recommended PLND in ORP patients, 12.3% harboured LNI (NNT 8) vs. 5.1% RARP (NNT 19). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to NCCN and AUA PLND guidelines was lower during RARP than during ORP when PLND was recommended. The rate of non-recommended PLND was also higher during ORP than during RARP. Technical considerations may be at play.