Radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostatic adenocarcinoma. Factors influencing biochemical progression free survival
Martín-Marquina Aspiunza A, Sánchez Zalabardo D, Arocena García-Tapia J, Sanz Pérez G, Díez Caballero F, Rosell Costa D, Robles García JE, Berián Polo JM.
MATERIAL AND METHOD
Study of biochemical progression (PSA > 0.5 ng/ml) and biochemical progression-free survival in 160 patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma who underwent radical prostatectomy at the University Clinic in Navarra between 1988-1997.
At the end of the study, 120 patients (75%) are alive and free of progression, 33 (20%) are alive and in progression, 3 (1.9%) died of cancer, and 4 (2.5%) died for other causes. Biochemical progression occurred in 43/160 (27%) patients. Progression is related to previous PSA, both in absolute terms and divided into greater or smaller than 15 ng/ml; to Gleason grade greater or smaller than 7 or divided into 2-4, 5-7, 8-10; to pathological stage and to urethro-vesical junction stenosis. Biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) in the univariate study is related to PSA (the ideal prognostic cut-off value being 15 ng/ml); to Gleason, specially when divided into 2-4, 5-7, 8-10; to the pathological stage and to margins. The multivariate study evidences that the single most influential factors are PSA (divided as greater or smaller than 15 ng/ml), Gleason grade (divided into: 2-4, 5-7, 8-10) and margins involvement. There are 3 highly reliable risk groups based on PSA, Gleason and clinical stage. When these are introduced as variables in the multivariate study, they appear as the strongest predictive variables.
The influential factors on progression-free survival are PSA (15 ng/ml being the best prognostic cut-off value), Gleason grade (divided into 2-4, 5-7, 8-10) and margins' positivity, which are the single most significant pathological factor ahead of clinical stage. Serum PSA, clinical stage and Gleason grade allow to define three reliable risk groups.
CITATION Actas Urol Esp. 1999 Apr;23(4):333-41