Contemporary update of cancer control after radical prostatectomy in the UK

Despite a significant increase of the number of radical prostatectomies (RPs) to treat organ-confined prostate cancer, there is very limited documentation of its oncological outcome in the UK. Pathological stage distribution and changes of outcome have not been audited on a consistent basis. We present the results of a multicentre review of postoperative predictive variables and prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after RP for clinically organ-confined disease. In all, 854 patient's notes were audited for staging parameters and follow-up data obtained. Patients with neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment as well as patients with incomplete data and follow-up were excluded. Median follow-up was 52 months for the remaining 705 patients. The median PSA was 10 ng ml−1. A large migration towards lower PSA and stage was seen. This translated into improved PSA survival rates. Overall Kaplan–Meier PSA recurrence-free survival probability at 1, 3, 5 and 8 years was 0.83, 0.69, 0.60 and 0.48, respectively. The 5-year PSA recurrence-free survival probability for PSA ranges 20 ng ml−1 was 0.82, 0.73, 0.59 and 0.20, respectively (log rank, P<0.0001). PSA recurrence-free survival probabilities for pathological Gleason grade 2–4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8–10 at 5 years were 0.84, 0.66, 0.55 and 0.21, respectively (log rank, P<0.0001). Similarly, 5-year PSA recurrence-free survival probabilities for pathological stages T2a, T2b, T3a, T3b and T4 were 0.82, 0.78, 0.48, 0.23 and 0.12, respectively (log rank, P=0.0012). Oncological outcome after RP has improved over time in the UK. PSA recurrence-free survival estimates are less optimistic compared to quoted survival figures in the literature. Survival figures based on pathological stage and Gleason grade may serve to counsel patients postoperatively and to stratify patients better for adjuvant treatment

Stage T1c prostate cancer: defining the appropriate staging evaluation and the role for pelvic lymphadenectomy

A good staging system should be able to accurately reflect the natural history of a malignant disease, to express the extent of the disease at the time of diagnosis, and stratify patients in prognostically distinctive groups. The staging system for prostate cancer, as it is today, fails to fulfill these requirements. Approximately one third of the patients who undergo surgery for complete excision of prostate cancer in fact do not have a localize disease. The incidence of tumor at the inked margin may reach 30% for T1 stage and up to 60% for clinical T2b prostate cancer according to comparision with pathologic examination of resected specimen. Several concepts have been recently proposed as a means of improving the accuracy of the available staging system. In this paper, we review current aspects of clinical and pathological staging of prostate cancer, and the importance of these new concepts on the early stages of prostate cancer.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47057/1/345_2005_Article_BF01300182.pd