Is it necessary to separate clinical stage T1c from T2 prostate adenocarcinoma?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that prostate cancer patients with clinical stage cT1c and cT2 have similar outcomes and clinicopathological features, and should be grouped together. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a series of men with prostate cancer who had a radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP), we assessed those with cT1c (223) and cT2 (65) adenocarcinoma. All RP specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted; tumour volume was measured using the grid method. Clinical and pathological characteristics were analysed. RESULTS: Patients with cT2 tumours were more likely to have a higher Gleason score (P = 0.04) and final pathological stage (P = 0.05) than those with cT1c tumours. There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.92), preoperative PSA level (P = 0.17), prostate weight (P = 0.34), tumour volume (P = 0.16), surgical margin status (P = 0.86), multifocality (P = 0.92), the presence of perineural invasion (P = 0.09), or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (P = 0.99) between patients with clinical stage cT1c and those with cT2 tumours. There was no difference in PSA recurrence between patients with clinical stage T1c and those with cT2 tumours (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with clinical stage cT2 tumours have a higher Gleason score and advanced pathological stage than tumours detected because of a high serum PSA level (die). These results suggest that clinical stage cT1c tumours should be separated from clinical stage cT2 disease, but the PSA recurrence rate for both tumour stages is similar, indicating a need for further evaluation and refinement of the current clinical staging system.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)777-780
Number of pages4
JournalBJU International
Volume96
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2005

Fingerprint

Prostate
Adenocarcinoma
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Grading
Prostatectomy
Tumor Burden
Prostatic Neoplasms
Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Recurrence
Weights and Measures
Serum

Keywords

  • Neoplasm
  • Prognosis
  • Prostate
  • Prostatectomy
  • PSA recurrence
  • Staging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Is it necessary to separate clinical stage T1c from T2 prostate adenocarcinoma? / Armatys, Sandra A.; Koch, Michael; Bihrle, Richard; Gardner, Thomas; Cheng, Liang.

In: BJU International, Vol. 96, No. 6, 10.2005, p. 777-780.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d0100487e4514e7faa8e3ea72d18f9e1,
title = "Is it necessary to separate clinical stage T1c from T2 prostate adenocarcinoma?",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that prostate cancer patients with clinical stage cT1c and cT2 have similar outcomes and clinicopathological features, and should be grouped together. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a series of men with prostate cancer who had a radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP), we assessed those with cT1c (223) and cT2 (65) adenocarcinoma. All RP specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted; tumour volume was measured using the grid method. Clinical and pathological characteristics were analysed. RESULTS: Patients with cT2 tumours were more likely to have a higher Gleason score (P = 0.04) and final pathological stage (P = 0.05) than those with cT1c tumours. There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.92), preoperative PSA level (P = 0.17), prostate weight (P = 0.34), tumour volume (P = 0.16), surgical margin status (P = 0.86), multifocality (P = 0.92), the presence of perineural invasion (P = 0.09), or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (P = 0.99) between patients with clinical stage cT1c and those with cT2 tumours. There was no difference in PSA recurrence between patients with clinical stage T1c and those with cT2 tumours (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with clinical stage cT2 tumours have a higher Gleason score and advanced pathological stage than tumours detected because of a high serum PSA level (die). These results suggest that clinical stage cT1c tumours should be separated from clinical stage cT2 disease, but the PSA recurrence rate for both tumour stages is similar, indicating a need for further evaluation and refinement of the current clinical staging system.",
keywords = "Neoplasm, Prognosis, Prostate, Prostatectomy, PSA recurrence, Staging",
author = "Armatys, {Sandra A.} and Michael Koch and Richard Bihrle and Thomas Gardner and Liang Cheng",
year = "2005",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05713.x",
language = "English",
volume = "96",
pages = "777--780",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is it necessary to separate clinical stage T1c from T2 prostate adenocarcinoma?

AU - Armatys, Sandra A.

AU - Koch, Michael

AU - Bihrle, Richard

AU - Gardner, Thomas

AU - Cheng, Liang

PY - 2005/10

Y1 - 2005/10

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that prostate cancer patients with clinical stage cT1c and cT2 have similar outcomes and clinicopathological features, and should be grouped together. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a series of men with prostate cancer who had a radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP), we assessed those with cT1c (223) and cT2 (65) adenocarcinoma. All RP specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted; tumour volume was measured using the grid method. Clinical and pathological characteristics were analysed. RESULTS: Patients with cT2 tumours were more likely to have a higher Gleason score (P = 0.04) and final pathological stage (P = 0.05) than those with cT1c tumours. There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.92), preoperative PSA level (P = 0.17), prostate weight (P = 0.34), tumour volume (P = 0.16), surgical margin status (P = 0.86), multifocality (P = 0.92), the presence of perineural invasion (P = 0.09), or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (P = 0.99) between patients with clinical stage cT1c and those with cT2 tumours. There was no difference in PSA recurrence between patients with clinical stage T1c and those with cT2 tumours (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with clinical stage cT2 tumours have a higher Gleason score and advanced pathological stage than tumours detected because of a high serum PSA level (die). These results suggest that clinical stage cT1c tumours should be separated from clinical stage cT2 disease, but the PSA recurrence rate for both tumour stages is similar, indicating a need for further evaluation and refinement of the current clinical staging system.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that prostate cancer patients with clinical stage cT1c and cT2 have similar outcomes and clinicopathological features, and should be grouped together. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a series of men with prostate cancer who had a radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP), we assessed those with cT1c (223) and cT2 (65) adenocarcinoma. All RP specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted; tumour volume was measured using the grid method. Clinical and pathological characteristics were analysed. RESULTS: Patients with cT2 tumours were more likely to have a higher Gleason score (P = 0.04) and final pathological stage (P = 0.05) than those with cT1c tumours. There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.92), preoperative PSA level (P = 0.17), prostate weight (P = 0.34), tumour volume (P = 0.16), surgical margin status (P = 0.86), multifocality (P = 0.92), the presence of perineural invasion (P = 0.09), or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (P = 0.99) between patients with clinical stage cT1c and those with cT2 tumours. There was no difference in PSA recurrence between patients with clinical stage T1c and those with cT2 tumours (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with clinical stage cT2 tumours have a higher Gleason score and advanced pathological stage than tumours detected because of a high serum PSA level (die). These results suggest that clinical stage cT1c tumours should be separated from clinical stage cT2 disease, but the PSA recurrence rate for both tumour stages is similar, indicating a need for further evaluation and refinement of the current clinical staging system.

KW - Neoplasm

KW - Prognosis

KW - Prostate

KW - Prostatectomy

KW - PSA recurrence

KW - Staging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=25844488105&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=25844488105&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05713.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05713.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 16153198

AN - SCOPUS:25844488105

VL - 96

SP - 777

EP - 780

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 6

ER -