| 1. |
- Hagman, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Urinary continence recovery and oncological outcomes after surgery for prostate cancer analysed by risk category: results from the LAParoscopic prostatectomy robot and open trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Urology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0724-4983 .- 1433-8726. ; 39:9, s. 3239-3249
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose To evaluate urinary continence (UC) recovery and oncological outcomes in different risk-groups after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). Patients and methods We analysed 2650 men with prostate cancer from seven open (n = 805) and seven robotic (n = 1845) Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011 in a prospective non-randomised trial, LAPPRO. UC recovery was defined as change of pads less than once in 24 h. Information was collected through validated questionnaires. Rate of positive surgical margins (PSM) and biochemical recurrence (BCR), defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 0.25 mg/ml, were recorded. We stratified patients into two risk groups (low-intermediate and high risk) based on the D'Amico risk classification system. Result Among men with high-risk prostate cancer, we found significantly higher rates of UC recovery up to 24 months after RRP compared to RALP (66.1% vs 60.5%) RR 0.85 (CI 95% 0.73-0.99) while PSM was more frequent after RRP compared to RALP (46.8% vs 23.5%) RR 1.56 (CI 95% 1.10-2.21). In the same group no significant difference was seen in BCR. Overall, however, BCR was significantly more common after RRP compared to RALP at 24 months (9.8% vs 6.6%) RR 1.43 (Cl 95% 1.08-1.89). The limitations of this study are its non-randomized design and the relatively short time of follow-up. Conclusions Our study indicates that men with high-risk tumour operated with open surgery had better urinary continence recovery but with a higher risk of PSM than after robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. No significant difference was seen in biochemical recurrence.
|
|
| 2. |
- Patschan, Oliver, et al.
(författare)
-
Association of tumor-associated trypsin inhibitor (TATI) expression with molecular markers, pathologic features and clinical outcomes of urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder.
- 2011
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Urology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1433-8726 .- 0724-4983.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSES: To describe the differential tissue expression of tumor-associated trypsin inhibitor (TATI) in normal bladder urothelium, primary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) and metastatic UCB and to assess the association of TATI expression with molecular markers commonly altered in UCB and clinical outcomes after radical cystectomy. METHODS: Slides from eight cystectomy patients without cancer, 191 radical cystectomy patients, 20 lymph nodes without metastasis and 40 lymph nodes with UCB were stained. Tissue expression of TATI, cyclin E1, cyclin D1, p53, p21, p27, pRB, Ki-67, Bcl-2, Caspase-3, Survivin and Cyclooxigenase-2 was measured in a tissue microarray. Cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival after radical cystectomy was recorded. RESULTS: TATI was expressed in 100% of patients without cancer, while 71% of radical cystectomy specimens and 90% of lymph node metastases exhibited decreased or no TATI expression. In radical cystectomy specimens, TATI expression decreased with advancing pathologic stage (P < 0.001) and lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.055). In univariate analyses, but not in multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses, decreased TATI expression was associated with increased probability of tumor recurrence and cancer-specific mortality. Decreased TATI expression was correlated with altered expression of Cyclooxigenase-2 (P = 0.005), p21 (P = 0.035) and Ki-67 (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: We found that normal urothelium expresses TATI and that TATI expression decreases with advancing tumor stage. While there was no prognostic benefit to TATI when adjusted for standard clinicopathologic features, it seems to play an important biologic role in UCB pathogenesis and invasion. Its association with markers involved in the cell cycle, proliferation and inflammation serves as hypothesis for molecular interactions.
|
|
| 3. |
- van der Poel, Henk, et al.
(författare)
-
Role of active surveillance and focal therapy in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancers
- 2015
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Urology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0724-4983 .- 1433-8726. ; 33:7, s. 907-916
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Low-risk prostate cancer is found in about half of newly diagnosed men subjected to PSA screening. Methods: To define the role of active surveillance and focal therapy in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancers, an invited international panel of practicing physicians in the field of localized prostate cancer discussed the available literature in three consecutive meetings to come to a broad interpretation of the available data. Results: The panel (“new prostate cancer management group,” npm) agreed on the following observations. In most men with a low-volume Gleason 6 tumor, initial conservative management is appropriate. In men with a larger unifocal Gleason score 6 or 3 + 4 lesion, focal therapy, although still considered an investigational approach, appears to be a suitable option in early non-randomized comparison studies. Furthermore, in patients with multifocal small satellite Gleason 6 lesions in the presence of a larger index lesion, focal therapy of the index lesion is an option. For patients with high-grade, large-volume disease, or in young men with evidence of high-volume multifocal low-grade prostate cancer, whole-gland treatment should be considered. Conclusion: Active surveillance is a preferred and safe option for low-risk prostate cancer. Focal therapy is still under investigation, but the available phase II data are promising. Clinical benefits must be shown in prospective trials. With improved imaging, focal therapy may be an option for patients not choosing active surveillance with low-risk disease, progression upon active surveillance or intermediate-risk cancers with a localizable lesion.
|
|
