Risk Factors for Relapse of Prostate Cancerafter Radical Prostatectomy in Chinese Population
Urology Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 03 (2024),
11 May 2024
,
Page 155-161
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v20i.7758
Abstract
Purpose: To analyze the risk factors for the relapse of prostate cancer (PC) after radical prostatectomy (RP) and build a nomogram as a predictive model.
Materials andMethods: The patients who underwent PR from March 2019 to February 2022 were retrospectively enrolled in our hospital's case system. During the follow-up process, two consecutive prostate-specific antigens (PSA) ≥0.2 μg/L were performed. And needle biopsy was performed to further determine whether the patient had prostate cancer recurrence. According to the follow-up results, the patients were divided into non-relapsed and relapsed groups.The related parameters of the two groups were collected. Independent risk factors for postoperative recurrence were determined using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Statistical software, R, was used to build nomograms. R software was used to construct a nomogram, and the prediction effect of the nomogram was evaluated by the calibration curve and the area under the ROC curve (AUC).
Results: Among the 367 patients who underwent RP, 112 (30.52%) had, and 255 (69.48%) did not have relapses after surgery. Cox multivariableregression analysis revealed that preoperative Gleason score, preoperative PSA, pathological staging, positive margin, and seminal vesicle invasion, were the risk factors for postoperative recurrence after RP (all P < 0.05). Verification of the predictive model by ROC curve demonstrated that the AUC of the ROC curves for patients’ relapses 3 and 5 years after RP was 0.986 (95%CI0.975-0.998) and 0.974 (95%CI0.961-0.987), respectively. This model validation showed that the results of the predictive model were basically consistent with the actual results, suggesting that the nomogram was able to accurately predict a patient’s relapse.
Conclusion: The nomogram of this study was a good predictor of postoperative recurrence of PC after RP, which will help doctors provide personalized treatment and follow-up strategies for patients.
- Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Relapse; Nomogram
How to Cite
References
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, et al. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 7-33.
Gómez Rivas J, Cabañas J, Eguibar A, et al. Evolución de la prostatectomía radical eneltratamiento del cáncer de próstataen la Comunidad de Madrid. Arch Esp Urol 2018; 71: 466-473.
Ondracek RP, Kattan MW, Murekeyisoni C, et al. Validation of the kattan nomogram for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2016; 14: 1395-1401.
Swanson GP, Yu C, Kattan MW, et al. Validation of postoperative nomograms in prostate cancer patients with long-term follow-up. Urol 2011; 78: 105-9.
Artibani W, Porcaro AB, De Marco V, et al. Management of biochemical recurrence after primary curative treatment for prostate cancer: a review. Urol Int 2018; 100: 251-262.
Tilki D, Chen MH, Wu J, et al. Adjuvant versus early salvage radiation therapy for men at high risk for recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer and the risk of death. J Clin Oncol 2021; 39: 2284-2293.
Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1499-1507.
Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, et al. Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7005.
Zeigler-Johnson C, Hudson A, Glanz K, et al. Performance of prostate cancer recurrence nomograms by obesity status: a retrospective analysis of a radical prostatectomy cohort. BMC Cancer 2018; 18: 1-8.
Suh J, Yoo S, Park J, et al. Differences in risk factors for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy stratified by the degree of obesity: focused on surgical methods. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 10157.
Yang X, Shi Y, Lin Y, et al. Efficacy of radical prostatectomy on prostate cancer patients and analysis of risk factors for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J BUON 2020; 25: 2623-2628.
Sımsır A, Cal C, Mammadov R, et al. Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: is the disease or the surgeon to blame? Int Braz J Urol 2011; 37: 328-34.
Tourinho-Barbosa R, Srougi V, Nunes-Silva I, et al. Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: what does it mean? Int Braz J Urol 2018; 44: 14-21.
Manceau C, Beauval JB, Lesourd M, et al. MRI characteristics accurately predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Med 2020; 9: 3841.
Fakhrejahani F, Madan RA, Dahut WL. Management options for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2017; 18: 26.
Kang HW, Jung HD, Lee JY, et al. Prostate-specific antigen density predicts favorable pathology and biochemical recurrence in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Asian J Androl 2016; 18: 480-484.
Hashimoto T, Ohori M, Shimodaira K, et al. Prostate-specific antigen screening impacts on biochemical recurrence in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2018; 25: 561-567.
Barbas Bernardos G, Herranz Amo F, González San Segundo C, et al. Survival analysis of patients with prostate cancer and unfavorable risk factors treated with radical prostatectomy and salvage radiotherapy after biochemical recurrence and persistence. Actas Urol Esp 2020; 44: 701-707.
Song W, Lee DH, Jeon HG, et al. Impact of gleason score on biochemical recurrence in patients with pT3aN0/Nx prostate cancer with positive surgical margins: a multicenter study from the prostate cancer research committee. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017; 143: 2393-2400.
Kurbegovic S, Berg KD, Thomsen FB, et al. The risk of biochemical recurrence for intermediate-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Scand J Urol 2016; 51: 450-456.
Zhang L, Zhao H, Wu B, et al. Predictive factors for positive surgical margins in patients with prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol 2021; 10: 539592.
Stephenson AJ, Eggener SE, Hernandez AV, et al. Do margins matter? The influence of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer-specific mortality. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 675-680.
Preisser F, Coxilha G, Heinze A, et al. Impact of positive surgical margin length and Gleason grade at the margin on biochemical recurrence in patients with organ-confined prostate cancer. Prostate 2019; 79: 1832-1836.
Kim SM, Min BH, Ahn JH, et al. Nomogram to predict lymph node metastasis in patients with early gastric cancer: a useful clinical tool to reduce gastrectomy after endoscopic resection. Endosc 2020; 52: 435-443.
Chen D, Liu Z, Liu W, et al. Predicting postoperative peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer with serosal invasion using a collagen nomogram. Nat Commun 2021; 12: 179.
Wu J, Zhang H, Li L, et al. A nomogram for predicting overall survival in patients with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: a population-based analysis. Cancer Commun 2020; 40: 301-312.
Wu J, Guo S, Wang L, et al. Correlation analysis between CD133, Klk3 and Grhl2 expression and tumor characteristics in prostate cancer. Cell Mol Biol 2022; 67: 68-73.
Saeidi H, Raju CS, Ismail P, et al. Homologous recombination repair gene mutations in malaysian prostate cancer patients: gene mutations in malaysian prostate cancer. Cell Mol Biol 2022; 68: 22-26.
Khan F, Pandey P, Singh A, et al. Unveiling antioxidant and antiproliferative effects of prosopis juliflora leaves against human prostate cancer LNCaP cells: antioxidant and anticancer potential of prosopis juliflora. Cell Mol Biol 2022; 68: 20-27.
Zhang S, Zhu K, Han Q, et al. LncRNA PCAT1 might coordinate ZNF217 to promote CRC adhesion and invasion through regulating MTA2/MTA3/Snai1/E-Cadherin signaling. Cell Mol Biol 2022; 67: 1-9.
Gu T, Pan H, Zhang F, et al. The FOXP4-AS1/MiR-3130-3p/SP4 feedback loop is associated with prostate cancer: FOXP4-AS1 contributes to prostate cancer. Cell Mol Biol 2022; 68: 161-166.
- Abstract Viewed: 223 times
- 7758/pdf Downloaded: 19 times