Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Evaluation of pT2 subdivisions in the TNM staging system for prostate cancer.
BJU Int. 2008 Nov; 102(9):1092-6.BI

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the subclassifications of pT2 diseases in tumour-nodes-metastases (TNM) staging system for prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of 372 patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer at our institution. Pathological staging of all subjects were re-evaluated using the 1997 and the 2002 TNM staging system for prostate cancer. Various clinicopathological features along with biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) of pT2 subgroups were assessed.

RESULTS

Using the 2002 TNM staging criteria, 87 of the tumours (23.4%) were pT2a, and 284 (76.3%) were pT2c. Of all subjects, there was only one (0.3%) pathological 2002 T2b tumour identified. When subjects were classified according to the 1997 versions of the T2 subclassification (pT2a vs pT2b), the 1997 pT2a and pT2b cases showed no significant difference regarding BRFS (log-rank P = 0.645) among those who were followed-up for >2 years after RRP. Also, pathological stage (1997 pT2a vs pT2b) was not a significant predictor of BRFS in either uni- or multivariate analysis (P = 0.289 and P = 0.241, respectively). Only preoperative serum PSA level and pathological Gleason score along with positive surgical margin were significant predictors of PSA outcome after RRP on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that two- or three-tiered subclassification of pT2 organ-confined prostate cancer via methods used in the previous or current TNM staging system may not be appropriate. Efforts should be made to upgrade the current TNM staging system for prostate cancer.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Evaluation Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18671786

Citation

Hong, Sung Kyu, et al. "Evaluation of pT2 Subdivisions in the TNM Staging System for Prostate Cancer." BJU International, vol. 102, no. 9, 2008, pp. 1092-6.
Hong SK, Han BK, Chung JS, et al. Evaluation of pT2 subdivisions in the TNM staging system for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2008;102(9):1092-6.
Hong, S. K., Han, B. K., Chung, J. S., Park, D. S., Jeong, S. J., Byun, S. S., Choe, G., & Lee, S. E. (2008). Evaluation of pT2 subdivisions in the TNM staging system for prostate cancer. BJU International, 102(9), 1092-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07897.x
Hong SK, et al. Evaluation of pT2 Subdivisions in the TNM Staging System for Prostate Cancer. BJU Int. 2008;102(9):1092-6. PubMed PMID: 18671786.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of pT2 subdivisions in the TNM staging system for prostate cancer. AU - Hong,Sung Kyu, AU - Han,Byung Kyu, AU - Chung,Jae Seung, AU - Park,Dong-Soo, AU - Jeong,Seong Jin, AU - Byun,Seok-Soo, AU - Choe,Gheeyoung, AU - Lee,Sang Eun, Y1 - 2008/07/29/ PY - 2008/8/2/pubmed PY - 2009/1/1/medline PY - 2008/8/2/entrez SP - 1092 EP - 6 JF - BJU international JO - BJU Int VL - 102 IS - 9 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the subclassifications of pT2 diseases in tumour-nodes-metastases (TNM) staging system for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the data of 372 patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer at our institution. Pathological staging of all subjects were re-evaluated using the 1997 and the 2002 TNM staging system for prostate cancer. Various clinicopathological features along with biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) of pT2 subgroups were assessed. RESULTS: Using the 2002 TNM staging criteria, 87 of the tumours (23.4%) were pT2a, and 284 (76.3%) were pT2c. Of all subjects, there was only one (0.3%) pathological 2002 T2b tumour identified. When subjects were classified according to the 1997 versions of the T2 subclassification (pT2a vs pT2b), the 1997 pT2a and pT2b cases showed no significant difference regarding BRFS (log-rank P = 0.645) among those who were followed-up for >2 years after RRP. Also, pathological stage (1997 pT2a vs pT2b) was not a significant predictor of BRFS in either uni- or multivariate analysis (P = 0.289 and P = 0.241, respectively). Only preoperative serum PSA level and pathological Gleason score along with positive surgical margin were significant predictors of PSA outcome after RRP on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that two- or three-tiered subclassification of pT2 organ-confined prostate cancer via methods used in the previous or current TNM staging system may not be appropriate. Efforts should be made to upgrade the current TNM staging system for prostate cancer. SN - 1464-410X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18671786/Evaluation_of_pT2_subdivisions_in_the_TNM_staging_system_for_prostate_cancer_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07897.x DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -