Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jul;33(7):329.e13-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.04.004. Epub 2015 May 7.

Heterogeneity in D'Amico classification-based low-risk prostate cancer: Differences in upgrading and upstaging according to active surveillance eligibility

Affiliations

Heterogeneity in D'Amico classification-based low-risk prostate cancer: Differences in upgrading and upstaging according to active surveillance eligibility

Jonas Schiffmann et al. Urol Oncol. 2015 Jul.

Abstract

Background: To date, no study has examined clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics of D׳Amico low-risk patients according to active surveillance (AS) eligibility.

Material and methods: We relied on patients with low-risk prostate cancer, who were classified based on the D׳Amico classification, treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2008 and 2013 at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center. We assessed differences in clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics in D׳Amico low-risk patients according to AS eligibility (prostate-specific antigen [PSA]≤ 10 ng/ml, Gleason score ≤ 3 + 3, ≤ 2 positive cores,≤5 0% tumor content per core, and ≤ cT1-2a). Multivariable logistic regression analyses targeted 2 end points: (1) presence of either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 3+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) or (2) exclusive presence of high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 4+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) at RP.

Results: Of 1,331 patients low-risk prostate cancer classified based on the D׳Amico classification, 825 (62%) men were eligible for AS. AS candidates were less frequently either upgraded (55% vs. 78%, P<0.001) or upstaged (8% vs. 15%, P<0.001). Similarly, at final pathology, AS candidates less frequently harbored either intermediate- or high-risk (56% vs. 78%, P<0.001), or exclusive high-risk characteristics (9% vs. 16%, P<0.001). Tumor involvement per core (>50%) (most powerful), number of positive cores, PSA values, and age were independent predictors for either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics at RP. Tumor involvement per core and PSA values were independent predictors for exclusive high-risk characteristics at RP.

Conclusions: D׳Amico low-risk patients did not have a homogeneous histology at RP. Especially, non-AS candidates were at a higher risk of either upgrading or upstaging at final pathology. Tumor involvement greater than 50% per core was the most powerful indicator of adverse pathology. Therefore, D'Amico low-risk criteria are not safe enough to identify AS candidates.

Keywords: Active surveillance; Low-risk; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy; Upgrading; Upstaging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Reply by Authors.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] J Urol. 2017 Jan;197(1):264. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.100. Epub 2016 Oct 17. J Urol. 2017. PMID: 27765704 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

Substances