Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorOzluk, Yasemin
dc.contributor.authorErdem, Selçuk
dc.contributor.authorOzcan, Faruk
dc.contributor.authorSanli, Oner
dc.contributor.authorKilicaslan, Isin
dc.contributor.authorVerep, Samed
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-06T07:14:50Z
dc.date.available2021-03-06T07:14:50Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.citationVerep S., Erdem S., Ozluk Y., Kilicaslan I., Sanli O., Ozcan F., "The pathological upgrading after radical prostatectomy in low-risk prostate cancer patients who are eligible for active surveillance: How safe is it to depend on bioptic pathology?", PROSTATE, cilt.79, ss.1523-1529, 2019
dc.identifier.issn0270-4137
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.otherav_dc02d186-4e88-4eb9-b317-5ef8e2dcfee2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/145016
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23873
dc.description.abstractBackground Active surveillance (AS) is one of the treatment alternatives in low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The pathological upgrading after radical prostatectomy (RP) were investigated in patients who were eligible for AS in the present study. Methods Between August 2006 and July 2017, 627 patients underwent RP in our institution. One hundred and thirty-six patients who were eligible for AS at the time of RP were included in this study. The previously defined AS criteria Gleason 3 + 3=6 adenocarcinoma at maximum two biopsy cores, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 10 ng/mL and clinical T stage <= 2a were used in the study. The demographics, clinical, and histopathological outcomes were retrospectively compared between two groups, which were divided in accordance with the upgrading status at final pathology as Group 1 (n = 67, upgrading) and Group 2 (n = 69, nonupgrading). Results Gleason upgrading (GU) was found in 67 (49.3%) patients, and 17 patients (12.5%) were upstaged to pT3a. The upgrading to Gleason 3 + 4 was reported in 38.7% of patients, however, 7.4%, and 3.7% of the patients were upgraded to Gleason 4 + 3, and Gleason 4 + 4, respectively. The 10.3% of the patients had extraprostatic involvement, and the rate (19.4% vs 1.4%, P = .002) was significantly higher in Group 1. PSA density (P = .001), tumor size (P < .001), tumor percentage (P < .001), apical involvement (P = .013), and perineural invasion (P < .001) in RP specimen were higher in Group 1. Multivariate analysis showed that perineural invasion (OR = 4.26; 95%CI: 1.76-10.33; P = .001) and pathologic T stage (OR = 5.45; 95%CI: 1.08-27.4; P = .04) were independently associated with GU. Conclusions Since 12.5% of the patients upstaged to pT3a disease, and there is a possible risk of Gleason 4 pattern, upgrading of the tumor should carefully be kept in mind before offering AS to low-risk patients with PCa.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectDahili Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectİç Hastalıkları
dc.subjectEndokrinoloji ve Metabolizma Hastalıkları
dc.subjectNefroloji
dc.subjectENDOKRİNOLOJİ VE METABOLİZMA
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectÜROLOJİ VE NEFROLOJİ
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.titleThe pathological upgrading after radical prostatectomy in low-risk prostate cancer patients who are eligible for active surveillance: How safe is it to depend on bioptic pathology?
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalPROSTATE
dc.contributor.departmentİstanbul Üniversitesi , ,
dc.identifier.volume79
dc.identifier.issue13
dc.identifier.startpage1523
dc.identifier.endpage1529
dc.contributor.firstauthorID84351


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster