Introduction: Preoperative parameters for predicting extraprostatic extension (ECE) in clinically organ-confined prostate cancer patients are not well defined. Our aim was to evaluate the roles of the biopsy Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based parameters, volume, and clinical T classification in prediction of ECE. Materials and Methods: A total of 188 patients with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy from January 1998 to December 2007 were included in the study. Age, prostate volume, preoperative total serum PSA (tPSA), free PSA, PSA density (PSAD), biopsy Gleason score, and clinical T classification were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses to predict ECE. Results: Pathologic examination revealed 130 patients had organ-confined disease and 58 patients were positive for ECE. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that tPSA was an independent predictor of ECE. Gleason score ≥8 had a trend for predicting ECE. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves suggested that tPSA and PSAD had a similar diagnosis performance in the whole cohort. For patients with Gleason score of 7, PSAD was found to be statistically better than tPSA for predicting ECE. Conclusions: tPSA remains one of the most important factors for predicting ECE in prostate cancer patients. PSAD may be more helpful than tPSA for predicting ECE in the patients with Gleason score of 7.

Keywords:
Extraprostatic extension, Gleason score, Total serum prostate-specific antigen, Prostate-specific antigen density , Prostate neoplasm
1.
Ping Z, Wan-qing C: The commonest cancers in national cancer registration areas; in Ping Z (ed): Chinese Cancer Registry Annual Report. Beijing, Military Medical Science Press 2010, vol 1, pp 28-39.
2.
Jemal A, Center MM, DeSantis C, Ward EM: Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19:1893-1907.
3.
Eifler JB, Feng Z, Lin BM, Partin MT, Humphreys EB, Han M, Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Trock BJ, Partin AW: An updated prostate cancer staging nomogram (Partin tables) based on cases from 2006 to 2011. BJU Int 2013;111:22-29.
4.
Masieri L, Minervini A, Vittori G, Lanciotti M, Lanzi F, Lapini A, Carini M, Serni S: The role of free to total PSA ratio in prediction of extracapsular tumor extension and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with PSA between 4 and 10 ng/ml. Int Urol Nephrol 2012;44:1031-1038.
5.
Psutka SP, Feldman AS, Rodin D, Olumi AF, Wu CL, McDougal WS: Men with organ-confined prostate cancer and positive surgical margins develop biochemical failure at a similar rate to men with extracapsular extension. Urology 2011;78:121-125.
6.
Epstein JI, Carmichael MJ, Pizov G, Walsh PC: Influence of capsular penetration on progression following radical prostatectomy: a study of 196 cases with long-term followup. J Urol 1993;150:135-141.
7.
Chao KK, Goldstein NS, Yan D, Vargas CE, Ghilezan MI, Korman HJ, Kernen KM, Hollander JB, Gonzalez JA, Martinez AA, Vicini FA, Kestin LL: Clinicopathologic analysis of extracapsular extension in prostate cancer: should the clinical target volume be expanded posterolaterally to account for microscopic extension? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:999-1007.
8.
Ghia AJ, Shrieve DC, Tward JD: Adjuvant radiotherapy use and patterns of care analysis for margin-positive prostate adenocarcinoma with extracapsular extension: Postprostatectomy adjuvant radiotherapy: a SEER analysis. Urology 2010;76:1169-1174.
9.
Ravery V, Chastang C, Toublanc M, Boccon-Gibod L, Delmas V, Boccon-Gibod L: Percentage of cancer on biopsy cores accurately predicts extracapsular extension and biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2000;37:449-455.
10.
Roethke MC, Lichy MP, Kniess M, Werner MK, Claussen CD, Stenzl A, Schlemmer HP, Schilling D: Accuracy of preoperative endorectal MRI in predicting extracapsular extension and influence on neurovascular bundle sparing in radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2013;31:1111-1116.
11.
Pinto F, Totaro A, Palermo G, Calarco A, Sacco E, D'Addessi A, Racioppi M, Valentini A, Gui B, Bassi P: Imaging in prostate cancer staging: present role and future perspectives. Urol Int 2012;88:125-136.
12.
Colleselli D, Hennenlotter J, Schilling D, Krueger SA, Roethke M, Lichy MP, Vogel U, Kuehs U, Schlemmer HP, Stenzl A, Schwentner C: Impact of clinical parameters on the diagnostic accuracy of endorectal coil MRI for the detection of prostate cancer. Urol Int 2011;86:393-398.
13.
Eisenberg ML, Cowan JE, Davies BJ, Carroll PR, Shinohara K: The importance of tumor palpability and transrectal ultrasonographic appearance in the contemporary clinical staging of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2011;29:171-176.
14.
Yu JB, Makarov DV, Sharma R, Peschel RE, Partin AW, Gross CP: Validation of the Partin nomogram for prostate cancer in a national sample. J Urol 2010;183:105-111.
15.
Karakiewicz PI, Bhojani N, Capitanio U, Reuther AM, Suardi N, Jeldres C, Pharand D, Peloquin F, Perrotte P, Shariat SF, Klein EA: External validation of the updated Partin tables in a cohort of North American men. J Urol 2008;180:898-903.
16.
Schwartz DJ, Sengupta S, Hillman DW, Sargent DJ, Cheville JC, Wilson TM, Mynderse LA, Choo R, Davis BJ: Prediction of radial distance of extraprostatic extension from pretherapy factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;69:411-418.
17.
Brassell SA, Kao TC, Sun L, Moul JW: Prostate-specific antigen versus prostate-specific antigen density as predictor of tumor volume, margin status, pathologic stage, and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Urology 2005;66:1229-1233.
18.
Magheli A, Rais-Bahrami S, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Partin AW, Han M, Gonzalgo ML: Prostate specific antigen versus prostate specific antigen density as a prognosticator of pathological characteristics and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2008;179:1780-1784.
19.
Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW, Scardino PT: Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 2002;167:528-534.
20.
Fletcher SG, Mills SE, Smolkin ME, Theodorescu D: Case-matched comparison of contemporary radiation therapy to surgery in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:1092-1099.
21.
Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, Scardino PT, Pearson JD: Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997;277:1445-1451.
22.
Huang Y, Isharwal S, Haese A, Chun FK, Makarov DV, Feng Z, Han M, Humphreys E, Epstein JI, Partin AW, Veltri RW: Prediction of patient-specific risk and percentile cohort risk of pathological stage outcome using continuous prostate-specific antigen measurement, clinical stage and biopsy Gleason score. BJU Int 2011;107:1562-1569.
23.
Pepe P, Fraggetta F, Galia A, Aragona F: Is PCA3 score useful in preoperative staging of a single microfocus of prostate cancer diagnosed at saturation biopsy? Urol Int 2012;89:143-147.
24.
Asbell SO, Vijayakumar S: Racial differences in prostate-specific antigen levels in patients with local-regional prostate cancer. Prostate 1997;31:42-46.
25.
Moul JW, Connelly RR, Mooneyhan RM, Zhang W, Sesterhenn IA, Mostofi FK, McLeod DG: Racial differences in tumor volume and prostate specific antigen among radical prostatectomy patients. J Urol 1999;162:394-397.
26.
Resnick MJ, Canter DJ, Guzzo TJ, Brucker BM, Bergey M, Sonnad SS, Wein AJ, Malkowicz SB: Does race affect postoperative outcomes in patients with low-risk prostate cancer who undergo radical prostatectomy? Urology 2009;73:620-623.
27.
Schreiber D, Rineer J, Yu JB, Olsheski M, Nwokedi E, Schwartz D, Choi K, Rotman M: Analysis of pathologic extent of disease for clinically localized prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and subsequent use of adjuvant radiation in a national cohort. Cancer 2010;116:5757-5766.
28.
Jeong CW, Jeong SJ, Hong SK, Lee SB, Ku JH, Byun SS, Jeong H, Kwak C, Kim HH, Lee E, Lee SE: Nomograms to predict the pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer in Korean men: comparison with western predictive tools using decision curve analysis. Int J Urol 2012;19:846-852.
29.
Paquette EL, Connelly RR, Sun L, Paquette LR, Moul JW: Predictors of extracapsular extension and positive margins in African American and white men. Urol Oncol 2003;21:33-38.
30.
Ghafoori M, Varedi P, Hosseini SJ, Asgari M, Shakiba M: Value of prostate-specific antigen and prostate-specific antigen density in detection of prostate cancer in an Iranian population of men. Urol J 2009;6:182-188.
31.
Giannarini G, Scott CA, Moro U, Pertoldi B, Beltrami CA, Selli C: Are PSA density and PSA density of the transition zone more accurate than PSA in predicting the pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 2008;26:353-360.
32.
Nishimoto K, Nakashima J, Hashiguchi A, Kikuchi E, Miyajima A, Nakagawa K, Ohigashi T, Oya M, Murai M: Prediction of extraprostatic extension by prostate specific antigen velocity, endorectal MRI, and biopsy Gleason score in clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2008;15:520-523.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.