Long-term oncological outcomes of prostate cancer upgrading following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Abstract
351 Background: Pathologic upgrading from biopsy to final pathology at the time of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) is a frequent finding and may reflect more aggressive disease biology, potentially leading to adverse long-term oncologic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the association between upgrading and oncologic outcomes beyond five years after RARP. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted using an IRB-approved database to identify 4,910 consecutive patients who underwent RARP between 2015 and 2020. Patients were included if they had at least five years of postoperative follow-up. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined according to AUA guidelines. Results: A total of 1,210 patients met inclusion criteria. Pathologic upgrading was identified in 361 patients (29.8%). While the upgraded and non-upgraded groups were similar in terms of adverse pathological features, the upgraded group had a significantly higher incidence of positive surgical margins (42.1% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.039). At a median follow-up of 82.4 months (IQR 69.5-97.4), these differences did not translate into a significant difference in BCR-free survival ( p = 0.32). Conclusions: Despite a relatively high incidence of pathologic upgrading in patients undergoing RARP, most of which originated from Grade Group 1, this finding was not associated with worse BCR outcomes. With long term follow-up, upgrading at the time of RARP did not significantly impact BCR-free survival, and overall BCR rates did not differ meaningfully between upgraded and non-upgraded patients. Baseline clinicodemographics and oncological outcomes of all included patients. Overall cohort ( n =1210) Equivocal ( n =841) Upgrading ( n =361) p Age (years) 63 (58 –68) 63 (59-68) 63 (58-67) 0.077 PSA (ng/mL) 5.7 (4.2 - 8.6) 6.5 (4.8-11.6) 7.3 (5.2-11.5) 0.201 Biopsy ISUP Grade Group <0.001 1 256 (21.2%) 66 (7.9%) 188 (52.1%) 2 517 (42.7%) 405 (48.2%) 108 (29.9%) 3 234 (19.3%) 195 (23.2%) 42 (11.6%) 4-5 203 (16.8%) 178 (21.1%) 25 (6.9%) RARP ISUP Grade Group <0.001 1 70 (5.8%) 70 (8.3%) 0 2 639 (53.2%) 474 (56.4%) 165 (45.5%) 3 300 (25.0%) 188 (22.4%) 112 (32.0%) 4 78 (6.5%) 51 (6.1%) 27 (7.5%) 5 114 (9.5%) 57 (6.8%) 57 (15.8%) Positive Surgical Margin 455 (37.6%) 298 (35.5%) 152 (12.6%) 0.039 Biochemical Recurrence (BCR) 321 (26.5%) 217 (25.8%) 102 (28.25%) 0.514 Distant Metastasis 145 (12.0%) 102 (12.14%) 41 (11.36%) 0.786 Follow-up Duration (months) 82.4 (69.5-97.4) 81.8(69.4-96.7) 84.7 (70.2 -101.8) 0.105 IQR = Interquartile Range; ISUP = International Society of Urological Pathology; BCR = Biochemical Recurrence; IQR = Interquartile Range; ISUP = International Society of Urological Pathology; BCR = Biochemical Recurrence; Categorical variables are presented as n (%), and continuous variables as median (IQR).
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (8)
Milagros Secin
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
Abdulrahman Al-Bayati
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Nicolas Soputro
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Mohamad Watfa
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Christopher Weight
Jane K. Nguyen
Center for Urologic Oncology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
Jihad Kaouk
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Ruben Olivares
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH