Gleason pattern 5 as a pathologic predictor of recurrence, development of metastasis, and prostate cancer-specific death for patients receiving salvage radiation therapy following radical prostatectomy.

Authors

null

William C. Jackson

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

William C. Jackson , Skyler B. Johnson , Corey Foster , Darren Li , Benjamin Foster , Yeohan Song , Howard Mark Sandler , Ganesh S. Palapattu , Priya Kunju , Rohit Mehra , Daniel A. Hamstra , Felix Yi-Chung Feng

Organizations

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan, East Lansing, MI, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: The presence of primary, secondary, and tertiary Gleason pattern 5 (GP5) in prostate cancer has been shown to predict outcomes and improve risk stratification following radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). However, the predictive value of GP5 has not been assessed in salvage EBRT (SRT) for a rising PSA after RP. We sought to assess the prognostic capability of the presence of GP5 in this setting. Methods: 575 patients who received SRT at a single institution for biochemical recurrence after RP were retrospectively reviewed in an IRB approved analysis. We assessed the impact of GP5 on biochemical failure (BF), distant metastasis (DM), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards models. Results: Median follow up was 56.7 months post SRT. On pathologic evaluation, 563 patients had a documented Gleason score (GS). 60 patients (10.7%) had primary, secondary, or tertiary GP5. GP5 was the strongest pathologic predictor of DM (p<0.01 HR: 1.9 [95%CI: 1.3-2.9]) and PCSM (p<0.01 HR: 4.0 [95%CI: 2.1-7.7]) on univariate analysis. The presence of GP5 was a better predictor of BF, DM, PCSM, and OS than stratification by GS8-10. Patients with GP5 had clinically worse outcomes than GS8 patients without GP5. There was no difference in outcome between primary, secondary, and tertiary GP5. On multivariate analysis, GP5 was the strongest pathologic predictor of BF (p<0.01 HR: 2.7 [95%CI: 1.6-4.5]), DM (p<0.01 HR: 11.2 [95%CI: 3.9-32.2]), and PCSM (p<0.01 HR: 6.0 [95%CI: 1.8-19.6]). Conclusions: In SRT, where pathologic factors including extra-capsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and margin status are known, the presence of GP5 is the strongest pathologic predictor of BF, DM, and PCSM. Traditional GS risk stratification fails to fully utilize the prognostic capabilities of individual GP’s for SRT patients following RP. Intensification of treatment regimens, such as early use of androgen deprivation therapy or adjuvant radiation, may be appropriate for patients with GP5 in this setting.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session A: Prostate Cancer

Track

Prostate Cancer

Sub Track

Prostate Cancer

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 6; abstr 151)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2013.31.6_suppl.151

Abstract #

151

Poster Bd #

J16

Abstract Disclosures