Twenty-year trends in prostate cancer stage and grade migration in a large contemporary german radical prostatectomy cohort

Standard

Twenty-year trends in prostate cancer stage and grade migration in a large contemporary german radical prostatectomy cohort. / Würnschimmel, Christoph; Kachanov, Mykyta; Wenzel, Mike; Mandel, Philipp; Karakiewicz, Pierre I; Maurer, Tobias; Steuber, Thomas; Tilki, Derya; Graefen, Markus; Budäus, Lars.

in: PROSTATE, Jahrgang 81, Nr. 12, 09.2021, S. 849-856.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/ZeitungSCORING: ZeitschriftenaufsatzForschungBegutachtung

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{816a45cc477b4aa7bc7dd096134afbad,
title = "Twenty-year trends in prostate cancer stage and grade migration in a large contemporary german radical prostatectomy cohort",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: A trend towards inverse stage migration in prostate cancer (PCa) was reported. However, previous analyses did not take into account potential differences in sampling strategies (number of biopsy cores), which might have confounded these reports.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Within our single-institutional database we identified PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2000 and 2020 (n = 21,646). We calculated the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) for D'Amico risk groups, biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG), PSA and cT stage as well as postoperative RP GGG and pT stage relying on log linear regression methodology. Subsequently, we repeated the analyses after adjustment for number of cores obtained at biopsy.RESULTS: Absolute rates of D'Amico low risk decreased (-30.1%), while intermediate and high risk increased (+21.2% and +9.0%, respectively). Rates of GGG I decreased (-50.0%), while GGG II-V increased, with the largest increase in GGG II (+22.5%). This trend, albeit less pronounced, was also recorded after adjusted EAPC analyses (p < .05). Specifically, EAPC values for D'Amico low vs intermediate vs high risk were -1.07%, +0.37%, +0.45%, respectively, and EAPC values for GGG ranged between -0.71% (GGG I) and +0.80% (GGG IV). Finally, an increase in ≥cT2 (EAPC: +3.16%) was displayed (all p < .001). These trends were confirmed in EAPC calculations in RP GGG and pT stages (p < .001).CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the trend towards less frequent treatment of low risk PCa and more frequent treatment of high risk PCa, also after adjustment for number of biopsy cores.",
author = "Christoph W{\"u}rnschimmel and Mykyta Kachanov and Mike Wenzel and Philipp Mandel and Karakiewicz, {Pierre I} and Tobias Maurer and Thomas Steuber and Derya Tilki and Markus Graefen and Lars Bud{\"a}us",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. The Prostate Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.",
year = "2021",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1002/pros.24181",
language = "English",
volume = "81",
pages = "849--856",
journal = "PROSTATE",
issn = "0270-4137",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "12",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Twenty-year trends in prostate cancer stage and grade migration in a large contemporary german radical prostatectomy cohort

AU - Würnschimmel, Christoph

AU - Kachanov, Mykyta

AU - Wenzel, Mike

AU - Mandel, Philipp

AU - Karakiewicz, Pierre I

AU - Maurer, Tobias

AU - Steuber, Thomas

AU - Tilki, Derya

AU - Graefen, Markus

AU - Budäus, Lars

N1 - © 2021 The Authors. The Prostate Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

PY - 2021/9

Y1 - 2021/9

N2 - BACKGROUND: A trend towards inverse stage migration in prostate cancer (PCa) was reported. However, previous analyses did not take into account potential differences in sampling strategies (number of biopsy cores), which might have confounded these reports.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Within our single-institutional database we identified PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2000 and 2020 (n = 21,646). We calculated the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) for D'Amico risk groups, biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG), PSA and cT stage as well as postoperative RP GGG and pT stage relying on log linear regression methodology. Subsequently, we repeated the analyses after adjustment for number of cores obtained at biopsy.RESULTS: Absolute rates of D'Amico low risk decreased (-30.1%), while intermediate and high risk increased (+21.2% and +9.0%, respectively). Rates of GGG I decreased (-50.0%), while GGG II-V increased, with the largest increase in GGG II (+22.5%). This trend, albeit less pronounced, was also recorded after adjusted EAPC analyses (p < .05). Specifically, EAPC values for D'Amico low vs intermediate vs high risk were -1.07%, +0.37%, +0.45%, respectively, and EAPC values for GGG ranged between -0.71% (GGG I) and +0.80% (GGG IV). Finally, an increase in ≥cT2 (EAPC: +3.16%) was displayed (all p < .001). These trends were confirmed in EAPC calculations in RP GGG and pT stages (p < .001).CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the trend towards less frequent treatment of low risk PCa and more frequent treatment of high risk PCa, also after adjustment for number of biopsy cores.

AB - BACKGROUND: A trend towards inverse stage migration in prostate cancer (PCa) was reported. However, previous analyses did not take into account potential differences in sampling strategies (number of biopsy cores), which might have confounded these reports.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Within our single-institutional database we identified PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2000 and 2020 (n = 21,646). We calculated the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) for D'Amico risk groups, biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG), PSA and cT stage as well as postoperative RP GGG and pT stage relying on log linear regression methodology. Subsequently, we repeated the analyses after adjustment for number of cores obtained at biopsy.RESULTS: Absolute rates of D'Amico low risk decreased (-30.1%), while intermediate and high risk increased (+21.2% and +9.0%, respectively). Rates of GGG I decreased (-50.0%), while GGG II-V increased, with the largest increase in GGG II (+22.5%). This trend, albeit less pronounced, was also recorded after adjusted EAPC analyses (p < .05). Specifically, EAPC values for D'Amico low vs intermediate vs high risk were -1.07%, +0.37%, +0.45%, respectively, and EAPC values for GGG ranged between -0.71% (GGG I) and +0.80% (GGG IV). Finally, an increase in ≥cT2 (EAPC: +3.16%) was displayed (all p < .001). These trends were confirmed in EAPC calculations in RP GGG and pT stages (p < .001).CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the trend towards less frequent treatment of low risk PCa and more frequent treatment of high risk PCa, also after adjustment for number of biopsy cores.

U2 - 10.1002/pros.24181

DO - 10.1002/pros.24181

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34110033

VL - 81

SP - 849

EP - 856

JO - PROSTATE

JF - PROSTATE

SN - 0270-4137

IS - 12

ER -