Purpose: To assess adherence rates to pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) PLND guideline (2% or higher risk) and D'Amico lymph node invasion (LNI) risk stratification (intermediate/high risk) in contemporary North American patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). Material and methods: We relied on 49,358 patients treated with RP and PLND (2010-2013) in SEER database. Adherence rates were quantified and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression analyses tested for independent predictors. Results: According to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification, PLND was recommended in 63.3% and 64.9% of patients, respectively. Corresponding adherence rates were 68.8% and 69.1%. Adherence rates improved from 67.3% to 71.6% and from 67.6% to 72.0%, respectively, over time. In MVA, more advanced clinical stage, higher biopsy Gleason score and higher number of positive biopsy cores predicted PLNDs that were performed below NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. Conversely, lower clinical stage, lower PSA and lower biopsy Gleason score predicted PLND omission in individuals with risk level above NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. MVA results for D'Amico classification were virtually identical. Conclusions: Adherence to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification for purpose of PLND is suboptimal in SEER population-based patients treated with RP. However, adherence rates have improved over time. Patients, who did not undergo PLND despite elevated LNI risk, had more favorable PCa characteristics than the average. Conversely, patients, who underwent PLND despite low-risk, had worse PCa characteristics than the average.

Adherence to pelvic lymph node dissection recommendations according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network pelvic lymph node dissection guideline and the D'Amico lymph node invasion risk stratification

Briganti, Alberto;Montorsi, Francesco;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: To assess adherence rates to pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) PLND guideline (2% or higher risk) and D'Amico lymph node invasion (LNI) risk stratification (intermediate/high risk) in contemporary North American patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). Material and methods: We relied on 49,358 patients treated with RP and PLND (2010-2013) in SEER database. Adherence rates were quantified and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression analyses tested for independent predictors. Results: According to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification, PLND was recommended in 63.3% and 64.9% of patients, respectively. Corresponding adherence rates were 68.8% and 69.1%. Adherence rates improved from 67.3% to 71.6% and from 67.6% to 72.0%, respectively, over time. In MVA, more advanced clinical stage, higher biopsy Gleason score and higher number of positive biopsy cores predicted PLNDs that were performed below NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. Conversely, lower clinical stage, lower PSA and lower biopsy Gleason score predicted PLND omission in individuals with risk level above NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. MVA results for D'Amico classification were virtually identical. Conclusions: Adherence to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification for purpose of PLND is suboptimal in SEER population-based patients treated with RP. However, adherence rates have improved over time. Patients, who did not undergo PLND despite elevated LNI risk, had more favorable PCa characteristics than the average. Conversely, patients, who underwent PLND despite low-risk, had worse PCa characteristics than the average.
2017
Lymph node invasion; NCCN guideline; Nomogram; Population based; SEER; Oncology; Urology
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/75624
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 17
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 13
social impact