Advertisement

Prediction of biochemical failure using prostate-specific antigen half-life in patients with adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy

  • Kwang Suk Lee
  • Kyo Chul Koo
  • Byung Ha Chung
Original Article
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Prostate-specific antigen nadir and time to prostate-specific antigen nadir are predictors of disease progression in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. However, a mutually conflicting relationship exists between them. Thus, we compared postoperative prostate-specific antigen levels at the first follow-up with the expected levels while considering the half-life of prostate-specific antigen to improve the prediction of biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in patients with adverse pathologic features.

Methods

Patients treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy were enrolled. Patients with a follow-up duration of < 12 months or positive lymphadenectomy results were excluded. “Adverse prostate-specific antigen” was defined as a prostate-specific antigen level higher than the expected level at 6 weeks.

Results

Among 450 patients, adverse pathologic features and adverse prostate-specific antigen were found in 260 (57.8%) and 245 (54.5%) patients, respectively. Analysis of patients with and without abnormal prostate-specific antigen level revealed significantly different biochemical failure-free survival outcomes. Patients with one adverse pathologic feature but without adverse prostate-specific antigen showed similar biochemical failure-free survival to those without adverse pathologic features. Adverse prostate-specific antigen was identified as an independent predictor for biochemical failure within 1 year after radical prostatectomy. The area under the curve when adding adverse prostate-specific antigen to the conventional factors was significantly higher than that for the conventional factors alone.

Conclusion

The difference between postoperative prostate-specific antigen levels at the first follow-up visit after radical prostatectomy and the expected level while considering the half-life of prostate-specific antigen is a predictive factor for treatment efficacy following radical prostatectomy.

Keywords

Patient outcome assessment Prostate Prostate cancer Prostatectomy 

Notes

Author contributions

KSL: project development, manuscript writing; KCK: manuscript writing/editing; BHC: project development, manuscript writing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There is no potential conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

Clinical research involving human participants but no animals.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by our institutional review board.

Informed consent

Due to the retrospective nature of the study, written informed consent was waived.

References

  1. 1.
    Wolters T, Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, van den Bergh RC, Bangma CH, Hugosson J, Ciatto S, Kwiatkowski M, Villers A, Lujan M, Nelen V, Tammela TL, Schroder FH (2010) The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC. Int J Cancer 126(10):2387–2393.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.24870 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, Fouad MN, Gelmann EP, Kvale PA, Reding DJ, Weissfeld JL, Yokochi LA, O’Brien B, Clapp JD, Rathmell JM, Riley TL, Hayes RB, Kramer BS, Izmirlian G, Miller AB, Pinsky PF, Prorok PC, Gohagan JK, Berg CD, Team PP (2009) Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 360(13):1310–1319.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0810696 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, D’Amico AV, Davis BJ, Eastham JA, Enke CA, Farrington TA, Higano CS, Horwitz EM, Hurwitz M, Kane CJ, Kawachi MH, Kuettel M, Lee RJ, Meeks JJ, Penson DF, Plimack ER, Pow-Sang JM, Raben D, Richey S, Roach M 3rd, Rosenfeld S, Schaeffer E, Skolarus TA, Small EJ, Sonpavde G, Srinivas S, Strope SA, Tward J, Shead DA, Freedman-Cass DA (2016) Prostate cancer, version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 14(1):19–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D, Messing E, Forman J, Chin J, Swanson G, Canby-Hagino E, Crawford ED (2009) Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial. J Urol 181(3):956–962.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.032 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wiegel T, Bottke D, Steiner U, Siegmann A, Golz R, Storkel S, Willich N, Semjonow A, Souchon R, Stockle M, Rube C, Weissbach L, Althaus P, Rebmann U, Kalble T, Feldmann HJ, Wirth M, Hinke A, Hinkelbein W, Miller K (2009) Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy alone in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95. J Clin Oncol 27(18):2924–2930.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.9563 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bolla M, van Poppel H, Tombal B, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L, de Reijke TM, Verbaeys A, Bosset JF, van Velthoven R, Colombel M, van de Beek C, Verhagen P, van den Bergh A, Sternberg C, Gasser T, van Tienhoven G, Scalliet P, Haustermans K, Collette L, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer RO, Genito-Urinary Group (2012) Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 380(9858):2018–2027.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61253-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thompson IM Jr, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D, Messing E, Forman J, Chin J, Swanson G, Canby-Hagino E, Crawford ED (2006) Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 296(19):2329–2335.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.19.2329 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morgan TM, Hawken SR, Ghani KR, Miller DC, Feng FY, Linsell SM, Salisz JA, Gao Y, Montie JE, Cher ML (2016) Variation in the use of postoperative radiotherapy among high-risk patients following radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19(2):216–221.  https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2016.9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sineshaw HM, Gray PJ, Efstathiou JA, Jemal A (2015) Declining use of radiotherapy for adverse features after radical prostatectomy: results from the National Cancer Data Base. Eur Urol 68(5):768–774.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Audenet F, Seringe E, Drouin SJ, Comperat E, Cussenot O, Bitker MO, Roupret M (2012) Persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen at six weeks after radical prostatectomy helps in early identification of patients who are likely to recur. World J Urol 30(2):239–244.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0707-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oesterling JE, Chan DW, Epstein JI, Kimball AW Jr, Bruzek DJ, Rock RC, Brendler CB, Walsh PC (1988) Prostate specific antigen in the preoperative and postoperative evaluation of localized prostatic cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. J Urol 139(4):766–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG (2002) Clearance rates of total prostate specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy in African-Americans and Caucasians. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 5(2):111–114.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500567 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brandle E, Hautmann O, Bachem M, Kleinschmidt K, Gottfried HW, Grunert A, Hautmann RE (1999) Serum half-life time determination of free and total prostate-specific antigen following radical prostatectomy–a critical assessment. Urology 53(4):722–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Koo KC, Tuliao P, Komninos C, Choi YD, Chung BH, Hong SJ, Jee SH, Rha KH (2015) Prognostic impact of time to undetectable prostate-specific antigen in patients with positive surgical margins following radical prostatectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 22(2):693–700.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4057-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eisenberg ML, Davies BJ, Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Carroll PR (2010) Prognostic implications of an undetectable ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen level after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 57(4):622–629.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03.077 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sturgeon CM, Duffy MJ, Stenman UH, Lilja H, Brunner N, Chan DW, Babaian R, Bast RC Jr, Dowell B, Esteva FJ, Haglund C, Harbeck N, Hayes DF, Holten-Andersen M, Klee GG, Lamerz R, Looijenga LH, Molina R, Nielsen HJ, Rittenhouse H, Semjonow A, Shih Ie M, Sibley P, Soletormos G, Stephan C, Sokoll L, Hoffman BR, Diamandis EP, National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (2008) National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines for use of tumor markers in testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers. Clin Chem 54(12):e11–e79.  https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2008.105601 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Almufti R, Wilbaux M, Oza A, Henin E, Freyer G, Tod M, Colomban O, You B (2014) A critical review of the analytical approaches for circulating tumor biomarker kinetics during treatment. Ann Oncol 25(1):41–56.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdt382 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kondo N, Murakami Y, Uemura K, Hayashidani Y, Sudo T, Hashimoto Y, Nakashima A, Sakabe R, Shigemoto N, Kato Y, Ohge H, Sueda T (2010) Prognostic impact of perioperative serum CA 19-9 levels in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17(9):2321–2329.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1033-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu PY, Alberts DS, Monk BJ, Brady M, Moon J, Markman M (2007) An early signal of CA-125 progression for ovarian cancer patients receiving maintenance treatment after complete clinical response to primary therapy. J Clin Oncol 25(24):3615–3620.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.09.4540 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yuan SQ, Zhou ZW, Wan DS, Chen G, Lu ZH, Wang GQ, Pan ZZ (2008) The role of half-life of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in prognosis prediction of colorectal cancer patients with preoperatively elevated CEA. Ai Zheng 27(6):612–617PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moreira DM, Presti JC Jr, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Sun LL, Moul JW, Freedland SJ (2010) Postoperative prostate-specific antigen nadir improves accuracy for predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) and Duke Prostate Center databases. Int J Urol 17(11):914–922.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02631.x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Dotan ZA, Bianco FJ Jr, Lilja H, Scardino PT (2006) Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol 24(24):3973–3978.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.04.0756 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hong SK, Park HZ, Lee WK, Kim DS, Lee JS, Doo SH, Jeong SJ, Yoon CY, Byun SS, Lee SE (2010) Prognostic significance of undetectable ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen nadir after radical prostatectomy. Urology 76(3):723–727.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.081 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations