Mehmet YÜCEL, Cengiz ATAKANLI, ŞAHİN KABAY, Uğur SARAÇOĞLU, Soner YALÇINKAYA, Galip DEDEKARGINOĞLU, Erol ARAS, Faysal GÜLER

Lokalize prostat kanserli hastalarda partin tabloları öngörüsü ile radikal prostatektomi spesimen sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması

Partin tabloları pek çok klinikte preoperatif olarak prostat kanser evresini öngörmede kullanılmaktadır. Çalışmamızda 2001 yılında güncellenen Partin tablolarının Türk hastalarında patolojik evrelendirmesindeki öngörüsünün uygu-lanabilirliğini ve güvenilirliğini test etmek istedik. Radikal prostatektomi operasyonu yapılan 125 hastanın klinik ve pato-lojik bulguları değerlendirildi. Serum PSA değerleri, klinik ever, biyopsi Gleason skoru ve radikal prostatektomi spesimenlerinin patoloji sonuçları değerlendirildi. Partin tablolarının öngörü değerleri ve prostatektomi spesimenlerinin patoloji bulguları karşılaştırıldı ve ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristics) eğrilerine göre analiz edildi. Hastaların orta-lama yaşı 63 (48-74) idi. Klinik evresi T1c olan hasta yüzdesi %49.6 idi. Patoloji Gleason skoru 5-6 olan hasta oranı %68.8 idi. Preoperatif ortalama serum PSA değeri 12.96 ng/ml (0.9-42) idi. Organa sınırlı hastalık, seminal vezikül invazyonu ve lenf nodu metastazı oranları sırasıyla %66.4, %8.8, ve %4.0 olarak bulundu. Organa sınırlı hastalık, seminal vezikül invazyonu ve lenf nodu tutulumu için eğri altında kalan alan sırasıyla 0.696, 0.704 ve 0.860 olarak bulundu. So-nuçta 2001 yılında güncellenen Partin tablolarının Türk hastalarda da organa sınırlı hastalık, seminal vezikül invazyonu ve lenf nodu tutulumunu patoloji sonuçlarına göre kabul edilebilir bir öngörü değeri verdiği tespit ve kabul edilebilir bir doğrulukta kullanılabileceğini göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Nomogramlar, Prostatektomi, Sonuçların tekrarlanabilirliği, Lenfatik metastaz, Neoplazm metastazı, Neoplazm evrelendirilmesi, Prostat neoplazmları, ROC eğrisi, Prostata özgü antijen

Comparison of the predictivity of partin tables and radical prostatectomy specimen in patients of the localized prostate cancer

Partin tables was used to predict the stage of prostate cancer preoperatively in many clinics. We evaluated the validity of 2001 Partin tables, which was updated in 2001, for the ability to predict the pathological stage in Turkish patients. The clinical and pathological findings of 125 patients who have had radical prostatectomy were assessed. Serum PSA values, clinical stage, biopsy Gleason score and the pathological features of the radical prostatectomy specimens were collected and evaluated. The predictive value of Partin nomogram and pathological findings of prostatectomy specimens were compared and analyzed according to Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis. Median age of the patients was 63 (48–74). The percentage of patients with clinical stage T1c was 49.6%. Patients with Gleason score of 5–6 in biopsy constituted 68.8% of the study group. Preoperative mean serum PSA level was 12.96ng/ml (0.9-42). Organ confined disease, seminal vesicle involvement, and lymph node metastases ratios were 66.4%, 8.8% and 4.0%, respectively. Area Under Curve (AUC) values for organ confined disease, seminal vesicle involvement and lymph node involvement were calculated as 0.696, 0.704 and 0.860 respectively. It appears that updated Partin tables have a reasonable predictive value for the final pathological features like organ confined disease, seminal vesicle and lymph node involvement in Turkish patients and Partin tables could also be used in Turkish patients with comparable accuracy.

Keywords:

Nomograms, Prostatectomy, Reproducibility of Results, Lymphatic Metastasis, Neoplasm Metastasis, Neoplasm Staging, Prostatic Neoplasms, ROC Curve, Prostate-Specific Antigen,

PDF

___

1.Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC: Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer, 71: 3582-3593, 1993
2.Paulson DF: Impact of radical prostatectomy in the management of clinically localized disease. J Urol, 152: 1826-1830, 1994.
3.Graefen M, Noldus J, Pichlmeier U, et al: Early prostate-specific antigen relapse after radical retropubic prostatectomy: prediction on the basis of preoperative and postoperative tumor characteristics. Eur Urol, 36: 21-30, 1999.
4.Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, et al: A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 90: 766-771, 1998.
5.D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al: Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 17: 168-72, 1999.
6.Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, et al: The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol, 150: 110-114, 1993.
7.Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM, et al: Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology, 58: 843-848, 2001.
8.Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Partin AW, et al: Validation of Partin tables for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol, 164: 1591-1595, 2000.
9.Graefen M, Augustin H, Karakiewicz PI, et al: Can predictive models for prostate cancer patients derived in the United States of America be utilized in European patients? A validation study of the Par-tin tables. Eur Urol, 43: 6-10, 2003.
10.Eskicorapci SY, Karabulut E, Türkeri L, ve ark. Validation of 2001 Partin tables in Turkey: a multicenter study. Eur Urol, 47: 185-189, 2005.
11.Penson DF, Grossfeld GD, Li YP, et al: How well does the Partin nomogram predict pathological stage after radical prostatectomy in a community based population? Results of the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urological Research Endeavor. J Urol, 167: 1653-1657, 2002.
12.Eskicorapcı SY, Soylu A, Karabulut E, ve ark: Par-tin Tabloları Türkiye′deki hastalarda prostat kanse-rini öngörmede kullanılabilir mi? Üroloji Bülteni, 14: 183-187, 2003.