We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Studies
Validation of a biopsy-based pathologic algorithm for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma.
Cancer 2002 September 2
BACKGROUND: The authors validated an algorithm for the preoperative prediction of lymph node (LN) metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma. The algorithm was applied to sextant biopsy material and radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) stage obtained from a cohort of men who were treated at the authors' institution.
METHODS: Four hundred forty-three patients underwent systematic sextant biopsy and RRP with staging lymphadenectomy. The original algorithm was based on systematic sextant biopsy data and classified patients into three risk groups for LN metastases based on the biopsy result. If > or = 4 of 6 biopsies contained any Gleason Pattern 4 disease, then the patient was at high risk for LN metastases (45%). Patients with > or = 1 of 6 biopsies with dominant Gleason Pattern 4 disease (excluding high-risk patients) had an intermediate predicted risk (19%) of LN metastases. All other patients had a low predicted risk of LN metastases (2.2%). The authors assed the percentage of patients who were positive and negative for LN metastases and calculated the specificity and negative predictive value in the series when patients were classified according to the original algorithm.
RESULTS: Twenty of 443 patients had intraoperative LN metastases. When applied to the current data, the Hamburg algorithm classified 404 patients in the low-risk group, 30 patients in the intermediate-risk group, and 9 patients in the high risk group. The incidence of LN metastases was 2.47% in the low-risk group, 20% in the intermediate-risk group, and 44.4% in the high-risk group. The negative predictive value for the low-risk group was 97.52%, and the specificity was 94.14%.
CONCLUSIONS: The Hamburg algorithm proved a valid tool for the prediction of lymphatic spread in this validation study on data from the authors' institution. The algorithm may serve as a tool to select patients who do not need to undergo pelvic lymphadenectomy at the time they undergo RRP, hence reducing morbidity and expense. More importantly, with the increasing numbers of men undergoing treatment options in whom LN dissection is not performed, this validated algorithm provides an important selection basis regarding the appropriateness of a therapy that does not routinely include LN staging.
METHODS: Four hundred forty-three patients underwent systematic sextant biopsy and RRP with staging lymphadenectomy. The original algorithm was based on systematic sextant biopsy data and classified patients into three risk groups for LN metastases based on the biopsy result. If > or = 4 of 6 biopsies contained any Gleason Pattern 4 disease, then the patient was at high risk for LN metastases (45%). Patients with > or = 1 of 6 biopsies with dominant Gleason Pattern 4 disease (excluding high-risk patients) had an intermediate predicted risk (19%) of LN metastases. All other patients had a low predicted risk of LN metastases (2.2%). The authors assed the percentage of patients who were positive and negative for LN metastases and calculated the specificity and negative predictive value in the series when patients were classified according to the original algorithm.
RESULTS: Twenty of 443 patients had intraoperative LN metastases. When applied to the current data, the Hamburg algorithm classified 404 patients in the low-risk group, 30 patients in the intermediate-risk group, and 9 patients in the high risk group. The incidence of LN metastases was 2.47% in the low-risk group, 20% in the intermediate-risk group, and 44.4% in the high-risk group. The negative predictive value for the low-risk group was 97.52%, and the specificity was 94.14%.
CONCLUSIONS: The Hamburg algorithm proved a valid tool for the prediction of lymphatic spread in this validation study on data from the authors' institution. The algorithm may serve as a tool to select patients who do not need to undergo pelvic lymphadenectomy at the time they undergo RRP, hence reducing morbidity and expense. More importantly, with the increasing numbers of men undergoing treatment options in whom LN dissection is not performed, this validated algorithm provides an important selection basis regarding the appropriateness of a therapy that does not routinely include LN staging.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app